From dkellogg60@gmail.com Sun Jan 1 00:36:07 2017 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Sun, 1 Jan 2017 17:36:07 +0900 Subject: [Xmca-l] Chat Is Not Instruction Message-ID: Happy new year, everybody: may it be far happier and healthier and humaner than the old one. We completed the latter here in Sydney, by blowing up half a million dollars in fireworks, with all the artistic eclat of the invasion of Iraq. After which I came home and read Peter Jones' chapter in the Cambridge volume "The Transformation of Learning" (van Oers, Wardekker, Elbers and van der Veer eds.), entitled "Language in Cultural-Historical Perspective". Peter starts out noting that for linguists CHAT isn't a philosophy of science of which linguistics is one application, but rather a vital and shared set of concerns based on a larger common project. Humanity too is a common, and very much unfinished, project; watching the fireworks over Sydney and remembering how the Chinese invented gunpowder as courtly entertainment but soon found other uses for it, I cannot help but agree with Peter that that humanity would be a good idea but is still, in so very many ways, an untested one. Peter then says that mainstream linguistic theories "speak to this unfreedom by speaking this unfreedom", by making speech into a genetic endowment, a modularized component of the mind/brain, and and he calls it), and "fixed, isolated, and mutually unintelligble shards of human being and potential". This isn't really how I read Chomsky: it ignores a) Chomsky's insistence that most language is never spoken becasue it is self directed, an insight that seems to me completely compatible with Vygotsky, and b) Chomsky's whole rationale for treating language as a formalism, which is to demonstrate the infinite potential of a very finite number of elements. In contrast, I find Peter's idea that the "instruction" is the unit of analysis for a cultural historical approach to linguistics to be an instance of speaking to this unfreedom by speaking this unfreedom. It's not a new idea: Janet also located the origins of language in people telling other people what to do. But it's a profoundly depressing one. Fortunately, it is also one that is quite at odds with very simple facts of language. First of all, linguistics (and any other science, including psychology) doesn't require or even allow any "unit of analysis" that will fit any problem at all: specific analytical problems require specific units of analysis. Secondly, there is, of course, the problem of defining the object of study of linguistics (a problem that stumped Sassure and Firth and many other linguists), but instruction would be a very poor unit of analysis for this problem, since animals can and do instruct each other, but they have no human language; and thirdly, direct instructions are a very small part of language and become increasingly smaller as we become more and more human). May we all require fewer and fewer direct instances of direct instruction in the new year! David Kellogg Macquaire University From laires11@gmail.com Sun Jan 1 01:00:44 2017 From: laires11@gmail.com (Luisa Aires) Date: Sun, 1 Jan 2017 09:00:44 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Happy new year Message-ID: Dear XMCAers >From Portugal, I wish you an excellent New Year. Best Lu?sa A. -- Department of Education and Distance Learning, Universidade Aberta Centre of Studies on Migrations and Intercultural Relations (CEMRI) R. Amial, n? 752, 4200-055 Porto, Portugal laires@uab.pt www.uab.pt From anamshane@gmail.com Sun Jan 1 07:18:05 2017 From: anamshane@gmail.com (Ana Marjanovic-Shane) Date: Sun, 01 Jan 2017 15:18:05 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Happy New Year Message-ID: Dear friends and colleagues, Happy New Year! May it be happy, joyous, full of adventures and success in everything!! Ana -- *Ana Marjanovic-Shane* Dialogic Pedagogy Journal, Editor (dpj.pitt.edu) Chestnut Hill College, Associate Professor of Education e-mails: shaneam@chc.edu anamshane@gmail.com US phone: +1 267-334-2905 Serbian phone: +381 62 1904 110 From hshonerd@gmail.com Sun Jan 1 21:03:53 2017 From: hshonerd@gmail.com (HENRY SHONERD) Date: Sun, 1 Jan 2017 21:03:53 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <842E0D79-C400-47D5-BD08-0CF8CD9567A8@gmail.com> Thank you, Ana! And Happy New Year to you! And to all!!! > On Jan 1, 2017, at 7:18 AM, Ana Marjanovic-Shane wrote: > > Dear friends and colleagues, > > Happy New Year! > > May it be happy, joyous, full of adventures and success in everything!! > > Ana > -- > *Ana Marjanovic-Shane* > Dialogic Pedagogy Journal, Editor (dpj.pitt.edu) > Chestnut Hill College, Associate Professor of Education > e-mails: shaneam@chc.edu > anamshane@gmail.com > US phone: +1 267-334-2905 > Serbian phone: +381 62 1904 110 From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Mon Jan 2 00:12:25 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2017 08:12:25 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! Message-ID: <1483344752182.40904@iped.uio.no> Dear all, I would like to join David, Luisa, Ana, Henry and the others to wish you all a Happy New Year! May it be full of joy, peace, and opportunity. I also would like to begin the year announcing our first ?MCA article discussion, ?although in fact corresponds to the last issue of the year we just passed, Issue 4 on Perezhivanie. This is a very special *special* issue, not only because its topic has raised lots of interest lately in the CHAT community but also because, greatly coordinated by Andy Blunden and the rest of the editorial team, the issue takes the form of a symposium where authors get the chance to present and respond to each others' ideas on the subject. In my view, this allows having a rich and multidimensional approach to a subject as important as perezhivanie. Following with the dialogical spirit in which the special issue was assembled, we will focus on one lead article, but hoping to also engage ideas and insights present in or relevant to other contributions in the issue. ?Marc Clar?'s "Vygotsky and Vasilyuk on Perezhivanie: Two Notions and One Word" will be our focus. The article very nicely engages the lead work of Vygotsky, but also the less known ??(?in educational literature) but totally relevant works of psychologist ?F. Vasilyuk and semiotician A. J. Greimas, mobilising a number of key concepts including those of semiotic mediation and transformation. ?In addition to Marc, who will soon join us, I have encouraged some of the other authors in the special issue to also join as "relevant others," if time and circumstances allow them. Let's hope that this will help keeping the symposium spirit up. Marc's article is attached to this e-mail and will be made open access at the T&F pages as soon as people is back from the holidays. The T&F link is this: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039.2016.1186194 The link to the MCA Forum pages, where we announce our discussions and other xmca things, is here: http://lchc.ucsd.edu/MCA/ I wish us all a very productive and interesting discussion. Alfredo -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Clar? 2016 Vygotsky and Vasilyuk on Perezhivanie Two Notions and One Word.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 1005402 bytes Desc: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Clar=E0_2016_Vygotsky_and_Vasilyuk_on_Perezhivanie_Two_Not?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?ions_and_One_Word.pdf?= Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20170102/507e2f24/attachment-0001.pdf From boblake@georgiasouthern.edu Mon Jan 2 08:09:19 2017 From: boblake@georgiasouthern.edu (Robert Lake) Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2017 11:09:19 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear Ana, Thank-you for thinking of all of us! I hope the year ahead is filled with joyous exploration and rich imagination in these dark and uncertain times. Thank-you for all you do! *Robert Lake* On Sun, Jan 1, 2017 at 10:18 AM, Ana Marjanovic-Shane wrote: > Dear friends and colleagues, > > Happy New Year! > > May it be happy, joyous, full of adventures and success in everything!! > > Ana > -- > *Ana Marjanovic-Shane* > Dialogic Pedagogy Journal, Editor (dpj.pitt.edu) > Chestnut Hill College, Associate Professor of Education > e-mails: shaneam@chc.edu > anamshane@gmail.com > US phone: +1 267-334-2905 > Serbian phone: +381 62 1904 110 > -- Robert Lake Ed.D. Associate Professor Social Foundations of Education Dept. of Curriculum, Foundations, and Reading Georgia Southern University P. O. Box 8144, Statesboro, GA 30460 Secretary/Treasurer-AERA- Paulo Freire Special Interest Group Webpage: https://georgiasouthern.academia.edu/RobertLake*Democracy must be born anew in every generation, and education is its midwife.* John Dewey-*Democracy and Education*,1916, p. 139 From boblake@georgiasouthern.edu Mon Jan 2 08:09:19 2017 From: boblake@georgiasouthern.edu (Robert Lake) Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2017 11:09:19 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear Ana, Thank-you for thinking of all of us! I hope the year ahead is filled with joyous exploration and rich imagination in these dark and uncertain times. Thank-you for all you do! *Robert Lake* On Sun, Jan 1, 2017 at 10:18 AM, Ana Marjanovic-Shane wrote: > Dear friends and colleagues, > > Happy New Year! > > May it be happy, joyous, full of adventures and success in everything!! > > Ana > -- > *Ana Marjanovic-Shane* > Dialogic Pedagogy Journal, Editor (dpj.pitt.edu) > Chestnut Hill College, Associate Professor of Education > e-mails: shaneam@chc.edu > anamshane@gmail.com > US phone: +1 267-334-2905 > Serbian phone: +381 62 1904 110 > -- Robert Lake Ed.D. Associate Professor Social Foundations of Education Dept. of Curriculum, Foundations, and Reading Georgia Southern University P. O. Box 8144, Statesboro, GA 30460 Secretary/Treasurer-AERA- Paulo Freire Special Interest Group Webpage: https://georgiasouthern.academia.edu/RobertLake*Democracy must be born anew in every generation, and education is its midwife.* John Dewey-*Democracy and Education*,1916, p. 139 From mcole@ucsd.edu Mon Jan 2 11:00:11 2017 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2017 11:00:11 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] New Year's Perezhivanie Message-ID: With the New Year, as our Russian colleagues put it! This image forwarded from a friend more or less sums up my experience of the past year. Thought you might find it interesting too. Vis a vis the discussion of perezhivanie: Does this image provide us with used (re-presented) behavioral evidence of a person undergoing perezhivanie? Looking forward to the discussion. Feliz a?o nuevo! Mike -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: IMG_0593.PNG Type: image/png Size: 74645 bytes Desc: not available Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20170102/8e95459d/attachment.png From bazerman@education.ucsb.edu Mon Jan 2 11:20:08 2017 From: bazerman@education.ucsb.edu (Charles Bazerman) Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2017 11:20:08 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: So you think 2017 has any hope of being any better? Chuck ----- Original Message ----- From: mike cole Date: Monday, January 2, 2017 11:01 am Subject: [Xmca-l] New Year's Perezhivanie To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > With the New Year, as our Russian colleagues put it! > > This image forwarded from a friend more or less sums up my experience > of > the past year. Thought you might find it interesting too. > > Vis a vis the discussion of perezhivanie: Does this image provide us with > used (re-presented) behavioral evidence of a person undergoing perezhivanie? > > Looking forward to the discussion. > > Feliz a?o nuevo! > > Mike From mcole@ucsd.edu Mon Jan 2 12:03:14 2017 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2017 20:03:14 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The pieces of brick thrown up by this political hammering have not yet fallen and made the devastation personally experienced by the nation/world. Still, genuinely, we can wish all of us 7.3 billion well in the new year. So what do you think chuck, is this a good representation of perezhivanie? :-) Mike On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 11:24 AM Charles Bazerman < bazerman@education.ucsb.edu> wrote: > So you think 2017 has any hope of being any better? > > Chuck > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: mike cole > > Date: Monday, January 2, 2017 11:01 am > > Subject: [Xmca-l] New Year's Perezhivanie > > To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > > > > With the New Year, as our Russian colleagues put it! > > > > > > This image forwarded from a friend more or less sums up my experience > > > of > > > the past year. Thought you might find it interesting too. > > > > > > Vis a vis the discussion of perezhivanie: Does this image provide us with > > > used (re-presented) behavioral evidence of a person undergoing > perezhivanie? > > > > > > Looking forward to the discussion. > > > > > > Feliz a?o nuevo! > > > > > > Mike > > > > From marc.clara@gmail.com Mon Jan 2 13:14:41 2017 From: marc.clara@gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Marc_Clar=C3=A0?=) Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2017 22:14:41 +0100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! In-Reply-To: <1483344752182.40904@iped.uio.no> References: <1483344752182.40904@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: Hi, all, and thank you so much, Alfredo, for your kind invitation to participate in this discussion. My paper in the MCA special issue focuses on a distinction between a type of activity, which I argue that is what Vasilyuk called *perezhivanie* (experiencing) and a type of semiotic mediator, which I argue that is what Vygotsky, in The Problem of the Environment, called *perezhivanie.* I argue, following Vasilyuk, that in experiencing activities (Vasilyuk's perezhivanie), this type of mediator is profoundly transformed ? in fact, that experiencing activities consist of the semiotic transformation of this type of mediator. As Veresov and Fleer argue in their commentary, perezhivanie (as a type of mediator) is for me a psychological phenomenon, one which is of course conceptualized from a specific theoretical framework. But the phenomenon is also visible from other theoretical frameworks as well, as I mention in the paper. This phenomenon is my main interest, and it is from this interest that I arrived at the concept of perezhivanie (not the other way around). Now, the phenomenon is that at least emotion, reasoning, and volition (formation of conscious purposes) seem to be decisively mediated by holistic situational meaning. My current research concern is trying to find ways to study and understand how this mediation occurs and how these semiotic mediators are transformed and distributed. From this view, I think that experiencing activities (Vasilyuk's perezhivanie) may provide a good terrain to study these issues (especially regarding the mediation of emotion), as I tried to exemplify in the paper. Studying semiotic mediation, however, is of course not easy. Following Vygotsky, I assume that extended discourse is the manifestation of thinking within certain psychological conditions (Vygotsky's Thinking and Speech, chapter 7), and I also assume the Vygotsky's law of the unity of the structure and function of thinking (Vygotsky's Thinking and Speech, chapter 6). From these two assumptions, I propose that meaning (and its functions in human activity) can be scientifically studied by structurally analyzing the narratives generated by subjects, considering that the discourse produced in the narrative is the point of departure of this study, but that considerable analytical work must be done to move from this discourse to the full characterization of meaning. It is in that point where I find useful the work developed by Greimas, the usefulness of which I only suggest in the paper. >From this background, I found many interesting ideas and questions in the other papers of the special issue. In this first post I will propose two of them for possible discussion. The first one was raised by Gonz?lez-Rey, when he introduces, in connection with perezhivanie, the concepts of personality, and especially, of sense. So, which is the conceptual (and-or phenomenal) relation between perezhivanie and sense? Gonz?lez-Rey suggests that both concepts are somewhat similar (and overcome by the concept of ?subjective sense?); my opinion, partly expressed in my commentary, is that perezhivanie is a type of meaning, which includes different levels of depth, and that sense corresponds to the deepest level of meaning (which can be characterized as a system of semic oppositions). Therefore, sense wouldn't be in opposition to meaning (as ?a microcosm of human consciousness?, as Kozulin remembers in his commentary), although it would be in opposition to manifested meaning (the surface level of meaning). The second issue was raised by Roth and Jornet, and I think it goes beyond the issue of perezhivanie itself. If I understand them well, they argue that Vygotsky's core proposal of cultural mediation is influenced by the Cartesian dualism (mind-matter), and that a promising approach to Cultural Psychology would be a Spinozist monism. I am actually very interested on the issue of which epistemological position can best substantiate the construction of a cultural psychology, and that's why I feel inclined to take the opportunity to ask for your opinions about that. About the proposal of Roth and Jornet, I have some doubts. First, I don't see why Vygotsky's proposals can be seen as dualist (in the Cartesian sense) -I suspect that it is because of the analytical distinctions?. Anyway, in my understanding, Vygotsky explicitly assumes a materialist monism (for example in The Crisis), and in fact he constructs his proposal on mediation upon reflexology, which also explicitly assumed a materialist monism (e.g. Sechenov). Would a Spinozist monism be a better point of departure? I don't know, in my understanding it is a more idealist monism, and I don't clearly see what could be gained. In my opinion, a scientific psychology which includes the study of mind is only possible if any type of monism is assumed. However, in my view, for a scientific psychology, the ontological nature of the world is perhaps less important (it is an issue for metaphysics?), and I am inclined to assume a neutral monism (e.g. Russell). So from this view, a materialist monism and a Spinozist monism wouldn't be so different, so from both views it could be assumed that all is of the same nature and all is similarly knowable (including mind) [which is the ontological nature of the world and to what degree it is knowable are issues that can be left to philosophy]. However, in my opinion, this does not mean that, while assuming a monism, analytical distinctions cannot be done when studying the world. In that sense, I had the impression that Roth and Jornet tended to dilute analytical distinctions in the name of monism; I repeat that I don't know if I understood them well, but if this was the case, in my opinion, analysis would be impossible within the new psychology suggested by Roth and Jornet, and, regarding perezhivanie, there would be the danger, noted by Vygotsky in The Crisis and cautioned by Kozulin in his commentary, that by meaning everything, perezhivanie ends by meaning nothing. Best regards and happy new year, Marc. 2017-01-02 9:12 GMT+01:00 Alfredo Jornet Gil : > Dear all, > > > I would like to join David, Luisa, Ana, Henry and the others to wish you > all a Happy New Year! May it be full of joy, peace, and opportunity. > > > I also would like to begin the year announcing our first ?MCA article > discussion, ?although in fact corresponds to the last issue of the year we > just passed, Issue 4 on Perezhivanie. This is a very special *special* > issue, not only because its topic has raised lots of interest lately in the > CHAT community but also because, greatly coordinated by Andy Blunden and > the rest of the editorial team, the issue takes the form of a symposium > where authors get the chance to present and respond to each others' ideas > on the subject. In my view, this allows having a rich and multidimensional > approach to a subject as important as perezhivanie. > > > Following with the dialogical spirit in which the special issue was > assembled, we will focus on one lead article, but hoping to also engage > ideas and insights present in or relevant to other contributions in the > issue. ?Marc Clar?'s "Vygotsky and Vasilyuk on Perezhivanie: Two Notions > and One Word" will be our focus. The article very nicely engages the lead > work of Vygotsky, but also the less known ??(?in educational literature) > but totally relevant works of psychologist ?F. Vasilyuk and semiotician A. > J. Greimas, mobilising a number of key concepts including those of semiotic > mediation and transformation. > > ?In addition to Marc, who will soon join us, I have encouraged some of the > other authors in the special issue to also join as "relevant others," if > time and circumstances allow them. Let's hope that this will help keeping > the symposium spirit up. > > > Marc's article is attached to this e-mail and will be made open access at > the T&F pages as soon as people is back from the holidays. The T&F link is > this: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039.2016.1186194 > > The link to the MCA Forum pages, where we announce our discussions and > other xmca things, is here: http://lchc.ucsd.edu/MCA/ > > > I wish us all a very productive and interesting discussion. > > Alfredo > > > > > > > > > From bazerman@education.ucsb.edu Mon Jan 2 13:14:40 2017 From: bazerman@education.ucsb.edu (Charles Bazerman) Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2017 13:14:40 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Well, there is a wide spread socially typified activity surrounding the new year which supports a summative reflection on both the perceived events (in our day this includes all the reported events that attach us to larger unfoldings with the personal meanings, evaluation, and feelings we attach to the events and reports) and the emotional/experiential passage of the person as they struggled to make away through all these perceived and interpreted events. This in the new year is often combined with some kind of ritually induced belief that there somehow can be fresh starts. So I guess the cartoon in this way reflects for many people the sense that Clara reports Vasilyuv as holding for perezhivanie. (I know neither Russian nor Vasilyuv, so I cannot pass judgment on Clara's reading nor the reading of Vygotsky which does not match my own). But Clara also then goes on to discuss a case of a transformation of what the subject considers to be the total situation the person is struggling through. So if one is not so attentive to new year rituals and is more caught up in the continuing struggles in which there is no predetermined moment of fresh beginnings, then the total situation is a bit different and so is the struggle. To me the institutionally determined date of January 20 looms much larger, and that leaves me with no desire to smash the past--but only turmoil as how to resist or transform what seems to be coming. That is the struggle to be experienced and engaged in. I can hope that collective efforts and resistant institutions can change the trajectory of what is coming, but cannot make a ritual wish in the face of all signs of the many coming storms. Chuck ----- Original Message ----- From: mike cole Date: Monday, January 2, 2017 12:05 pm Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > The pieces of brick thrown up by this political hammering have not yet > fallen and made the devastation personally experienced by the nation/world. > > Still, genuinely, we can wish all of us 7.3 billion well in the new year. > > So what do you think chuck, is this a good representation of perezhivanie? > :-) > Mike > > On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 11:24 AM Charles Bazerman < > bazerman@education.ucsb.edu> wrote: > > > So you think 2017 has any hope of being any better? > > > > Chuck > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > From: mike cole > > > > Date: Monday, January 2, 2017 11:01 am > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] New Year's Perezhivanie > > > > To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > > > > > > > > With the New Year, as our Russian colleagues put it! > > > > > > > > > > This image forwarded from a friend more or less sums up my experience > > > > > of > > > > > the past year. Thought you might find it interesting too. > > > > > > > > > > Vis a vis the discussion of perezhivanie: Does this image provide > us with > > > > > used (re-presented) behavioral evidence of a person undergoing > > perezhivanie? > > > > > > > > > > Looking forward to the discussion. > > > > > > > > > > Feliz a?o nuevo! > > > > > > > > > > Mike > > > > > > > > From lpscholar2@gmail.com Mon Jan 2 15:45:39 2017 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2017 15:45:39 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <586ae645.475a620a.84afb.9951@mx.google.com> Mike, When you use the phrase (by this poltical hammering) then i would suggest this political activity is not capturing the full meaning of perezhivanie. My reason for saying this must first refer to page 5 of the article where perezhivanie?s meaning is approached through the meaningfulness-meaninglessness opposition and the back and forth within this struggle. The image of the hammer as presented has its source in the meaning-forming motive proceeding in a direction towards realization of her meaning-forming political motives. Only within this aspect of the opposition will the situation in the image HAVE meaning and BE meaningful. Vasilyuk however adds the other aspect?: If things are proceeding OTHERWISE the situation becomes meaningless (LP ? and then we enter the crisis of meaninglessness ? the otherwise - where words no longer mediate the situation). This nature of perezhivanie Vasilyuk metaphorically describes as learning ( as ENTERING INTO) this type of meaning that is NOT formal, scientific conceptual knowledge. It is a place of moods and shifting experiences. So in my reading of perezhivanie there is this tension between (entering into) volitional acts and the alternative aspect of perizihavanie as overwhelming crisis of (meaninglessness) which must be mediated and the mediators transformed. Turning back to page 2 and the situation where Macduff must feel his situation as a man when his entire family are killed. No practical activity can bring his family back. Another type of work is needed (and necessary) which Macduff calls (feeling the situation as a man). THIS WORK Vasilyuk calls perezhivanie. So, my way of reading the image of the hammer smashing 2016 highlights the aspect of (entering into) a meaningful motive as (political activity) that is represented but what is not is the alternative, represented in the crisis of meaninglessness that is the other aspect of perezhivanie. Marc Clara speaks of the mediator that transforms this crisis of experiencing, but i am not sure the the image of the girl and hammer portrays the aspect of perezhivanie as involving a transformative mediator existing between meaningfulness and meaninglessness? That time when words and practical activity fail and the person is facing existential dread when (feeling as a man) that all hope has left the world. That moment is the moment in which Clara opened and (entered into) her article exploring the two notions of perizhivanie using the same word. At the heart of this matter is the existential dread of meaninglessness unique for each person and our ways of answering as alternative waysthat give a deep sense of meaningfulness. It is here that there is overlap with last month?s article where Zukerman addressed the unique existential aspect entering into cultural historical (human paths) Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: mike cole Sent: January 2, 2017 12:06 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie The pieces of brick thrown up by this political hammering have not yet fallen and made the devastation personally experienced by the nation/world. Still, genuinely, we can wish all of us 7.3 billion well in the new year. So what do you think chuck, is this a good representation of perezhivanie? :-) Mike On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 11:24 AM Charles Bazerman < bazerman@education.ucsb.edu> wrote: > So you think 2017 has any hope of being any better? > > Chuck > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: mike cole > > Date: Monday, January 2, 2017 11:01 am > > Subject: [Xmca-l] New Year's Perezhivanie > > To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > > > > With the New Year, as our Russian colleagues put it! > > > > > > This image forwarded from a friend more or less sums up my experience > > > of > > > the past year. Thought you might find it interesting too. > > > > > > Vis a vis the discussion of perezhivanie: Does this image provide us with > > > used (re-presented) behavioral evidence of a person undergoing > perezhivanie? > > > > > > Looking forward to the discussion. > > > > > > Feliz a?o nuevo! > > > > > > Mike > > > > From bferholt@gmail.com Tue Jan 3 07:50:01 2017 From: bferholt@gmail.com (Beth Ferholt) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2017 10:50:01 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: <586ae645.475a620a.84afb.9951@mx.google.com> References: <586ae645.475a620a.84afb.9951@mx.google.com> Message-ID: Several people did tell me, independently, that the great end of the John Oliver segment on 2016, where different NYers curse 2016 on the street, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQ6WPo-oW5Q, helped them to overcome feelings of despair at the end of last year. So maybe it is related to perezhivanie. But maybe just to one part of the process. Beth On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 6:45 PM, wrote: > Mike, > When you use the phrase (by this poltical hammering) then i would suggest > this political activity is not capturing the full meaning of perezhivanie. > My reason for saying this must first refer to page 5 of the article where > perezhivanie?s meaning is approached through the > meaningfulness-meaninglessness opposition and the back and forth within > this struggle. > The image of the hammer as presented has its source in the meaning-forming > motive proceeding in a direction towards realization of her meaning-forming > political motives. Only within this aspect of the opposition will the > situation in the image HAVE meaning and BE meaningful. > Vasilyuk however adds the other aspect : If things are proceeding > OTHERWISE the situation becomes meaningless (LP ? and then we enter the > crisis of meaninglessness ? the otherwise - where words no longer mediate > the situation). > > This nature of perezhivanie Vasilyuk metaphorically describes as learning > ( as ENTERING INTO) this type of meaning that is NOT formal, scientific > conceptual knowledge. It is a place of moods and shifting experiences. > > So in my reading of perezhivanie there is this tension between (entering > into) volitional acts and the alternative aspect of perizihavanie as > overwhelming crisis of (meaninglessness) which must be mediated and the > mediators transformed. > > Turning back to page 2 and the situation where Macduff must feel his > situation as a man when his entire family are killed. No practical activity > can bring his family back. Another type of work is needed (and necessary) > which Macduff calls (feeling the situation as a man). THIS WORK Vasilyuk > calls perezhivanie. > > So, my way of reading the image of the hammer smashing 2016 highlights the > aspect of (entering into) a meaningful motive as (political activity) that > is represented but what is not is the alternative, represented in the > crisis of meaninglessness that is the other aspect of perezhivanie. > Marc Clara speaks of the mediator that transforms this crisis of > experiencing, but i am not sure the the image of the girl and hammer > portrays the aspect of perezhivanie as involving a transformative mediator > existing between meaningfulness and meaninglessness? > That time when words and practical activity fail and the person is facing > existential dread when (feeling as a man) that all hope has left the world. > That moment is the moment in which Clara opened and (entered into) her > article exploring the two notions of perizhivanie using the same word. > At the heart of this matter is the existential dread of meaninglessness > unique for each person and our ways of answering as alternative waysthat > give a deep sense of meaningfulness. > It is here that there is overlap with last month?s article where Zukerman > addressed the unique existential aspect entering into cultural historical > (human paths) > > > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > From: mike cole > Sent: January 2, 2017 12:06 PM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie > > The pieces of brick thrown up by this political hammering have not yet > fallen and made the devastation personally experienced by the nation/world. > > Still, genuinely, we can wish all of us 7.3 billion well in the new year. > > So what do you think chuck, is this a good representation of perezhivanie? > :-) > Mike > > On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 11:24 AM Charles Bazerman < > bazerman@education.ucsb.edu> wrote: > > > So you think 2017 has any hope of being any better? > > > > Chuck > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > From: mike cole > > > > Date: Monday, January 2, 2017 11:01 am > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] New Year's Perezhivanie > > > > To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > > > > > > > > With the New Year, as our Russian colleagues put it! > > > > > > > > > > This image forwarded from a friend more or less sums up my experience > > > > > of > > > > > the past year. Thought you might find it interesting too. > > > > > > > > > > Vis a vis the discussion of perezhivanie: Does this image provide us > with > > > > > used (re-presented) behavioral evidence of a person undergoing > > perezhivanie? > > > > > > > > > > Looking forward to the discussion. > > > > > > > > > > Feliz a?o nuevo! > > > > > > > > > > Mike > > > > > > > > > > -- Beth Ferholt Assistant Professor Department of Early Childhood and Art Education Brooklyn College, City University of New York 2900 Bedford Avenue Brooklyn, NY 11210-2889 Email: bferholt@brooklyn.cuny.edu Phone: (718) 951-5205 Fax: (718) 951-4816 From schuckcschuck@gmail.com Tue Jan 3 09:37:38 2017 From: schuckcschuck@gmail.com (Christopher Schuck) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2017 12:37:38 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] New Year's Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: References: <586ae645.475a620a.84afb.9951@mx.google.com> Message-ID: It's an interesting question (about the brick and perezhivanie), partly because that extended, "living-through", repeated doubling-back process evoked by the Vygotskian sense of the concept would seem to be at odds with a single, discrete act of "smashing" that is immediate, forceful and even violent. It would suggest that part of what perezhivanie means is wrapped up in the symbolic marking of its end - and that this end, when it comes, can be forceful. Certainly, the image could not be more unified and embodying of a particular set of meaningful experiences. But is that how perezhivanie works? This leads me to ask: 1) what are the problems and contradictions encountered in using particular metaphors to depict perezhivanie, where perezhivanie is itself so defined by imagination and narrativity? Part of this might also be a question of what it means to describe and represent one's own perezhivanie figuratively/narratively (whether to others, or to oneself), as opposed to living that perezhivanie. Especially if the attempt to capture/represent one's own perezhivanie is, perhaps, also central to the living of it? 2) What is the nature of the relationship between perezhivanie and force, either in terms of the internal process or in terms of how it finally "ends"? (Not to mention, how it begins). It would seem that in both conceptions discussed in the article there is a certain intensity required. But does this in some cases require something more explosive - and does Vasilyuk's conception of perezhivanie as activity speak more to this possibility? And how do we reconcile this with the less "forceful" notion of enduring, revisiting, and working through? On Monday, January 2, 2017, mike cole wrote: > The pieces of brick thrown up by this political hammering have not yet > fallen and made the devastation personally experienced by the nation/world. > > Still, genuinely, we can wish all of us 7.3 billion well in the new year. > > So what do you think chuck, is this a good representation of perezhivanie? > :-) > Mike > > On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 11:24 AM Charles Bazerman < > bazerman@education.ucsb.edu> wrote: > > > So you think 2017 has any hope of being any better? > > > > Chuck > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > From: mike cole > > > > Date: Monday, January 2, 2017 11:01 am > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] New Year's Perezhivanie > > > > To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > > > > > > > > With the New Year, as our Russian colleagues put it! > > > > > > > > > > This image forwarded from a friend more or less sums up my experience > > > > > of > > > > > the past year. Thought you might find it interesting too. > > > > > > > > > > Vis a vis the discussion of perezhivanie: Does this image provide us > with > > > > > used (re-presented) behavioral evidence of a person undergoing > > perezhivanie? > > > > > > > > > > Looking forward to the discussion. > > > > > > > > > > Feliz a?o nuevo! > > > > > > > > > > Mike > > > > > > > > > From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Tue Jan 3 10:16:52 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2017 18:16:52 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! In-Reply-To: References: <1483344752182.40904@iped.uio.no>, Message-ID: <1483467423798.57819@iped.uio.no> Hi Marc, all, thanks for joining and for your interesting work, which I follow since I became aware of it. I appreciate the way in your paper you show careful and honest attention to the texts of the authors involved, but perhaps most of all I appreciate that the paper makes the transformational dimension related to struggle and change salient, a dimension all papers deemed central to perezhivanie. And I have learned more about Vasilyuk by reading your paper. But I also see that we have approached the question of perezhivanie differently and I think that addressing the questions that you raise concerning our article may be a good way to both respond and discuss your paper. I am aware that our use of the term monism may be problematic to some, and N. Veresov, who has recently written about this (see attached article), warns against the dangers of simply moving from dualism into an undifferentiating monism that relativizes everything, making development un-studiable. This seems to be the way in which you have understood our argument, and of course this is not what we are or want to be doing. Probably many will think that *dialectical materialism* rather than monism is the proper term, and I could agree with them; we do in fact use dialectical materialism there and elsewhere. Yet, we wanted to emphasise the Spinozist influence (an influence that also runs through Marx) and so we found it appropriate to use the term monism, a term that Vygotsky uses before arguing that Spinoza "develops an essentially materialistic view" (Collected Works, Vol. 6, p. 124). For us, the aim is working out ways to empirically examine and formulate problems in ways that do not reify a mind-body dualism. Although overcoming dualism is foundational to the CHAT paradigm, I would however not say that Vygotsky did get to solve all of the problems that Cartesian dualism had created for psychology, even though he recognised those problems brilliantly as early as in the "Crisis". It should suffice to cite Vygotsky's own remarks, which we quote in the paper (and which A.N. Leont'ev mentions in the introduction to the collected works), where Vygotsky explicitly critiques some of his own prior ideas for failing to overcome dualism. We agree with those who, like F. G. Rey, see Vygotsky's project as a developing rather than as a finalised one. The fact is that Vygotsky was building a theory on the unity of the affect and the intellect that was to be grounded on Spinoza, and what we try to do is to explore how perezhivanie, as a concept being developed during the same period (but not finalised or totally settled!), could be seen from the perspective of the Spinozist Vygotsky. As you note, in our article we argue that, if one takes the Spinozist one-substance approach, classical concepts used in non-classical psychology, at least in the way they are commonly used in the current literature, should be revised. One such concept is mediation. And I personally do not have much of a problem when mediation is used to denote the fundamental fact that every thing exists always through *another*, never in and of itself. But I do think that it is problematic to identify MEDIATORS, such as "a meaning", as a means to account for or explain developmental processes and learning events, precisely because it is there, at least in my view, that dualism creeps in. For example, I find it paradoxical that you are concerned that our monist approach risks turning perezhivanie into a useless category because it may be used to explain everything and nothing, and yet you do not seem to have a problem using the term mediation to account for the transformation of perezhivanie without clearly elaborating on how mediation does change anything or what it looks like as a real process. How is it different saying that a perezhivanie mediates the experiencing-as-struggle from simply saying that it "affects" or "determines" it? Indeed, if perezhivanie mediates experiencing-as-struggle, does not experiencing-as-struglgle too mediate perezhivanie? And do not both may be said to mediate development, or development mediate them? Is not this explaining everything and nothing? I do believe you can argue that there is a difference between mediation and classical psychology's cause-effect relations, but to show this you need to dig into the dialectical underpinnings of the theory. In your paper, you offer a nice analysis of a lovely case of a teacher who, in dealing with a challenge with one of her students, changes her perezhivanie. I think you can rightly argue that there is a semiotic transformation, and I fully support your statement that by studying discourse we can empirically approach questions of psychological development. The contradictions you show as being involved and resolved resonate really well with what I experience as a parent or as a teacher in the classroom. Yet, without unpacking what this "mediation" taking place between one perezhivanie and the next one means as a concrete and real, the same analysis could be done taking an information processing approach: there is an situation that is processed (represented?) in one way, which then leads to a (cognitive) dissonance, and then there is a cognitive resolution by means of which the situation is presented differently in consciousness (indeed, when seen in this way, the term perezhivanie and the term "representation" become almost indistinguishable). How is mediation, as an analytical concept, helping here? And most importantly to the question of perezhivanie, how is this analysis going to show the internal connection between intellect and affect that Vygotsky formulates as constitutive of the notion of perezhivanie? I believe that the key lies in understanding what Vygotsky means when he says that perezhivanie is a unit of analysis. I will not repeat here what already is written in at least a couple of the articles in the special issue (Blunden, ours), that is the difference between analysis by elements and unit analysis (Vygotsky 1987). A unit analysis approach is consistent with Spinoza, for whom cause-effect explanations were not adequate, requiring instead an understanding of self-development, perezhivanie as a kernel cell for the development of personality. And I think you may be after this in your article in suggesting a form of continuous movement from perezhivanie to experiencing-as-struggle. But perhaps the major difficulty I find is that, in positing Vygotsky's perezhivanie as "a type of meaning" and Vasilyuk's perezhivanie (or experiencing-as-struggle) as a "type of activity," it is difficult not to see here a division between product and process, a division that then is analytically bridged by the addition of a third term, mediation, that should bring back the real movement between the product and the process. A different approach involves considering the concrete extension of actual living and lived social relations, and look at them as generative phenomena. What is there in the encounter between Carla and the child that leads to change? For it is not inside the mind, but in real life, in consciousness as the real relation between people, that Carla is changed. How is the semantic structure that you nicely present and attribute to Carla a product of the social relation between her and the child? I think that to rightfully situate perezhivanie as a concept in a Vygotskian framework, we ought to address its relation to the genetic law of development. There is much more to disentangle, but this is long enough. I hope I have succeeded in making clear these ideas. Thanks so much for engaging in the discussion! Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Marc Clar? Sent: 02 January 2017 22:14 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! Hi, all, and thank you so much, Alfredo, for your kind invitation to participate in this discussion. My paper in the MCA special issue focuses on a distinction between a type of activity, which I argue that is what Vasilyuk called *perezhivanie* (experiencing) and a type of semiotic mediator, which I argue that is what Vygotsky, in The Problem of the Environment, called *perezhivanie.* I argue, following Vasilyuk, that in experiencing activities (Vasilyuk's perezhivanie), this type of mediator is profoundly transformed ? in fact, that experiencing activities consist of the semiotic transformation of this type of mediator. As Veresov and Fleer argue in their commentary, perezhivanie (as a type of mediator) is for me a psychological phenomenon, one which is of course conceptualized from a specific theoretical framework. But the phenomenon is also visible from other theoretical frameworks as well, as I mention in the paper. This phenomenon is my main interest, and it is from this interest that I arrived at the concept of perezhivanie (not the other way around). Now, the phenomenon is that at least emotion, reasoning, and volition (formation of conscious purposes) seem to be decisively mediated by holistic situational meaning. My current research concern is trying to find ways to study and understand how this mediation occurs and how these semiotic mediators are transformed and distributed. From this view, I think that experiencing activities (Vasilyuk's perezhivanie) may provide a good terrain to study these issues (especially regarding the mediation of emotion), as I tried to exemplify in the paper. Studying semiotic mediation, however, is of course not easy. Following Vygotsky, I assume that extended discourse is the manifestation of thinking within certain psychological conditions (Vygotsky's Thinking and Speech, chapter 7), and I also assume the Vygotsky's law of the unity of the structure and function of thinking (Vygotsky's Thinking and Speech, chapter 6). From these two assumptions, I propose that meaning (and its functions in human activity) can be scientifically studied by structurally analyzing the narratives generated by subjects, considering that the discourse produced in the narrative is the point of departure of this study, but that considerable analytical work must be done to move from this discourse to the full characterization of meaning. It is in that point where I find useful the work developed by Greimas, the usefulness of which I only suggest in the paper. >From this background, I found many interesting ideas and questions in the other papers of the special issue. In this first post I will propose two of them for possible discussion. The first one was raised by Gonz?lez-Rey, when he introduces, in connection with perezhivanie, the concepts of personality, and especially, of sense. So, which is the conceptual (and-or phenomenal) relation between perezhivanie and sense? Gonz?lez-Rey suggests that both concepts are somewhat similar (and overcome by the concept of ?subjective sense?); my opinion, partly expressed in my commentary, is that perezhivanie is a type of meaning, which includes different levels of depth, and that sense corresponds to the deepest level of meaning (which can be characterized as a system of semic oppositions). Therefore, sense wouldn't be in opposition to meaning (as ?a microcosm of human consciousness?, as Kozulin remembers in his commentary), although it would be in opposition to manifested meaning (the surface level of meaning). The second issue was raised by Roth and Jornet, and I think it goes beyond the issue of perezhivanie itself. If I understand them well, they argue that Vygotsky's core proposal of cultural mediation is influenced by the Cartesian dualism (mind-matter), and that a promising approach to Cultural Psychology would be a Spinozist monism. I am actually very interested on the issue of which epistemological position can best substantiate the construction of a cultural psychology, and that's why I feel inclined to take the opportunity to ask for your opinions about that. About the proposal of Roth and Jornet, I have some doubts. First, I don't see why Vygotsky's proposals can be seen as dualist (in the Cartesian sense) -I suspect that it is because of the analytical distinctions?. Anyway, in my understanding, Vygotsky explicitly assumes a materialist monism (for example in The Crisis), and in fact he constructs his proposal on mediation upon reflexology, which also explicitly assumed a materialist monism (e.g. Sechenov). Would a Spinozist monism be a better point of departure? I don't know, in my understanding it is a more idealist monism, and I don't clearly see what could be gained. In my opinion, a scientific psychology which includes the study of mind is only possible if any type of monism is assumed. However, in my view, for a scientific psychology, the ontological nature of the world is perhaps less important (it is an issue for metaphysics?), and I am inclined to assume a neutral monism (e.g. Russell). So from this view, a materialist monism and a Spinozist monism wouldn't be so different, so from both views it could be assumed that all is of the same nature and all is similarly knowable (including mind) [which is the ontological nature of the world and to what degree it is knowable are issues that can be left to philosophy]. However, in my opinion, this does not mean that, while assuming a monism, analytical distinctions cannot be done when studying the world. In that sense, I had the impression that Roth and Jornet tended to dilute analytical distinctions in the name of monism; I repeat that I don't know if I understood them well, but if this was the case, in my opinion, analysis would be impossible within the new psychology suggested by Roth and Jornet, and, regarding perezhivanie, there would be the danger, noted by Vygotsky in The Crisis and cautioned by Kozulin in his commentary, that by meaning everything, perezhivanie ends by meaning nothing. Best regards and happy new year, Marc. 2017-01-02 9:12 GMT+01:00 Alfredo Jornet Gil : > Dear all, > > > I would like to join David, Luisa, Ana, Henry and the others to wish you > all a Happy New Year! May it be full of joy, peace, and opportunity. > > > I also would like to begin the year announcing our first ?MCA article > discussion, ?although in fact corresponds to the last issue of the year we > just passed, Issue 4 on Perezhivanie. This is a very special *special* > issue, not only because its topic has raised lots of interest lately in the > CHAT community but also because, greatly coordinated by Andy Blunden and > the rest of the editorial team, the issue takes the form of a symposium > where authors get the chance to present and respond to each others' ideas > on the subject. In my view, this allows having a rich and multidimensional > approach to a subject as important as perezhivanie. > > > Following with the dialogical spirit in which the special issue was > assembled, we will focus on one lead article, but hoping to also engage > ideas and insights present in or relevant to other contributions in the > issue. ?Marc Clar?'s "Vygotsky and Vasilyuk on Perezhivanie: Two Notions > and One Word" will be our focus. The article very nicely engages the lead > work of Vygotsky, but also the less known ??(?in educational literature) > but totally relevant works of psychologist ?F. Vasilyuk and semiotician A. > J. Greimas, mobilising a number of key concepts including those of semiotic > mediation and transformation. > > ?In addition to Marc, who will soon join us, I have encouraged some of the > other authors in the special issue to also join as "relevant others," if > time and circumstances allow them. Let's hope that this will help keeping > the symposium spirit up. > > > Marc's article is attached to this e-mail and will be made open access at > the T&F pages as soon as people is back from the holidays. The T&F link is > this: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039.2016.1186194 > > The link to the MCA Forum pages, where we announce our discussions and > other xmca things, is here: http://lchc.ucsd.edu/MCA/ > > > I wish us all a very productive and interesting discussion. > > Alfredo > > > > > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Veresov 2016 Duality of categories or dialectical concepts?.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 287318 bytes Desc: Veresov 2016 Duality of categories or dialectical concepts?.pdf Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20170103/111cdda4/attachment.pdf From lpscholar2@gmail.com Tue Jan 3 11:25:15 2017 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2017 11:25:15 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: References: <586ae645.475a620a.84afb.9951@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <586bfabd.4133620a.c1947.e4b2@mx.google.com> Christopher, your way of reading (entering into) and responding that offers examples and then alternatives (the otherwise) i believe captures the flow of perezhivanie. If the struggle between meaningfulness-meaninglessness is at the heart of this month?s article as the heart of crisis, I believe this is also the deep question that most often brings persons to Western forms of psycho-therapy -in our particular localized time and place. Your 2nd question of the relation between perezhivanie and (force) seems to be relevant. The relation of perezhivanie with less forceful, WEAKER notions of (entering into) such as enduring, revisiting, working through. I would add (going out on a limb) that we may also want to explore the notion of the Judaic tradition that runs through what Zukerman calls (the human path) of humanity. I lack background to be specific but do notice the number of Judaic scholars who have been and are engaged with psychotherapy as expressing the character of human salvation and redemption. Martin Buber?s name is often mentioned in this regard. Bella has written a book on the relation of Judaic tradition and Vygotsky (which I have not read) but at the heart of the Judaic tradition is the human path and humanity existing here and now in our living relations. If this is going a step too far, just ignore, and return to the question of less forceful (weaker) human paths of enduring and working through by (entering into) the meaningfulness-meaninglessness (crisis) as both existential and cultural-historical. An alternative image to forcefully hammering and smashing the bricks in the hope of clearing a space for something new to emerge or be created as the bricks scatter and we begin to (de-sign) something brand new from the rubble. The back and forth that feels like repetition and sameness and being stuck may be actually a mood and an (entering into) and (living through) and (working through) the crisis. I would add and highlight this movement is not an interior journey of mastery towards (independence) but is, using Zukerman?s words, an inter/mental back and forth generating a meaningful way forward from within the tension of the crisis of perezhivanie. My belief is when moving through the crisis we do not travel alone but travel with others expressing care and concern for us. The time for heroic journeys is now in question? Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Christopher Schuck Sent: January 3, 2017 9:39 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] New Year's Perezhivanie It's an interesting question (about the brick and perezhivanie), partly because that extended, "living-through", repeated doubling-back process evoked by the Vygotskian sense of the concept would seem to be at odds with a single, discrete act of "smashing" that is immediate, forceful and even violent. It would suggest that part of what perezhivanie means is wrapped up in the symbolic marking of its end - and that this end, when it comes, can be forceful. Certainly, the image could not be more unified and embodying of a particular set of meaningful experiences. But is that how perezhivanie works? This leads me to ask: 1) what are the problems and contradictions encountered in using particular metaphors to depict perezhivanie, where perezhivanie is itself so defined by imagination and narrativity? Part of this might also be a question of what it means to describe and represent one's own perezhivanie figuratively/narratively (whether to others, or to oneself), as opposed to living that perezhivanie. Especially if the attempt to capture/represent one's own perezhivanie is, perhaps, also central to the living of it? 2) What is the nature of the relationship between perezhivanie and force, either in terms of the internal process or in terms of how it finally "ends"? (Not to mention, how it begins). It would seem that in both conceptions discussed in the article there is a certain intensity required. But does this in some cases require something more explosive - and does Vasilyuk's conception of perezhivanie as activity speak more to this possibility? And how do we reconcile this with the less "forceful" notion of enduring, revisiting, and working through? On Monday, January 2, 2017, mike cole wrote: > The pieces of brick thrown up by this political hammering have not yet > fallen and made the devastation personally experienced by the nation/world. > > Still, genuinely, we can wish all of us 7.3 billion well in the new year. > > So what do you think chuck, is this a good representation of perezhivanie? > :-) > Mike > > On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 11:24 AM Charles Bazerman < > bazerman@education.ucsb.edu> wrote: > > > So you think 2017 has any hope of being any better? > > > > Chuck > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > From: mike cole > > > > Date: Monday, January 2, 2017 11:01 am > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] New Year's Perezhivanie > > > > To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > > > > > > > > With the New Year, as our Russian colleagues put it! > > > > > > > > > > This image forwarded from a friend more or less sums up my experience > > > > > of > > > > > the past year. Thought you might find it interesting too. > > > > > > > > > > Vis a vis the discussion of perezhivanie: Does this image provide us > with > > > > > used (re-presented) behavioral evidence of a person undergoing > > perezhivanie? > > > > > > > > > > Looking forward to the discussion. > > > > > > > > > > Feliz a?o nuevo! > > > > > > > > > > Mike > > > > > > > > > From smago@uga.edu Tue Jan 3 11:45:27 2017 From: smago@uga.edu (Peter Smagorinsky) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2017 19:45:27 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: <586bfabd.4133620a.c1947.e4b2@mx.google.com> References: <586ae645.475a620a.84afb.9951@mx.google.com> <586bfabd.4133620a.c1947.e4b2@mx.google.com> Message-ID: The attached article is focused on Vygotsky's Jewish legacy, also by a Bella (in response to Larry's "Bella has written a book on the relation of Judaic tradition and Vygotsky (which I have not read) but at the heart of the Judaic tradition is the human path and humanity existing here and now in our living relations.") -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of lpscholar2@gmail.com Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2017 2:25 PM To: Christopher Schuck ; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie Christopher, your way of reading (entering into) and responding that offers examples and then alternatives (the otherwise) i believe captures the flow of perezhivanie. If the struggle between meaningfulness-meaninglessness is at the heart of this month?s article as the heart of crisis, I believe this is also the deep question that most often brings persons to Western forms of psycho-therapy -in our particular localized time and place. Your 2nd question of the relation between perezhivanie and (force) seems to be relevant. The relation of perezhivanie with less forceful, WEAKER notions of (entering into) such as enduring, revisiting, working through. I would add (going out on a limb) that we may also want to explore the notion of the Judaic tradition that runs through what Zukerman calls (the human path) of humanity. I lack background to be specific but do notice the number of Judaic scholars who have been and are engaged with psychotherapy as expressing the character of human salvation and redemption. Martin Buber?s name is often mentioned in this regard. Bella has written a book on the relation of Judaic tradition and Vygotsky (which I have not read) but at the heart of the Judaic tradition is the human path and humanity existing here and now in our living relations. If this is going a step too far, just ignore, and return to the question of less forceful (weaker) human paths of enduring and working through by (entering into) the meaningfulness-meaninglessness (crisis) as both existential and cultural-historical. An alternative image to forcefully hammering and smashing the bricks in the hope of clearing a space for something new to emerge or be created as the bricks scatter and we begin to (de-sign) something brand new from the rubble. The back and forth that feels like repetition and sameness and being stuck may be actually a mood and an (entering into) and (living through) and (working through) the crisis. I would add and highlight this movement is not an interior journey of mastery towards (independence) but is, using Zukerman?s words, an inter/mental back and forth generating a meaningful way forward from within the tension of the crisis of perezhivanie. My belief is when moving through the crisis we do not travel alone but travel with others expressing care and concern for us. The time for heroic journeys is now in question? Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Christopher Schuck Sent: January 3, 2017 9:39 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] New Year's Perezhivanie It's an interesting question (about the brick and perezhivanie), partly because that extended, "living-through", repeated doubling-back process evoked by the Vygotskian sense of the concept would seem to be at odds with a single, discrete act of "smashing" that is immediate, forceful and even violent. It would suggest that part of what perezhivanie means is wrapped up in the symbolic marking of its end - and that this end, when it comes, can be forceful. Certainly, the image could not be more unified and embodying of a particular set of meaningful experiences. But is that how perezhivanie works? This leads me to ask: 1) what are the problems and contradictions encountered in using particular metaphors to depict perezhivanie, where perezhivanie is itself so defined by imagination and narrativity? Part of this might also be a question of what it means to describe and represent one's own perezhivanie figuratively/narratively (whether to others, or to oneself), as opposed to living that perezhivanie. Especially if the attempt to capture/represent one's own perezhivanie is, perhaps, also central to the living of it? 2) What is the nature of the relationship between perezhivanie and force, either in terms of the internal process or in terms of how it finally "ends"? (Not to mention, how it begins). It would seem that in both conceptions discussed in the article there is a certain intensity required. But does this in some cases require something more explosive - and does Vasilyuk's conception of perezhivanie as activity speak more to this possibility? And how do we reconcile this with the less "forceful" notion of enduring, revisiting, and working through? On Monday, January 2, 2017, mike cole wrote: > The pieces of brick thrown up by this political hammering have not yet > fallen and made the devastation personally experienced by the nation/world. > > Still, genuinely, we can wish all of us 7.3 billion well in the new year. > > So what do you think chuck, is this a good representation of perezhivanie? > :-) > Mike > > On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 11:24 AM Charles Bazerman < > bazerman@education.ucsb.edu> wrote: > > > So you think 2017 has any hope of being any better? > > > > Chuck > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > From: mike cole > > > > Date: Monday, January 2, 2017 11:01 am > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] New Year's Perezhivanie > > > > To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > > > > > > > > With the New Year, as our Russian colleagues put it! > > > > > > > > > > This image forwarded from a friend more or less sums up my > > > experience > > > > > of > > > > > the past year. Thought you might find it interesting too. > > > > > > > > > > Vis a vis the discussion of perezhivanie: Does this image provide > > > us > with > > > > > used (re-presented) behavioral evidence of a person undergoing > > perezhivanie? > > > > > > > > > > Looking forward to the discussion. > > > > > > > > > > Feliz a?o nuevo! > > > > > > > > > > Mike > > > > > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: LSVjewish factor.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 112637 bytes Desc: LSVjewish factor.pdf Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20170103/f68c817f/attachment.pdf From dkellogg60@gmail.com Tue Jan 3 14:08:53 2017 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2017 07:08:53 +0900 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: References: <586ae645.475a620a.84afb.9951@mx.google.com> <586bfabd.4133620a.c1947.e4b2@mx.google.com> Message-ID: I agree that LSV's Spinozism (not any kind of supposed Buberism and not Judaism in general)--is relevant to his monism. To that extent, it is relevant to his holistic approach to what we are calling "perezhivanie": perezhivanie is a holistic, monist unit which includes both the experience and the experiencer. But there are a lot of things in Marc's article that I think are essentially distractions--things which direct our attention away from the system of concepts that LSV is trying to evoke with his use of the term. Here are three. First of all, I don't think that "perezhivanie" is originally a "special term" in Russian: there is nothing special about the prefix "pere~" ("trans") or the root "zhivanie" ("life") and Vygotsky was hardly the first to put them together, even in the context of psychology. When he introduce the term, he introduces it as a term which is already widely used. As an analogy, "experience" is not a special term in English, although if you are a systemic-functional linguist, "experiential" takes on a special meaning in relation to a system of other functions. So I think that the key to understanding Vygotsky's "perezhivanie" is not in Vasilyuk (who appears to be an adept of the anti-Semitic Russian Orthodox church). The key to understanding Vygotsky's "perezhivanie" is in Vygotsky. Secondly, and accordingly, I don't think that "perezhivanie" or any other term in Vygotsky can be resolved by the kind of "my dictionary is bigger than yours" arguments that we translators love so much. Just last week we had a rumble in Seoul over whether the word usually translated as "spontaneous" could be translated by a Korean word meaning "spontaneous", or by another one meaning "volitional" or by a different one meaning roughly "indigeneous". A big enough dictionary allows all three translations. But when we look in Vygotsky (his report on the construction of preschoools to the All Russian Working Group on the topic), we see that the real meaning is none of these: "spontaneous" learning, driven by the child's needs, is contrased with "spontaneous reactive" learning. At this point it becomes possible to consult a HUGE dictionary and include a VAST footnote on the various possible meanings of "reactive". But it is also possible to stop blaming our tools and just return to Vygotsky's report, where it becomes clear that what Vygotsky really means has nothing to do with reactology or behaviorism: he is referring to learning that is a reaction to and against and eventually with a teacher-parent-state syllabus. So "spontaneous" doesn't mean spontaneous or volitional or indigenous; it means non-reactive, and "reactive" doesn't mean reactionary or reactological or radioactive but rather non-spontaneous: Vygotsky's concepts are part of a system, and their meaning owes, just as Spinoza would have it, to their position in the system and not to their position in a dictionary or a thesaurus. Thirdly, and as a more or less final result, I don't see that the data that Marc ends his article with is relevant to Vygotsky's perezhivanie at all, because LSV's "perezhivanie" is designed as a unit for describing the development of the child's personality in the child's environment. On the one hand, that means it has to include both the feeling of what happens to the infant as it happens (e.g. the use of "perezhivanie" to describe the infant drinking milk in Vygotsky's lecture on infancy" and it has to include the thougth of what has happened when we reflect on its consequences *e.g. the use of "perezhivanie" to describe the three children in the dysfunctional family of "Problem of the Environment"). On the other hand, it does not have to include--and I think it cannot include--the response of an adult teacher to an unruly classroom, as Marc would have it do. David Kellogg Macquarie University On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 4:45 AM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > The attached article is focused on Vygotsky's Jewish legacy, also by a > Bella (in response to Larry's "Bella has written a book on the relation of > Judaic tradition and Vygotsky (which I have not read) but at the heart of > the Judaic tradition is the human path and humanity existing here and now > in our living relations.") > > -----Original Message----- > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ > mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of lpscholar2@gmail.com > Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2017 2:25 PM > To: Christopher Schuck ; eXtended Mind, Culture, > Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie > > Christopher, your way of reading (entering into) and responding that > offers examples and then alternatives (the otherwise) i believe captures > the flow of perezhivanie. > If the struggle between meaningfulness-meaninglessness is at the heart of > this month?s article as the heart of crisis, I believe this is also the > deep question that most often brings persons to Western forms of > psycho-therapy -in our particular localized time and place. > Your 2nd question of the relation between perezhivanie and (force) seems > to be relevant. The relation of perezhivanie with less forceful, WEAKER > notions of (entering into) such as enduring, revisiting, working through. I > would add (going out on a limb) that we may also want to explore the notion > of the Judaic tradition that runs through what Zukerman calls (the human > path) of humanity. I lack background to be specific but do notice the > number of Judaic scholars who have been and are engaged with psychotherapy > as expressing the character of human salvation and redemption. > Martin Buber?s name is often mentioned in this regard. > Bella has written a book on the relation of Judaic tradition and Vygotsky > (which I have not read) but at the heart of the Judaic tradition is the > human path and humanity existing here and now in our living relations. > If this is going a step too far, just ignore, and return to the question > of less forceful (weaker) human paths of enduring and working through by > (entering into) the meaningfulness-meaninglessness (crisis) as both > existential and cultural-historical. > An alternative image to forcefully hammering and smashing the bricks in > the hope of clearing a space for something new to emerge or be created as > the bricks scatter and we begin to (de-sign) something brand new from the > rubble. > The back and forth that feels like repetition and sameness and being stuck > may be actually a mood and an (entering into) and (living through) and > (working through) the crisis. > I would add and highlight this movement is not an interior journey of > mastery towards (independence) but is, using Zukerman?s words, an > inter/mental back and forth generating a meaningful way forward from within > the tension of the crisis of perezhivanie. > > My belief is when moving through the crisis we do not travel alone but > travel with others expressing care and concern for us. The time for heroic > journeys is now in question? > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > From: Christopher Schuck > Sent: January 3, 2017 9:39 AM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] New Year's Perezhivanie > > It's an interesting question (about the brick and perezhivanie), partly > because that extended, "living-through", repeated doubling-back process > evoked by the Vygotskian sense of the concept would seem to be at odds with > a single, discrete act of "smashing" that is immediate, forceful and even > violent. It would suggest that part of what perezhivanie means is wrapped > up in the symbolic marking of its end - and that this end, when it comes, > can be forceful. Certainly, the image could not be more unified and > embodying of a particular set of meaningful experiences. But is that how > perezhivanie works? This leads me to ask: > > 1) what are the problems and contradictions encountered in using > particular metaphors to depict perezhivanie, where perezhivanie is itself > so defined by imagination and narrativity? Part of this might also be a > question of what it means to describe and represent one's own perezhivanie > figuratively/narratively (whether to others, or to oneself), as opposed to > living that perezhivanie. Especially if the attempt to capture/represent > one's own perezhivanie is, perhaps, also central to the living of it? > > 2) What is the nature of the relationship between perezhivanie and force, > either in terms of the internal process or in terms of how it finally > "ends"? (Not to mention, how it begins). It would seem that in both > conceptions discussed in the article there is a certain intensity required. > But does this in some cases require something more explosive - and does > Vasilyuk's conception of perezhivanie as activity speak more to this > possibility? And how do we reconcile this with the less "forceful" notion > of enduring, revisiting, and working through? > > On Monday, January 2, 2017, mike cole wrote: > > > The pieces of brick thrown up by this political hammering have not yet > > fallen and made the devastation personally experienced by the > nation/world. > > > > Still, genuinely, we can wish all of us 7.3 billion well in the new year. > > > > So what do you think chuck, is this a good representation of > perezhivanie? > > :-) > > Mike > > > > On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 11:24 AM Charles Bazerman < > > bazerman@education.ucsb.edu> wrote: > > > > > So you think 2017 has any hope of being any better? > > > > > > Chuck > > > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > > > From: mike cole > > > > > > Date: Monday, January 2, 2017 11:01 am > > > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] New Year's Perezhivanie > > > > > > To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > > > > > > > > > > > > With the New Year, as our Russian colleagues put it! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This image forwarded from a friend more or less sums up my > > > > experience > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > the past year. Thought you might find it interesting too. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vis a vis the discussion of perezhivanie: Does this image provide > > > > us > > with > > > > > > > used (re-presented) behavioral evidence of a person undergoing > > > perezhivanie? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Looking forward to the discussion. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Feliz a?o nuevo! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mike > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From lpscholar2@gmail.com Tue Jan 3 14:34:08 2017 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2017 14:34:08 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: References: <586ae645.475a620a.84afb.9951@mx.google.com> <586bfabd.4133620a.c1947.e4b2@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <586c2702.d78b620a.87ebd.2fc1@mx.google.com> Peter, (and Bella) Thank you for this resource that furthers my understanding of Vygotsky?s family influences. I do not want to draw us away from this months focus on perezhivanie. But two quick fragments i will highlight. *on page 20 of Bella?s paper see note 14. It documents that Vygotsky translated Hebrew literature into Russian. He translated Berdichevsky?s story. What is the title of this story? ? (Redemption). I hear in this word echoes of perezhivanie. *on page 21 Bella highlights that for 2 full years while at the gymnasium Vygotsky organized a study seminar on the history of the Jewish people, seeking to understand the nature of history, the role of the individual in history, and the essence of nations, and other similar questions of the philosophy of history. I find these facts relevant as they overlap with our focus on perezhivanie. Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Peter Smagorinsky Sent: January 3, 2017 11:47 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; Christopher Schuck Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie The attached article is focused on Vygotsky's Jewish legacy, also by a Bella (in response to Larry's "Bella has written a book on the relation of Judaic tradition and Vygotsky (which I have not read) but at the heart of the Judaic tradition is the human path and humanity existing here and now in our living relations.") -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of lpscholar2@gmail.com Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2017 2:25 PM To: Christopher Schuck ; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie Christopher, your way of reading (entering into) and responding that offers examples and then alternatives (the otherwise) i believe captures the flow of perezhivanie. If the struggle between meaningfulness-meaninglessness is at the heart of this month?s article as the heart of crisis, I believe this is also the deep question that most often brings persons to Western forms of psycho-therapy -in our particular localized time and place. Your 2nd question of the relation between perezhivanie and (force) seems to be relevant. The relation of perezhivanie with less forceful, WEAKER notions of (entering into) such as enduring, revisiting, working through. I would add (going out on a limb) that we may also want to explore the notion of the Judaic tradition that runs through what Zukerman calls (the human path) of humanity. I lack background to be specific but do notice the number of Judaic scholars who have been and are engaged with psychotherapy as expressing the character of human salvation and redemption. Martin Buber?s name is often mentioned in this regard. Bella has written a book on the relation of Judaic tradition and Vygotsky (which I have not read) but at the heart of the Judaic tradition is the human path and humanity existing here and now in our living relations. If this is going a step too far, just ignore, and return to the question of less forceful (weaker) human paths of enduring and working through by (entering into) the meaningfulness-meaninglessness (crisis) as both existential and cultural-historical. An alternative image to forcefully hammering and smashing the bricks in the hope of clearing a space for something new to emerge or be created as the bricks scatter and we begin to (de-sign) something brand new from the rubble. The back and forth that feels like repetition and sameness and being stuck may be actually a mood and an (entering into) and (living through) and (working through) the crisis. I would add and highlight this movement is not an interior journey of mastery towards (independence) but is, using Zukerman?s words, an inter/mental back and forth generating a meaningful way forward from within the tension of the crisis of perezhivanie. My belief is when moving through the crisis we do not travel alone but travel with others expressing care and concern for us. The time for heroic journeys is now in question? Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Christopher Schuck Sent: January 3, 2017 9:39 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] New Year's Perezhivanie It's an interesting question (about the brick and perezhivanie), partly because that extended, "living-through", repeated doubling-back process evoked by the Vygotskian sense of the concept would seem to be at odds with a single, discrete act of "smashing" that is immediate, forceful and even violent. It would suggest that part of what perezhivanie means is wrapped up in the symbolic marking of its end - and that this end, when it comes, can be forceful. Certainly, the image could not be more unified and embodying of a particular set of meaningful experiences. But is that how perezhivanie works? This leads me to ask: 1) what are the problems and contradictions encountered in using particular metaphors to depict perezhivanie, where perezhivanie is itself so defined by imagination and narrativity? Part of this might also be a question of what it means to describe and represent one's own perezhivanie figuratively/narratively (whether to others, or to oneself), as opposed to living that perezhivanie. Especially if the attempt to capture/represent one's own perezhivanie is, perhaps, also central to the living of it? 2) What is the nature of the relationship between perezhivanie and force, either in terms of the internal process or in terms of how it finally "ends"? (Not to mention, how it begins). It would seem that in both conceptions discussed in the article there is a certain intensity required. But does this in some cases require something more explosive - and does Vasilyuk's conception of perezhivanie as activity speak more to this possibility? And how do we reconcile this with the less "forceful" notion of enduring, revisiting, and working through? On Monday, January 2, 2017, mike cole wrote: > The pieces of brick thrown up by this political hammering have not yet > fallen and made the devastation personally experienced by the nation/world. > > Still, genuinely, we can wish all of us 7.3 billion well in the new year. > > So what do you think chuck, is this a good representation of perezhivanie? > :-) > Mike > > On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 11:24 AM Charles Bazerman < > bazerman@education.ucsb.edu> wrote: > > > So you think 2017 has any hope of being any better? > > > > Chuck > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > From: mike cole > > > > Date: Monday, January 2, 2017 11:01 am > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] New Year's Perezhivanie > > > > To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > > > > > > > > With the New Year, as our Russian colleagues put it! > > > > > > > > > > This image forwarded from a friend more or less sums up my > > > experience > > > > > of > > > > > the past year. Thought you might find it interesting too. > > > > > > > > > > Vis a vis the discussion of perezhivanie: Does this image provide > > > us > with > > > > > used (re-presented) behavioral evidence of a person undergoing > > perezhivanie? > > > > > > > > > > Looking forward to the discussion. > > > > > > > > > > Feliz a?o nuevo! > > > > > > > > > > Mike > > > > > > > > > From mcole@ucsd.edu Tue Jan 3 16:19:17 2017 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2017 16:19:17 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Fwd: [COGDEVSOC] two post-doc positions at NYU In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: interesting topics for an xmcaophile I would imagine, if one were properly positioned. mike ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Andrei Cimpian Date: Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 2:33 PM Subject: [COGDEVSOC] two post-doc positions at NYU To: cogdevsoc@lists.cogdevsoc.org TWO POST-DOC POSITIONS AT NYU IN RHODES AND CIMPIAN LABS Drs. Andrei Cimpian (cimpianlab.com) and Marjorie Rhodes (kidconcepts.org) of New York University (psych.nyu.edu) are seeking to hire two post-doctoral scholars to begin in Summer or Fall of 2017. Researchers interested in the development of essentialism, stereotypes, the role of language in the development of social cognition, and/or the implications of social categorization for cognition, behavior, and achievement are encouraged to apply. These positions will be supported primarily by an NIH grant to Rhodes focusing on the linguistic transmission of essentialism and the implications of essentialism for behavior, and an NSF grant to Cimpian on the development of gender stereotypes about intelligence. Post-doctoral scholars will be primarily affiliated with one of these projects, but will also have the opportunity to develop independent lines of work and to collaborate across labs. Please send a cover letter, CV, two writing samples, and contact information for three references to Rachel Leshin, rachel.leshin@nyu.edu, by 1/20/2017. If you have questions, please email andrei.cimpian@nyu.edu and/or marjorie.rhodes@nyu.edu. New York University is an Equal Opportunity Employer. New York University is committed to a policy of equal treatment and opportunity in every aspect of its hiring and promotion process without regard to race, color, creed, religion, sex, pregnancy or childbirth (or related medical condition), sexual orientation, partnership status, gender and/or gender identity or expression, marital, parental or familial status, caregiver status, national origin, ethnicity, alienage or citizenship status, veteran or military status, age, disability, predisposing genetic characteristics, domestic violence victim status, unemployment status, or any other legally protected basis. Women, racial and ethnic minorities, persons of minority sexual orientation or gender identity, individuals with disabilities, and veterans are encouraged to apply for vacant positions at all levels. _______________________________________________ To post to the CDS listserv, send your message to: cogdevsoc@lists.cogdevsoc.org (If you belong to the listserv and have not included any large attachments, your message will be posted without moderation--so be careful!) To subscribe or unsubscribe from the listserv, visit: http://lists.cogdevsoc.org/listinfo.cgi/cogdevsoc-cogdevsoc.org From marc.clara@gmail.com Tue Jan 3 16:47:15 2017 From: marc.clara@gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Marc_Clar=C3=A0?=) Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2017 01:47:15 +0100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: References: <586ae645.475a620a.84afb.9951@mx.google.com> <586bfabd.4133620a.c1947.e4b2@mx.google.com> Message-ID: Hi, David, and thank you for your comments, they certainly will help me to improve my approach -since, of course, my intention was not to distract. However, I don't completely understand your first two critiques. In the paper, I recognize the translation problems of the word perezhivanie, but I argue that it is even more problematic the distinction between the everyday sense of the term, the traditional use of the term in psychology, and the specific use that Vasilyuk tries to introduce. I don't say that perezhivanie is originally a special term in Russian; I just recognize that there is a terminological problem that have some influence on the vagueness of the concept, and that the different usages of the word should be distinguished to approach the scientific concept(s) of perezhivanie. I understand even less your second critique, since although recognizing in the beginning of my paper these terminological issues, I think that in the remaining of my paper I don't try to address the issue from a "my dictionary is bigger than yours" stance, but on the contrary, I think I rely heavily on the texts by both Vygotsky and Vasilyuk and try to built a comprehensive interpretation of the concepts, which I exemplify with empirical data (also to exemplify the usefulness of this interpretation). I understand better your third critique, and I agree. Of course, by using my interpretation of Vygotsky's perezhivanie to study experiencing-as-struggle in teachers, I am pushing the concept out of the terrain and the problem in which Vygotsky proposed the concept. Here, it's true, I assume that perezhivanie (as a type of mediator, in my interpretation) is crucial to understand many issues (of course, child development, but many other issues as well). In fact, I made this assumption explicit in the paper. I accept the critique that this assumption was not made by Vygotsky, so if I was a psychology historian, this would be a limitation. However, I also see some potentiality in this kind of approach (i.e., pushing forward the concepts proposed by others), since it may permit the concept gain new explanatory power. Best regards, Marc. 2017-01-03 23:08 GMT+01:00 David Kellogg : > I agree that LSV's Spinozism (not any kind of supposed Buberism and not > Judaism in general)--is relevant to his monism. To that extent, it is > relevant to his holistic approach to what we are calling > "perezhivanie": perezhivanie is a holistic, monist unit which includes both > the experience and the experiencer. But there are a lot of things in Marc's > article that I think are essentially distractions--things which direct our > attention away from the system of concepts that LSV is trying to evoke with > his use of the term. Here are three. > > First of all, I don't think that "perezhivanie" is originally a "special > term" in Russian: there is nothing special about the prefix "pere~" > ("trans") or the root "zhivanie" ("life") and Vygotsky was hardly the first > to put them together, even in the context of psychology. When he introduce > the term, he introduces it as a term which is already widely used. As an > analogy, "experience" is not a special term in English, although if you are > a systemic-functional linguist, "experiential" takes on a special meaning > in relation to a system of other functions. So I think that the key to > understanding Vygotsky's "perezhivanie" is not in Vasilyuk (who appears to > be an adept of the anti-Semitic Russian Orthodox church). The key to > understanding Vygotsky's "perezhivanie" is in Vygotsky. > > Secondly, and accordingly, I don't think that "perezhivanie" or any other > term in Vygotsky can be resolved by the kind of "my dictionary is bigger > than yours" arguments that we translators love so much. Just last week we > had a rumble in Seoul over whether the word usually translated as > "spontaneous" could be translated by a Korean word meaning "spontaneous", > or by another one meaning "volitional" or by a different one meaning > roughly "indigeneous". A big enough dictionary allows all three > translations. But when we look in Vygotsky (his report on the construction > of preschoools to the All Russian Working Group on the topic), we see that > the real meaning is none of these: "spontaneous" learning, driven by the > child's needs, is contrased with "spontaneous reactive" learning. At this > point it becomes possible to consult a HUGE dictionary and include a VAST > footnote on the various possible meanings of "reactive". But it is also > possible to stop blaming our tools and just return to Vygotsky's report, > where it becomes clear that what Vygotsky really means has nothing to do > with reactology or behaviorism: he is referring to learning that is a > reaction to and against and eventually with a teacher-parent-state > syllabus. So "spontaneous" doesn't mean spontaneous or volitional or > indigenous; it means non-reactive, and "reactive" doesn't mean reactionary > or reactological or radioactive but rather non-spontaneous: Vygotsky's > concepts are part of a system, and their meaning owes, just as Spinoza > would have it, to their position in the system and not to their position in > a dictionary or a thesaurus. > > Thirdly, and as a more or less final result, I don't see that the data that > Marc ends his article with is relevant to Vygotsky's perezhivanie at all, > because LSV's "perezhivanie" is designed as a unit for describing the > development of the child's personality in the child's environment. On the > one hand, that means it has to include both the feeling of what happens to > the infant as it happens (e.g. the use of "perezhivanie" to describe the > infant drinking milk in Vygotsky's lecture on infancy" and it has to > include the thougth of what has happened when we reflect on its > consequences *e.g. the use of "perezhivanie" to describe the three children > in the dysfunctional family of "Problem of the Environment"). On the other > hand, it does not have to include--and I think it cannot include--the > response of an adult teacher to an unruly classroom, as Marc would have it > do. > > David Kellogg > Macquarie University > > On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 4:45 AM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > > > The attached article is focused on Vygotsky's Jewish legacy, also by a > > Bella (in response to Larry's "Bella has written a book on the relation > of > > Judaic tradition and Vygotsky (which I have not read) but at the heart of > > the Judaic tradition is the human path and humanity existing here and now > > in our living relations.") > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ > > mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of lpscholar2@gmail.com > > Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2017 2:25 PM > > To: Christopher Schuck ; eXtended Mind, > Culture, > > Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie > > > > Christopher, your way of reading (entering into) and responding that > > offers examples and then alternatives (the otherwise) i believe captures > > the flow of perezhivanie. > > If the struggle between meaningfulness-meaninglessness is at the heart of > > this month?s article as the heart of crisis, I believe this is also the > > deep question that most often brings persons to Western forms of > > psycho-therapy -in our particular localized time and place. > > Your 2nd question of the relation between perezhivanie and (force) seems > > to be relevant. The relation of perezhivanie with less forceful, WEAKER > > notions of (entering into) such as enduring, revisiting, working > through. I > > would add (going out on a limb) that we may also want to explore the > notion > > of the Judaic tradition that runs through what Zukerman calls (the human > > path) of humanity. I lack background to be specific but do notice the > > number of Judaic scholars who have been and are engaged with > psychotherapy > > as expressing the character of human salvation and redemption. > > Martin Buber?s name is often mentioned in this regard. > > Bella has written a book on the relation of Judaic tradition and Vygotsky > > (which I have not read) but at the heart of the Judaic tradition is the > > human path and humanity existing here and now in our living relations. > > If this is going a step too far, just ignore, and return to the question > > of less forceful (weaker) human paths of enduring and working through by > > (entering into) the meaningfulness-meaninglessness (crisis) as both > > existential and cultural-historical. > > An alternative image to forcefully hammering and smashing the bricks in > > the hope of clearing a space for something new to emerge or be created as > > the bricks scatter and we begin to (de-sign) something brand new from the > > rubble. > > The back and forth that feels like repetition and sameness and being > stuck > > may be actually a mood and an (entering into) and (living through) and > > (working through) the crisis. > > I would add and highlight this movement is not an interior journey of > > mastery towards (independence) but is, using Zukerman?s words, an > > inter/mental back and forth generating a meaningful way forward from > within > > the tension of the crisis of perezhivanie. > > > > My belief is when moving through the crisis we do not travel alone but > > travel with others expressing care and concern for us. The time for > heroic > > journeys is now in question? > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > From: Christopher Schuck > > Sent: January 3, 2017 9:39 AM > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] New Year's Perezhivanie > > > > It's an interesting question (about the brick and perezhivanie), partly > > because that extended, "living-through", repeated doubling-back process > > evoked by the Vygotskian sense of the concept would seem to be at odds > with > > a single, discrete act of "smashing" that is immediate, forceful and even > > violent. It would suggest that part of what perezhivanie means is wrapped > > up in the symbolic marking of its end - and that this end, when it comes, > > can be forceful. Certainly, the image could not be more unified and > > embodying of a particular set of meaningful experiences. But is that how > > perezhivanie works? This leads me to ask: > > > > 1) what are the problems and contradictions encountered in using > > particular metaphors to depict perezhivanie, where perezhivanie is itself > > so defined by imagination and narrativity? Part of this might also be a > > question of what it means to describe and represent one's own > perezhivanie > > figuratively/narratively (whether to others, or to oneself), as opposed > to > > living that perezhivanie. Especially if the attempt to capture/represent > > one's own perezhivanie is, perhaps, also central to the living of it? > > > > 2) What is the nature of the relationship between perezhivanie and > force, > > either in terms of the internal process or in terms of how it finally > > "ends"? (Not to mention, how it begins). It would seem that in both > > conceptions discussed in the article there is a certain intensity > required. > > But does this in some cases require something more explosive - and does > > Vasilyuk's conception of perezhivanie as activity speak more to this > > possibility? And how do we reconcile this with the less "forceful" notion > > of enduring, revisiting, and working through? > > > > On Monday, January 2, 2017, mike cole wrote: > > > > > The pieces of brick thrown up by this political hammering have not yet > > > fallen and made the devastation personally experienced by the > > nation/world. > > > > > > Still, genuinely, we can wish all of us 7.3 billion well in the new > year. > > > > > > So what do you think chuck, is this a good representation of > > perezhivanie? > > > :-) > > > Mike > > > > > > On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 11:24 AM Charles Bazerman < > > > bazerman@education.ucsb.edu> wrote: > > > > > > > So you think 2017 has any hope of being any better? > > > > > > > > Chuck > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > > > > > From: mike cole > > > > > > > > Date: Monday, January 2, 2017 11:01 am > > > > > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] New Year's Perezhivanie > > > > > > > > To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > With the New Year, as our Russian colleagues put it! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This image forwarded from a friend more or less sums up my > > > > > experience > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > the past year. Thought you might find it interesting too. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vis a vis the discussion of perezhivanie: Does this image provide > > > > > us > > > with > > > > > > > > > used (re-presented) behavioral evidence of a person undergoing > > > > perezhivanie? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Looking forward to the discussion. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Feliz a?o nuevo! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mike > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Wed Jan 4 05:41:29 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2017 13:41:29 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: References: <586ae645.475a620a.84afb.9951@mx.google.com>, Message-ID: <1483537304474.33665@iped.uio.no> That surely has a touch of catharsis to it, Beth, thanks for sharing! Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Beth Ferholt Sent: 03 January 2017 16:50 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Cc: mike cole Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie Several people did tell me, independently, that the great end of the John Oliver segment on 2016, where different NYers curse 2016 on the street, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQ6WPo-oW5Q, helped them to overcome feelings of despair at the end of last year. So maybe it is related to perezhivanie. But maybe just to one part of the process. Beth On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 6:45 PM, wrote: > Mike, > When you use the phrase (by this poltical hammering) then i would suggest > this political activity is not capturing the full meaning of perezhivanie. > My reason for saying this must first refer to page 5 of the article where > perezhivanie?s meaning is approached through the > meaningfulness-meaninglessness opposition and the back and forth within > this struggle. > The image of the hammer as presented has its source in the meaning-forming > motive proceeding in a direction towards realization of her meaning-forming > political motives. Only within this aspect of the opposition will the > situation in the image HAVE meaning and BE meaningful. > Vasilyuk however adds the other aspect : If things are proceeding > OTHERWISE the situation becomes meaningless (LP ? and then we enter the > crisis of meaninglessness ? the otherwise - where words no longer mediate > the situation). > > This nature of perezhivanie Vasilyuk metaphorically describes as learning > ( as ENTERING INTO) this type of meaning that is NOT formal, scientific > conceptual knowledge. It is a place of moods and shifting experiences. > > So in my reading of perezhivanie there is this tension between (entering > into) volitional acts and the alternative aspect of perizihavanie as > overwhelming crisis of (meaninglessness) which must be mediated and the > mediators transformed. > > Turning back to page 2 and the situation where Macduff must feel his > situation as a man when his entire family are killed. No practical activity > can bring his family back. Another type of work is needed (and necessary) > which Macduff calls (feeling the situation as a man). THIS WORK Vasilyuk > calls perezhivanie. > > So, my way of reading the image of the hammer smashing 2016 highlights the > aspect of (entering into) a meaningful motive as (political activity) that > is represented but what is not is the alternative, represented in the > crisis of meaninglessness that is the other aspect of perezhivanie. > Marc Clara speaks of the mediator that transforms this crisis of > experiencing, but i am not sure the the image of the girl and hammer > portrays the aspect of perezhivanie as involving a transformative mediator > existing between meaningfulness and meaninglessness? > That time when words and practical activity fail and the person is facing > existential dread when (feeling as a man) that all hope has left the world. > That moment is the moment in which Clara opened and (entered into) her > article exploring the two notions of perizhivanie using the same word. > At the heart of this matter is the existential dread of meaninglessness > unique for each person and our ways of answering as alternative waysthat > give a deep sense of meaningfulness. > It is here that there is overlap with last month?s article where Zukerman > addressed the unique existential aspect entering into cultural historical > (human paths) > > > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > From: mike cole > Sent: January 2, 2017 12:06 PM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie > > The pieces of brick thrown up by this political hammering have not yet > fallen and made the devastation personally experienced by the nation/world. > > Still, genuinely, we can wish all of us 7.3 billion well in the new year. > > So what do you think chuck, is this a good representation of perezhivanie? > :-) > Mike > > On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 11:24 AM Charles Bazerman < > bazerman@education.ucsb.edu> wrote: > > > So you think 2017 has any hope of being any better? > > > > Chuck > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > From: mike cole > > > > Date: Monday, January 2, 2017 11:01 am > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] New Year's Perezhivanie > > > > To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > > > > > > > > With the New Year, as our Russian colleagues put it! > > > > > > > > > > This image forwarded from a friend more or less sums up my experience > > > > > of > > > > > the past year. Thought you might find it interesting too. > > > > > > > > > > Vis a vis the discussion of perezhivanie: Does this image provide us > with > > > > > used (re-presented) behavioral evidence of a person undergoing > > perezhivanie? > > > > > > > > > > Looking forward to the discussion. > > > > > > > > > > Feliz a?o nuevo! > > > > > > > > > > Mike > > > > > > > > > > -- Beth Ferholt Assistant Professor Department of Early Childhood and Art Education Brooklyn College, City University of New York 2900 Bedford Avenue Brooklyn, NY 11210-2889 Email: bferholt@brooklyn.cuny.edu Phone: (718) 951-5205 Fax: (718) 951-4816 From bferholt@gmail.com Wed Jan 4 10:13:49 2017 From: bferholt@gmail.com (Beth Ferholt) Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2017 13:13:49 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: <1483537304474.33665@iped.uio.no> References: <586ae645.475a620a.84afb.9951@mx.google.com> <1483537304474.33665@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: It is often hard to contain the many strands in an XMCA discussion, but never more so than when we discuss this topic. In Reggio Emilia's early childhood pedagogy it could be called a spaghetti mess. I am thinking about three strands of pasta, now: >From Marc -- My current research concern is trying to find *ways to study* and understand how this mediation occurs and how these semiotic mediators are transformed and distributed. >From Chris -- Part of this might also be a question of what it means to describe and represent one's own perezhivanie figuratively/narratively (whether to others, or to oneself), as opposed to living that perezhivanie. *Especially if the attempt to capture/represent* *one's own perezhivanie is, perhaps, also central to the living of it?* And our US Narnia playworld study, where this capturing/representing(/living) took place with Maurice Sendak's illustrations of perezhivanie. Two of the stages ("making mischief of one kind ... and another" and "saying I'LL EAT YOU UP!) of perezhivanie look a lot like the image Mike sent ... we have called them stage 0, Fixed Boundaries, which means that in order to start the process of perezhivanie the moving forward that is life has to pause (despair) and also be recognized (with almost joyful anger and abandon before declaring oneself) (I have to check but I am pretty sure this was originally from Crime and Punishment via Vasilyuk). The difference between experiencing as struggle and the meaning that mediates experiencing as struggle is certainly a key questions. But how to access/study this question is still a problem. Again I turn to children -- and although the following example is still very emotionally powerful for me, I think it is particularly useful here -- for others as well as myself. Last night my family and I had to run out of our apartment because there was a large fire in the building next door that the firepeople could not contain for an hour or so. My five year old had trouble going to sleep, as we all did, after the blaze was extinguished and we were allowed to go home. He said he had read a book about volcanos at school and lava was live fire, and the book and the real fire had scared him, so the book had come true, so he wanted to cut up the book. I don't mean to bypass the other strands but this is what came to mind. Beth On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 8:41 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > That surely has a touch of catharsis to it, Beth, thanks for sharing! > Alfredo > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of Beth Ferholt > Sent: 03 January 2017 16:50 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Cc: mike cole > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie > > Several people did tell me, independently, that the great end of the John > Oliver segment on 2016, where different NYers curse 2016 on the street, > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQ6WPo-oW5Q, helped them to overcome > feelings of despair at the end of last year. So maybe it is related to > perezhivanie. But maybe just to one part of the process. Beth > > On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 6:45 PM, wrote: > > > Mike, > > When you use the phrase (by this poltical hammering) then i would suggest > > this political activity is not capturing the full meaning of > perezhivanie. > > My reason for saying this must first refer to page 5 of the article where > > perezhivanie?s meaning is approached through the > > meaningfulness-meaninglessness opposition and the back and forth within > > this struggle. > > The image of the hammer as presented has its source in the > meaning-forming > > motive proceeding in a direction towards realization of her > meaning-forming > > political motives. Only within this aspect of the opposition will the > > situation in the image HAVE meaning and BE meaningful. > > Vasilyuk however adds the other aspect : If things are proceeding > > OTHERWISE the situation becomes meaningless (LP ? and then we enter the > > crisis of meaninglessness ? the otherwise - where words no longer mediate > > the situation). > > > > This nature of perezhivanie Vasilyuk metaphorically describes as learning > > ( as ENTERING INTO) this type of meaning that is NOT formal, scientific > > conceptual knowledge. It is a place of moods and shifting experiences. > > > > So in my reading of perezhivanie there is this tension between (entering > > into) volitional acts and the alternative aspect of perizihavanie as > > overwhelming crisis of (meaninglessness) which must be mediated and the > > mediators transformed. > > > > Turning back to page 2 and the situation where Macduff must feel his > > situation as a man when his entire family are killed. No practical > activity > > can bring his family back. Another type of work is needed (and necessary) > > which Macduff calls (feeling the situation as a man). THIS WORK Vasilyuk > > calls perezhivanie. > > > > So, my way of reading the image of the hammer smashing 2016 highlights > the > > aspect of (entering into) a meaningful motive as (political activity) > that > > is represented but what is not is the alternative, represented in the > > crisis of meaninglessness that is the other aspect of perezhivanie. > > Marc Clara speaks of the mediator that transforms this crisis of > > experiencing, but i am not sure the the image of the girl and hammer > > portrays the aspect of perezhivanie as involving a transformative > mediator > > existing between meaningfulness and meaninglessness? > > That time when words and practical activity fail and the person is facing > > existential dread when (feeling as a man) that all hope has left the > world. > > That moment is the moment in which Clara opened and (entered into) her > > article exploring the two notions of perizhivanie using the same word. > > At the heart of this matter is the existential dread of meaninglessness > > unique for each person and our ways of answering as alternative waysthat > > give a deep sense of meaningfulness. > > It is here that there is overlap with last month?s article where Zukerman > > addressed the unique existential aspect entering into cultural historical > > (human paths) > > > > > > > > > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > From: mike cole > > Sent: January 2, 2017 12:06 PM > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie > > > > The pieces of brick thrown up by this political hammering have not yet > > fallen and made the devastation personally experienced by the > nation/world. > > > > Still, genuinely, we can wish all of us 7.3 billion well in the new year. > > > > So what do you think chuck, is this a good representation of > perezhivanie? > > :-) > > Mike > > > > On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 11:24 AM Charles Bazerman < > > bazerman@education.ucsb.edu> wrote: > > > > > So you think 2017 has any hope of being any better? > > > > > > Chuck > > > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > > > From: mike cole > > > > > > Date: Monday, January 2, 2017 11:01 am > > > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] New Year's Perezhivanie > > > > > > To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > > > > > > > > > > > > With the New Year, as our Russian colleagues put it! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This image forwarded from a friend more or less sums up my experience > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > the past year. Thought you might find it interesting too. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vis a vis the discussion of perezhivanie: Does this image provide us > > with > > > > > > > used (re-presented) behavioral evidence of a person undergoing > > > perezhivanie? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Looking forward to the discussion. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Feliz a?o nuevo! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mike > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Beth Ferholt > Assistant Professor > Department of Early Childhood and Art Education > Brooklyn College, City University of New York > 2900 Bedford Avenue > Brooklyn, NY 11210-2889 > > Email: bferholt@brooklyn.cuny.edu > Phone: (718) 951-5205 > Fax: (718) 951-4816 > > -- Beth Ferholt Assistant Professor Department of Early Childhood and Art Education Brooklyn College, City University of New York 2900 Bedford Avenue Brooklyn, NY 11210-2889 Email: bferholt@brooklyn.cuny.edu Phone: (718) 951-5205 Fax: (718) 951-4816 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: F--k 2016.pptx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.presentationml.presentation Size: 928490 bytes Desc: not available Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20170104/163a9a4e/attachment-0001.bin From bferholt@gmail.com Wed Jan 4 10:17:45 2017 From: bferholt@gmail.com (Beth Ferholt) Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2017 13:17:45 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: References: <586ae645.475a620a.84afb.9951@mx.google.com> <1483537304474.33665@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: You see in the picture on the wall in the first Sendak illustration that the wild thing that the child (Max) will become, in order to complete his stages of perezhivanie, is first a mediating meaning ... made by a real wild thing ... On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 1:13 PM, Beth Ferholt wrote: > It is often hard to contain the many strands in an XMCA discussion, but > never more so than when we discuss this topic. > > In Reggio Emilia's early childhood pedagogy it could be called a spaghetti > mess. > > I am thinking about three strands of pasta, now: > > From Marc -- My current research concern is trying to find > *ways to study* and understand how this mediation occurs and how these > semiotic mediators are transformed and distributed. > > From Chris -- Part of this might also be a question of > what it means to describe and represent one's own perezhivanie > figuratively/narratively (whether to others, or to oneself), as opposed to > living that perezhivanie. *Especially if the attempt to capture/represent* > *one's own perezhivanie is, perhaps, also central to the living of it?* > > And our US Narnia playworld study, where this > capturing/representing(/living) took place with Maurice Sendak's > illustrations of perezhivanie. > > Two of the stages ("making mischief of one kind ... and another" and > "saying I'LL EAT YOU UP!) of perezhivanie look a lot like the image Mike > sent ... we have called them stage 0, Fixed Boundaries, which means that in > order to start the process of perezhivanie the moving forward that is life > has to pause (despair) and also be recognized (with almost joyful anger and > abandon before declaring oneself) (I have to check but I am pretty sure > this was originally from Crime and Punishment via Vasilyuk). > > The difference between experiencing as struggle and the meaning that > mediates experiencing as struggle is certainly a key questions. But how to > access/study this question is still a problem. Again I turn to children -- > and although the following example is still very emotionally powerful for > me, I think it is particularly useful here -- for others as well as myself. > > Last night my family and I had to run out of our apartment because there > was a large fire in the building next door that the firepeople could not > contain for an hour or so. My five year old had trouble going to sleep, as > we all did, after the blaze was extinguished and we were allowed to go > home. He said he had read a book about volcanos at school and lava was > live fire, and the book and the real fire had scared him, so the book had > come true, so he wanted to cut up the book. > > I don't mean to bypass the other strands but this is what came to mind. > Beth > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 8:41 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > wrote: > >> That surely has a touch of catharsis to it, Beth, thanks for sharing! >> Alfredo >> ________________________________________ >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> on behalf of Beth Ferholt >> Sent: 03 January 2017 16:50 >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> Cc: mike cole >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie >> >> Several people did tell me, independently, that the great end of the John >> Oliver segment on 2016, where different NYers curse 2016 on the street, >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQ6WPo-oW5Q, helped them to overcome >> feelings of despair at the end of last year. So maybe it is related to >> perezhivanie. But maybe just to one part of the process. Beth >> >> On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 6:45 PM, wrote: >> >> > Mike, >> > When you use the phrase (by this poltical hammering) then i would >> suggest >> > this political activity is not capturing the full meaning of >> perezhivanie. >> > My reason for saying this must first refer to page 5 of the article >> where >> > perezhivanie?s meaning is approached through the >> > meaningfulness-meaninglessness opposition and the back and forth within >> > this struggle. >> > The image of the hammer as presented has its source in the >> meaning-forming >> > motive proceeding in a direction towards realization of her >> meaning-forming >> > political motives. Only within this aspect of the opposition will the >> > situation in the image HAVE meaning and BE meaningful. >> > Vasilyuk however adds the other aspect : If things are proceeding >> > OTHERWISE the situation becomes meaningless (LP ? and then we enter the >> > crisis of meaninglessness ? the otherwise - where words no longer >> mediate >> > the situation). >> > >> > This nature of perezhivanie Vasilyuk metaphorically describes as >> learning >> > ( as ENTERING INTO) this type of meaning that is NOT formal, scientific >> > conceptual knowledge. It is a place of moods and shifting experiences. >> > >> > So in my reading of perezhivanie there is this tension between (entering >> > into) volitional acts and the alternative aspect of perizihavanie as >> > overwhelming crisis of (meaninglessness) which must be mediated and the >> > mediators transformed. >> > >> > Turning back to page 2 and the situation where Macduff must feel his >> > situation as a man when his entire family are killed. No practical >> activity >> > can bring his family back. Another type of work is needed (and >> necessary) >> > which Macduff calls (feeling the situation as a man). THIS WORK Vasilyuk >> > calls perezhivanie. >> > >> > So, my way of reading the image of the hammer smashing 2016 highlights >> the >> > aspect of (entering into) a meaningful motive as (political activity) >> that >> > is represented but what is not is the alternative, represented in the >> > crisis of meaninglessness that is the other aspect of perezhivanie. >> > Marc Clara speaks of the mediator that transforms this crisis of >> > experiencing, but i am not sure the the image of the girl and hammer >> > portrays the aspect of perezhivanie as involving a transformative >> mediator >> > existing between meaningfulness and meaninglessness? >> > That time when words and practical activity fail and the person is >> facing >> > existential dread when (feeling as a man) that all hope has left the >> world. >> > That moment is the moment in which Clara opened and (entered into) her >> > article exploring the two notions of perizhivanie using the same word. >> > At the heart of this matter is the existential dread of meaninglessness >> > unique for each person and our ways of answering as alternative waysthat >> > give a deep sense of meaningfulness. >> > It is here that there is overlap with last month?s article where >> Zukerman >> > addressed the unique existential aspect entering into cultural >> historical >> > (human paths) >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > Sent from my Windows 10 phone >> > >> > From: mike cole >> > Sent: January 2, 2017 12:06 PM >> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie >> > >> > The pieces of brick thrown up by this political hammering have not yet >> > fallen and made the devastation personally experienced by the >> nation/world. >> > >> > Still, genuinely, we can wish all of us 7.3 billion well in the new >> year. >> > >> > So what do you think chuck, is this a good representation of >> perezhivanie? >> > :-) >> > Mike >> > >> > On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 11:24 AM Charles Bazerman < >> > bazerman@education.ucsb.edu> wrote: >> > >> > > So you think 2017 has any hope of being any better? >> > > >> > > Chuck >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > ----- Original Message ----- >> > > >> > > From: mike cole >> > > >> > > Date: Monday, January 2, 2017 11:01 am >> > > >> > > Subject: [Xmca-l] New Year's Perezhivanie >> > > >> > > To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > With the New Year, as our Russian colleagues put it! >> > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > This image forwarded from a friend more or less sums up my >> experience >> > > >> > > > of >> > > >> > > > the past year. Thought you might find it interesting too. >> > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > Vis a vis the discussion of perezhivanie: Does this image provide us >> > with >> > > >> > > > used (re-presented) behavioral evidence of a person undergoing >> > > perezhivanie? >> > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > Looking forward to the discussion. >> > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > Feliz a?o nuevo! >> > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > Mike >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > >> > >> >> >> -- >> Beth Ferholt >> Assistant Professor >> Department of Early Childhood and Art Education >> Brooklyn College, City University of New York >> 2900 Bedford Avenue >> Brooklyn, NY 11210-2889 >> >> Email: bferholt@brooklyn.cuny.edu >> Phone: (718) 951-5205 >> Fax: (718) 951-4816 >> >> > > > -- > Beth Ferholt > Assistant Professor > Department of Early Childhood and Art Education > Brooklyn College, City University of New York > 2900 Bedford Avenue > Brooklyn, NY 11210-2889 > > Email: bferholt@brooklyn.cuny.edu > Phone: (718) 951-5205 > Fax: (718) 951-4816 > -- Beth Ferholt Assistant Professor Department of Early Childhood and Art Education Brooklyn College, City University of New York 2900 Bedford Avenue Brooklyn, NY 11210-2889 Email: bferholt@brooklyn.cuny.edu Phone: (718) 951-5205 Fax: (718) 951-4816 From marc.clara@gmail.com Wed Jan 4 13:31:19 2017 From: marc.clara@gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Marc_Clar=C3=A0?=) Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2017 22:31:19 +0100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! In-Reply-To: <1483467423798.57819@iped.uio.no> References: <1483344752182.40904@iped.uio.no> <1483467423798.57819@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: Thank you very much, Alfredo, for sharing this excellent paper by Veresov, and thanks also for your responses, which really helped me to better understand your points. My main doubt about your proposal was/is caused by the statement that the idea of cultural mediation/mediator implies a cartesian dualism. This shocks me because, to me, the idea of cultural mediation is absolutely crucial (in fact, the keystone) for the construction of a monist (and scientific) psychology that does not forget mind ?that is, a cultural psychology. From your response, however, I realized that we may be approaching the idea of mediation in different ways. I talk of mediation and mediators in a quite restricted way. The starting point of my understanding of mediation is a dialectical relationship (organic, transactional) between the subject and the world (Vygotsky departs from the scheme stimulus-response, from reflexology). This relationship, that Vygotsky calls primitive psychological functions, would be basically biological. However, in human beings this relationship is mediated by cultural means: signs and tools; or primary, secondary and terciary artifacts. These cultural means reorganize the primitive functions (dialectic S-O relationship), which become then higher psychological functions (S-M-O) (see for example, The problem of the cultural development of the child, in The Vygotsky Reader). Now, the subject, the cultural mediators, and the object form an inseparable dialectical unit, so that the subject acts on (transforms) the object through the prism of the cultural mediators, the object acts on (transforms) the subject also through the prism of the cultural mediators, and the cultural means are themselves also transformed as a consequence of their mediation in this continuous dynamic dialectical tension. Here, for me, it is important the idea that the cultural means are as material (if we assume a materialist monism) as all the rest of the world; in fact, are parts of the material world which become signs or tools (and can be therefore socially distributed). This permits the introduction of the scientific study of mind-consciousness (as mediating systems of signs), because mind is not anymore something immaterial and unobservable, but it is as material and observable as the rest of the natural world. It is from this view that, for me, the idea of cultural mediation is the keystone of a monist psychology that includes mind. Thus, when I speak of mediators, I refer to the cultural means which mediate in the S-O dialectics; I am especially interested in signs/secondary artifacts. Here, it is perhaps necessary to insist that when I talk of studying mediators (and their semantic structure), this doesn't mean that they are taken out from the activity (the flux of live) in which they mediate (since out of activity they are not signs anymore); here, I think Vygotsky tries again to overcome another old dichotomy, the functionalism-structuralism one. I hope that all this makes also clear the difference between this view and that of computational psychologies (which in general are profoundly and explicitly dualist and not dialectic). Back to perezhivanie, I'm not obviously trying to deny the influence of Spinoza on Vygotsky's thinking (this is explicit in Vygotsky's writings, especially in ?The teaching about emotions?, in the Vol.6 of the Collected Works). But I have doubts that Vygotsky's introduction of the concept of perezhivanie is to be regarded primarily as a movement towards monism (from a previous cartesian dualism), and that this movement questions the concept of cultural mediation. Instead, and I think that this is in line with some of Gonz?lez-Rey observations in his paper, my impression is that the introduction of the concept of perezhivanie responds more to a movement (a further step) towards holism (something that, in my understanding, can also be found in Spinoza). Thus, I think that the word meaning is still the unit of analysis in the last Vygotsky -and therefore, the idea of cultural mediation is still crucial (in fact, in The problem of the environment, he connects the concept of perezhivanie, which has just introduced, to the development of word meaning [p.345-346, also cited in my paper]). However, in my view, in the last Vygotsky the focus is not anymore primarily on the word-meaning as formed for things (or collections of things, as in the ontogenetic research with Sakharov), but the focus is now in the formation of meaning for holistic situations. Best regards, Marc. 2017-01-03 19:16 GMT+01:00 Alfredo Jornet Gil : > Hi Marc, all, > > thanks for joining and for your interesting work, which I follow since I > became aware of it. I appreciate the way in your paper you show careful and > honest attention to the texts of the authors involved, but perhaps most of > all I appreciate that the paper makes the transformational dimension > related to struggle and change salient, a dimension all papers deemed > central to perezhivanie. And I have learned more about Vasilyuk by reading > your paper. But I also see that we have approached the question of > perezhivanie differently and I think that addressing the questions that you > raise concerning our article may be a good way to both respond and discuss > your paper. > > I am aware that our use of the term monism may be problematic to some, and > N. Veresov, who has recently written about this (see attached article), > warns against the dangers of simply moving from dualism into an > undifferentiating monism that relativizes everything, making development > un-studiable. This seems to be the way in which you have understood our > argument, and of course this is not what we are or want to be doing. > Probably many will think that *dialectical materialism* rather than monism > is the proper term, and I could agree with them; we do in fact use > dialectical materialism there and elsewhere. Yet, we wanted to emphasise > the Spinozist influence (an influence that also runs through Marx) and so > we found it appropriate to use the term monism, a term that Vygotsky uses > before arguing that Spinoza "develops an essentially materialistic view" > (Collected Works, Vol. 6, p. 124). For us, the aim is working out ways to > empirically examine and formulate problems in ways that do not reify a > mind-body dualism. > > Although overcoming dualism is foundational to the CHAT paradigm, I would > however not say that Vygotsky did get to solve all of the problems that > Cartesian dualism had created for psychology, even though he recognised > those problems brilliantly as early as in the "Crisis". It should suffice > to cite Vygotsky's own remarks, which we quote in the paper (and which A.N. > Leont'ev mentions in the introduction to the collected works), where > Vygotsky explicitly critiques some of his own prior ideas for failing to > overcome dualism. We agree with those who, like F. G. Rey, see Vygotsky's > project as a developing rather than as a finalised one. The fact is that > Vygotsky was building a theory on the unity of the affect and the intellect > that was to be grounded on Spinoza, and what we try to do is to explore how > perezhivanie, as a concept being developed during the same period (but not > finalised or totally settled!), could be seen from the perspective of the > Spinozist Vygotsky. > > As you note, in our article we argue that, if one takes the Spinozist > one-substance approach, classical concepts used in non-classical > psychology, at least in the way they are commonly used in the current > literature, should be revised. One such concept is mediation. And I > personally do not have much of a problem when mediation is used to denote > the fundamental fact that every thing exists always through *another*, > never in and of itself. But I do think that it is problematic to identify > MEDIATORS, such as "a meaning", as a means to account for or explain > developmental processes and learning events, precisely because it is there, > at least in my view, that dualism creeps in. > > For example, I find it paradoxical that you are concerned that our monist > approach risks turning perezhivanie into a useless category because it may > be used to explain everything and nothing, and yet you do not seem to have > a problem using the term mediation to account for the transformation of > perezhivanie without clearly elaborating on how mediation does change > anything or what it looks like as a real process. How is it different > saying that a perezhivanie mediates the experiencing-as-struggle from > simply saying that it "affects" or "determines" it? Indeed, if perezhivanie > mediates experiencing-as-struggle, does not experiencing-as-struglgle too > mediate perezhivanie? And do not both may be said to mediate development, > or development mediate them? Is not this explaining everything and nothing? > > I do believe you can argue that there is a difference between mediation > and classical psychology's cause-effect relations, but to show this you > need to dig into the dialectical underpinnings of the theory. In your > paper, you offer a nice analysis of a lovely case of a teacher who, in > dealing with a challenge with one of her students, changes her > perezhivanie. I think you can rightly argue that there is a semiotic > transformation, and I fully support your statement that by studying > discourse we can empirically approach questions of psychological > development. The contradictions you show as being involved and resolved > resonate really well with what I experience as a parent or as a teacher in > the classroom. Yet, without unpacking what this "mediation" taking place > between one perezhivanie and the next one means as a concrete and real, the > same analysis could be done taking an information processing approach: > there is an situation that is processed (represented?) in one way, which > then leads to a (cognitive) dissonance, and then there is a cognitive > resolution by means of which the situation is presented differently in > consciousness (indeed, when seen in this way, the term perezhivanie and the > term "representation" become almost indistinguishable). How is mediation, > as an analytical concept, helping here? And most importantly to the > question of perezhivanie, how is this analysis going to show the internal > connection between intellect and affect that Vygotsky formulates as > constitutive of the notion of perezhivanie? > > I believe that the key lies in understanding what Vygotsky means when he > says that perezhivanie is a unit of analysis. I will not repeat here what > already is written in at least a couple of the articles in the special > issue (Blunden, ours), that is the difference between analysis by elements > and unit analysis (Vygotsky 1987). A unit analysis approach is consistent > with Spinoza, for whom cause-effect explanations were not adequate, > requiring instead an understanding of self-development, perezhivanie as a > kernel cell for the development of personality. And I think you may be > after this in your article in suggesting a form of continuous movement from > perezhivanie to experiencing-as-struggle. But perhaps the major difficulty > I find is that, in positing Vygotsky's perezhivanie as "a type of meaning" > and Vasilyuk's perezhivanie (or experiencing-as-struggle) as a "type of > activity," it is difficult not to see here a division between product and > process, a division that then is analytically bridged by the addition of a > third term, mediation, that should bring back the real movement between the > product and the process. > > A different approach involves considering the concrete extension of actual > living and lived social relations, and look at them as generative > phenomena. What is there in the encounter between Carla and the child that > leads to change? For it is not inside the mind, but in real life, in > consciousness as the real relation between people, that Carla is changed. > How is the semantic structure that you nicely present and attribute to > Carla a product of the social relation between her and the child? I think > that to rightfully situate perezhivanie as a concept in a Vygotskian > framework, we ought to address its relation to the genetic law of > development. > > There is much more to disentangle, but this is long enough. I hope I have > succeeded in making clear these ideas. Thanks so much for engaging in the > discussion! > Alfredo > > > > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of Marc Clar? > Sent: 02 January 2017 22:14 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > Hi, all, and thank you so much, Alfredo, for your kind invitation to > participate in this discussion. My paper in the MCA special issue focuses > on a distinction between a type of activity, which I argue that is what > Vasilyuk called *perezhivanie* (experiencing) and a type of semiotic > mediator, which I argue that is what Vygotsky, in The Problem of the > Environment, called *perezhivanie.* I argue, following Vasilyuk, that in > experiencing activities (Vasilyuk's perezhivanie), this type of mediator is > profoundly transformed ? in fact, that experiencing activities consist of > the semiotic transformation of this type of mediator. > > As Veresov and Fleer argue in their commentary, perezhivanie (as a type of > mediator) is for me a psychological phenomenon, one which is of course > conceptualized from a specific theoretical framework. But the phenomenon is > also visible from other theoretical frameworks as well, as I mention in the > paper. This phenomenon is my main interest, and it is from this interest > that I arrived at the concept of perezhivanie (not the other way around). > Now, the phenomenon is that at least emotion, reasoning, and volition > (formation of conscious purposes) seem to be decisively mediated by > holistic situational meaning. My current research concern is trying to find > ways to study and understand how this mediation occurs and how these > semiotic mediators are transformed and distributed. From this view, I think > that experiencing activities (Vasilyuk's perezhivanie) may provide a good > terrain to study these issues (especially regarding the mediation of > emotion), as I tried to exemplify in the paper. > > Studying semiotic mediation, however, is of course not easy. Following > Vygotsky, I assume that extended discourse is the manifestation of thinking > within certain psychological conditions (Vygotsky's Thinking and Speech, > chapter 7), and I also assume the Vygotsky's law of the unity of the > structure and function of thinking (Vygotsky's Thinking and Speech, chapter > 6). From these two assumptions, I propose that meaning (and its functions > in human activity) can be scientifically studied by structurally analyzing > the narratives generated by subjects, considering that the discourse > produced in the narrative is the point of departure of this study, but that > considerable analytical work must be done to move from this discourse to > the full characterization of meaning. It is in that point where I find > useful the work developed by Greimas, the usefulness of which I only > suggest in the paper. > > >From this background, I found many interesting ideas and questions in the > other papers of the special issue. In this first post I will propose two of > them for possible discussion. The first one was raised by Gonz?lez-Rey, > when he introduces, in connection with perezhivanie, the concepts of > personality, and especially, of sense. So, which is the conceptual (and-or > phenomenal) relation between perezhivanie and sense? Gonz?lez-Rey suggests > that both concepts are somewhat similar (and overcome by the concept of > ?subjective sense?); my opinion, partly expressed in my commentary, is that > perezhivanie is a type of meaning, which includes different levels of > depth, and that sense corresponds to the deepest level of meaning (which > can be characterized as a system of semic oppositions). Therefore, sense > wouldn't be in opposition to meaning (as ?a microcosm of human > consciousness?, as Kozulin remembers in his commentary), although it would > be in opposition to manifested meaning (the surface level of meaning). > > The second issue was raised by Roth and Jornet, and I think it goes beyond > the issue of perezhivanie itself. If I understand them well, they argue > that Vygotsky's core proposal of cultural mediation is influenced by the > Cartesian dualism (mind-matter), and that a promising approach to Cultural > Psychology would be a Spinozist monism. I am actually very interested on > the issue of which epistemological position can best substantiate the > construction of a cultural psychology, and that's why I feel inclined to > take the opportunity to ask for your opinions about that. About the > proposal of Roth and Jornet, I have some doubts. First, I don't see why > Vygotsky's proposals can be seen as dualist (in the Cartesian sense) -I > suspect that it is because of the analytical distinctions?. Anyway, in my > understanding, Vygotsky explicitly assumes a materialist monism (for > example in The Crisis), and in fact he constructs his proposal on mediation > upon reflexology, which also explicitly assumed a materialist monism (e.g. > Sechenov). Would a Spinozist monism be a better point of departure? I don't > know, in my understanding it is a more idealist monism, and I don't clearly > see what could be gained. In my opinion, a scientific psychology which > includes the study of mind is only possible if any type of monism is > assumed. However, in my view, for a scientific psychology, the ontological > nature of the world is perhaps less important (it is an issue for > metaphysics?), and I am inclined to assume a neutral monism (e.g. Russell). > So from this view, a materialist monism and a Spinozist monism wouldn't be > so different, so from both views it could be assumed that all is of the > same nature and all is similarly knowable (including mind) [which is the > ontological nature of the world and to what degree it is knowable are > issues that can be left to philosophy]. However, in my opinion, this does > not mean that, while assuming a monism, analytical distinctions cannot be > done when studying the world. In that sense, I had the impression that Roth > and Jornet tended to dilute analytical distinctions in the name of monism; > I repeat that I don't know if I understood them well, but if this was the > case, in my opinion, analysis would be impossible within the new psychology > suggested by Roth and Jornet, and, regarding perezhivanie, there would be > the danger, noted by Vygotsky in The Crisis and cautioned by Kozulin in his > commentary, that by meaning everything, perezhivanie ends by meaning > nothing. > > Best regards and happy new year, > > Marc. > > 2017-01-02 9:12 GMT+01:00 Alfredo Jornet Gil : > > > Dear all, > > > > > > I would like to join David, Luisa, Ana, Henry and the others to wish you > > all a Happy New Year! May it be full of joy, peace, and opportunity. > > > > > > I also would like to begin the year announcing our first ?MCA article > > discussion, ?although in fact corresponds to the last issue of the year > we > > just passed, Issue 4 on Perezhivanie. This is a very special *special* > > issue, not only because its topic has raised lots of interest lately in > the > > CHAT community but also because, greatly coordinated by Andy Blunden and > > the rest of the editorial team, the issue takes the form of a symposium > > where authors get the chance to present and respond to each others' ideas > > on the subject. In my view, this allows having a rich and > multidimensional > > approach to a subject as important as perezhivanie. > > > > > > Following with the dialogical spirit in which the special issue was > > assembled, we will focus on one lead article, but hoping to also engage > > ideas and insights present in or relevant to other contributions in the > > issue. ?Marc Clar?'s "Vygotsky and Vasilyuk on Perezhivanie: Two Notions > > and One Word" will be our focus. The article very nicely engages the lead > > work of Vygotsky, but also the less known ??(?in educational literature) > > but totally relevant works of psychologist ?F. Vasilyuk and semiotician > A. > > J. Greimas, mobilising a number of key concepts including those of > semiotic > > mediation and transformation. > > > > ?In addition to Marc, who will soon join us, I have encouraged some of > the > > other authors in the special issue to also join as "relevant others," if > > time and circumstances allow them. Let's hope that this will help keeping > > the symposium spirit up. > > > > > > Marc's article is attached to this e-mail and will be made open access at > > the T&F pages as soon as people is back from the holidays. The T&F link > is > > this: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039.2016.1186194 > > > > The link to the MCA Forum pages, where we announce our discussions and > > other xmca things, is here: http://lchc.ucsd.edu/MCA/ > > > > > > I wish us all a very productive and interesting discussion. > > > > Alfredo > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Wed Jan 4 23:26:20 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2017 07:26:20 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! In-Reply-To: References: <1483344752182.40904@iped.uio.no> <1483467423798.57819@iped.uio.no>, Message-ID: <1483601196884.31418@iped.uio.no> Thanks Marc for your careful response. I am familiar to Vygotsky's notion of cultural mediation and I am aware and acknowledge that it was elaborated as a means to overcome dualism, and that it is not analog to a computational approach. When I brought the computing analogy, I did so with regard not to the concept of cultural mediation in general, but to the way it can be (and is) deployed analytically. I react to what it seems to me a dichotomy between a "meaning" as something that is static (thereby a form of "representation" or reflection of the relation with the environment instead of ?refraction)?? and the experiencing-as-struggling, which is described as ?transformation or change. If so, mediation here would seem to be part of a methodological device that first dissects "a type of meaning" from "a type of activity" (or a given state from the process that changes that state), and then unites it by adding the term "mediation." And this may be my misreading, but in that (mis)reading (which perhaps is mostly due to the fact that in your empirical illustration only the initial and end product, i.e., perezhivanie, are described, but not the experiencing-as-struggle, that is, the moving between the two), mediation here seems to do as analytical concept precisely what you were afraid our monism was doing: explaining nothing. Only the end products but not the process of producing perezhivanie are revealed. This may be problematic if one attends to what Veresov argues in the paper I shared yesterday, where he defends the notion of mediation but also specifies that Vygotsky speaks of *mediating activity* (as opposed to *mediated* activity). That is, not mediation by signs as products, but mediating activity as the activity of producing signs (which again is an activity of producing social relations, perhaps what you refer as "holistic meanings"?). What do you think? I did not think you were trying to deny the influence of Spinoza, and I do not think we ever said that Perezhivanie was primarily a move from Cartesian Dualism to Monism, as you suggest in your post. I copy and paste from my prior post: "The fact is that Vygotsky was building a theory on the unity of the affect and the intellect that was to be grounded on Spinoza, and what we try to do is to explore how perezhivanie, as a concept being developed during the same period (but not finalised or totally settled!), could be seen from the perspective of the Spinozist Vygotsky." I totally believe that bringing the distinction between perezhivanie as meaning, and perezhivanie as struggle, is totally relevant, and Beth Ferholt's vignettes of Where the Wild Things Are do indeed illustrate this. We really need to address this tension, which as Beth's examples and as our own everyday experience shows, is a tension that matters not just to books and to theories but to living persons (children, teachers), a tension that moreover is present and mentioned in all the articles of the symposium. The papers offer different proposals, and I think is so great we have the chance to discuss them! I too, as you, am very interesting in hearing others about the questions you had concerning sense and meaning. Alfredo From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Marc Clar? Sent: 04 January 2017 22:31 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! Thank you very much, Alfredo, for sharing this excellent paper by Veresov, and thanks also for your responses, which really helped me to better understand your points. My main doubt about your proposal was/is caused by the statement that the idea of cultural mediation/mediator implies a cartesian dualism. This shocks me because, to me, the idea of cultural mediation is absolutely crucial (in fact, the keystone) for the construction of a monist (and scientific) psychology that does not forget mind ?that is, a cultural psychology. From your response, however, I realized that we may be approaching the idea of mediation in different ways. I talk of mediation and mediators in a quite restricted way. The starting point of my understanding of mediation is a dialectical relationship (organic, transactional) between the subject and the world (Vygotsky departs from the scheme stimulus-response, from reflexology). This relationship, that Vygotsky calls primitive psychological functions, would be basically biological. However, in human beings this relationship is mediated by cultural means: signs and tools; or primary, secondary and terciary artifacts. These cultural means reorganize the primitive functions (dialectic S-O relationship), which become then higher psychological functions (S-M-O) (see for example, The problem of the cultural development of the child, in The Vygotsky Reader). Now, the subject, the cultural mediators, and the object form an inseparable dialectical unit, so that the subject acts on (transforms) the object through the prism of the cultural mediators, the object acts on (transforms) the subject also through the prism of the cultural mediators, and the cultural means are themselves also transformed as a consequence of their mediation in this continuous dynamic dialectical tension. Here, for me, it is important the idea that the cultural means are as material (if we assume a materialist monism) as all the rest of the world; in fact, are parts of the material world which become signs or tools (and can be therefore socially distributed). This permits the introduction of the scientific study of mind-consciousness (as mediating systems of signs), because mind is not anymore something immaterial and unobservable, but it is as material and observable as the rest of the natural world. It is from this view that, for me, the idea of cultural mediation is the keystone of a monist psychology that includes mind. Thus, when I speak of mediators, I refer to the cultural means which mediate in the S-O dialectics; I am especially interested in signs/secondary artifacts. Here, it is perhaps necessary to insist that when I talk of studying mediators (and their semantic structure), this doesn't mean that they are taken out from the activity (the flux of live) in which they mediate (since out of activity they are not signs anymore); here, I think Vygotsky tries again to overcome another old dichotomy, the functionalism-structuralism one. I hope that all this makes also clear the difference between this view and that of computational psychologies (which in general are profoundly and explicitly dualist and not dialectic). Back to perezhivanie, I'm not obviously trying to deny the influence of Spinoza on Vygotsky's thinking (this is explicit in Vygotsky's writings, especially in ?The teaching about emotions?, in the Vol.6 of the Collected Works). But I have doubts that Vygotsky's introduction of the concept of perezhivanie is to be regarded primarily as a movement towards monism (from a previous cartesian dualism), and that this movement questions the concept of cultural mediation. Instead, and I think that this is in line with some of Gonz?lez-Rey observations in his paper, my impression is that the introduction of the concept of perezhivanie responds more to a movement (a further step) towards holism (something that, in my understanding, can also be found in Spinoza). Thus, I think that the word meaning is still the unit of analysis in the last Vygotsky -and therefore, the idea of cultural mediation is still crucial (in fact, in The problem of the environment, he connects the concept of perezhivanie, which has just introduced, to the development of word meaning [p.345-346, also cited in my paper]). However, in my view, in the last Vygotsky the focus is not anymore primarily on the word-meaning as formed for things (or collections of things, as in the ontogenetic research with Sakharov), but the focus is now in the formation of meaning for holistic situations. Best regards, Marc. 2017-01-03 19:16 GMT+01:00 Alfredo Jornet Gil : > Hi Marc, all, > > thanks for joining and for your interesting work, which I follow since I > became aware of it. I appreciate the way in your paper you show careful and > honest attention to the texts of the authors involved, but perhaps most of > all I appreciate that the paper makes the transformational dimension > related to struggle and change salient, a dimension all papers deemed > central to perezhivanie. And I have learned more about Vasilyuk by reading > your paper. But I also see that we have approached the question of > perezhivanie differently and I think that addressing the questions that you > raise concerning our article may be a good way to both respond and discuss > your paper. > > I am aware that our use of the term monism may be problematic to some, and > N. Veresov, who has recently written about this (see attached article), > warns against the dangers of simply moving from dualism into an > undifferentiating monism that relativizes everything, making development > un-studiable. This seems to be the way in which you have understood our > argument, and of course this is not what we are or want to be doing. > Probably many will think that *dialectical materialism* rather than monism > is the proper term, and I could agree with them; we do in fact use > dialectical materialism there and elsewhere. Yet, we wanted to emphasise > the Spinozist influence (an influence that also runs through Marx) and so > we found it appropriate to use the term monism, a term that Vygotsky uses > before arguing that Spinoza "develops an essentially materialistic view" > (Collected Works, Vol. 6, p. 124). For us, the aim is working out ways to > empirically examine and formulate problems in ways that do not reify a > mind-body dualism. > > Although overcoming dualism is foundational to the CHAT paradigm, I would > however not say that Vygotsky did get to solve all of the problems that > Cartesian dualism had created for psychology, even though he recognised > those problems brilliantly as early as in the "Crisis". It should suffice > to cite Vygotsky's own remarks, which we quote in the paper (and which A.N. > Leont'ev mentions in the introduction to the collected works), where > Vygotsky explicitly critiques some of his own prior ideas for failing to > overcome dualism. We agree with those who, like F. G. Rey, see Vygotsky's > project as a developing rather than as a finalised one. The fact is that > Vygotsky was building a theory on the unity of the affect and the intellect > that was to be grounded on Spinoza, and what we try to do is to explore how > perezhivanie, as a concept being developed during the same period (but not > finalised or totally settled!), could be seen from the perspective of the > Spinozist Vygotsky. > > As you note, in our article we argue that, if one takes the Spinozist > one-substance approach, classical concepts used in non-classical > psychology, at least in the way they are commonly used in the current > literature, should be revised. One such concept is mediation. And I > personally do not have much of a problem when mediation is used to denote > the fundamental fact that every thing exists always through *another*, > never in and of itself. But I do think that it is problematic to identify > MEDIATORS, such as "a meaning", as a means to account for or explain > developmental processes and learning events, precisely because it is there, > at least in my view, that dualism creeps in. > > For example, I find it paradoxical that you are concerned that our monist > approach risks turning perezhivanie into a useless category because it may > be used to explain everything and nothing, and yet you do not seem to have > a problem using the term mediation to account for the transformation of > perezhivanie without clearly elaborating on how mediation does change > anything or what it looks like as a real process. How is it different > saying that a perezhivanie mediates the experiencing-as-struggle from > simply saying that it "affects" or "determines" it? Indeed, if perezhivanie > mediates experiencing-as-struggle, does not experiencing-as-struglgle too > mediate perezhivanie? And do not both may be said to mediate development, > or development mediate them? Is not this explaining everything and nothing? > > I do believe you can argue that there is a difference between mediation > and classical psychology's cause-effect relations, but to show this you > need to dig into the dialectical underpinnings of the theory. In your > paper, you offer a nice analysis of a lovely case of a teacher who, in > dealing with a challenge with one of her students, changes her > perezhivanie. I think you can rightly argue that there is a semiotic > transformation, and I fully support your statement that by studying > discourse we can empirically approach questions of psychological > development. The contradictions you show as being involved and resolved > resonate really well with what I experience as a parent or as a teacher in > the classroom. Yet, without unpacking what this "mediation" taking place > between one perezhivanie and the next one means as a concrete and real, the > same analysis could be done taking an information processing approach: > there is an situation that is processed (represented?) in one way, which > then leads to a (cognitive) dissonance, and then there is a cognitive > resolution by means of which the situation is presented differently in > consciousness (indeed, when seen in this way, the term perezhivanie and the > term "representation" become almost indistinguishable). How is mediation, > as an analytical concept, helping here? And most importantly to the > question of perezhivanie, how is this analysis going to show the internal > connection between intellect and affect that Vygotsky formulates as > constitutive of the notion of perezhivanie? > > I believe that the key lies in understanding what Vygotsky means when he > says that perezhivanie is a unit of analysis. I will not repeat here what > already is written in at least a couple of the articles in the special > issue (Blunden, ours), that is the difference between analysis by elements > and unit analysis (Vygotsky 1987). A unit analysis approach is consistent > with Spinoza, for whom cause-effect explanations were not adequate, > requiring instead an understanding of self-development, perezhivanie as a > kernel cell for the development of personality. And I think you may be > after this in your article in suggesting a form of continuous movement from > perezhivanie to experiencing-as-struggle. But perhaps the major difficulty > I find is that, in positing Vygotsky's perezhivanie as "a type of meaning" > and Vasilyuk's perezhivanie (or experiencing-as-struggle) as a "type of > activity," it is difficult not to see here a division between product and > process, a division that then is analytically bridged by the addition of a > third term, mediation, that should bring back the real movement between the > product and the process. > > A different approach involves considering the concrete extension of actual > living and lived social relations, and look at them as generative > phenomena. What is there in the encounter between Carla and the child that > leads to change? For it is not inside the mind, but in real life, in > consciousness as the real relation between people, that Carla is changed. > How is the semantic structure that you nicely present and attribute to > Carla a product of the social relation between her and the child? I think > that to rightfully situate perezhivanie as a concept in a Vygotskian > framework, we ought to address its relation to the genetic law of > development. > > There is much more to disentangle, but this is long enough. I hope I have > succeeded in making clear these ideas. Thanks so much for engaging in the > discussion! > Alfredo > > > > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of Marc Clar? > Sent: 02 January 2017 22:14 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > Hi, all, and thank you so much, Alfredo, for your kind invitation to > participate in this discussion. My paper in the MCA special issue focuses > on a distinction between a type of activity, which I argue that is what > Vasilyuk called *perezhivanie* (experiencing) and a type of semiotic > mediator, which I argue that is what Vygotsky, in The Problem of the > Environment, called *perezhivanie.* I argue, following Vasilyuk, that in > experiencing activities (Vasilyuk's perezhivanie), this type of mediator is > profoundly transformed ? in fact, that experiencing activities consist of > the semiotic transformation of this type of mediator. > > As Veresov and Fleer argue in their commentary, perezhivanie (as a type of > mediator) is for me a psychological phenomenon, one which is of course > conceptualized from a specific theoretical framework. But the phenomenon is > also visible from other theoretical frameworks as well, as I mention in the > paper. This phenomenon is my main interest, and it is from this interest > that I arrived at the concept of perezhivanie (not the other way around). > Now, the phenomenon is that at least emotion, reasoning, and volition > (formation of conscious purposes) seem to be decisively mediated by > holistic situational meaning. My current research concern is trying to find > ways to study and understand how this mediation occurs and how these > semiotic mediators are transformed and distributed. From this view, I think > that experiencing activities (Vasilyuk's perezhivanie) may provide a good > terrain to study these issues (especially regarding the mediation of > emotion), as I tried to exemplify in the paper. > > Studying semiotic mediation, however, is of course not easy. Following > Vygotsky, I assume that extended discourse is the manifestation of thinking > within certain psychological conditions (Vygotsky's Thinking and Speech, > chapter 7), and I also assume the Vygotsky's law of the unity of the > structure and function of thinking (Vygotsky's Thinking and Speech, chapter > 6). From these two assumptions, I propose that meaning (and its functions > in human activity) can be scientifically studied by structurally analyzing > the narratives generated by subjects, considering that the discourse > produced in the narrative is the point of departure of this study, but that > considerable analytical work must be done to move from this discourse to > the full characterization of meaning. It is in that point where I find > useful the work developed by Greimas, the usefulness of which I only > suggest in the paper. > > >From this background, I found many interesting ideas and questions in the > other papers of the special issue. In this first post I will propose two of > them for possible discussion. The first one was raised by Gonz?lez-Rey, > when he introduces, in connection with perezhivanie, the concepts of > personality, and especially, of sense. So, which is the conceptual (and-or > phenomenal) relation between perezhivanie and sense? Gonz?lez-Rey suggests > that both concepts are somewhat similar (and overcome by the concept of > ?subjective sense?); my opinion, partly expressed in my commentary, is that > perezhivanie is a type of meaning, which includes different levels of > depth, and that sense corresponds to the deepest level of meaning (which > can be characterized as a system of semic oppositions). Therefore, sense > wouldn't be in opposition to meaning (as ?a microcosm of human > consciousness?, as Kozulin remembers in his commentary), although it would > be in opposition to manifested meaning (the surface level of meaning). > > The second issue was raised by Roth and Jornet, and I think it goes beyond > the issue of perezhivanie itself. If I understand them well, they argue > that Vygotsky's core proposal of cultural mediation is influenced by the > Cartesian dualism (mind-matter), and that a promising approach to Cultural > Psychology would be a Spinozist monism. I am actually very interested on > the issue of which epistemological position can best substantiate the > construction of a cultural psychology, and that's why I feel inclined to > take the opportunity to ask for your opinions about that. About the > proposal of Roth and Jornet, I have some doubts. First, I don't see why > Vygotsky's proposals can be seen as dualist (in the Cartesian sense) -I > suspect that it is because of the analytical distinctions?. Anyway, in my > understanding, Vygotsky explicitly assumes a materialist monism (for > example in The Crisis), and in fact he constructs his proposal on mediation > upon reflexology, which also explicitly assumed a materialist monism (e.g. > Sechenov). Would a Spinozist monism be a better point of departure? I don't > know, in my understanding it is a more idealist monism, and I don't clearly > see what could be gained. In my opinion, a scientific psychology which > includes the study of mind is only possible if any type of monism is > assumed. However, in my view, for a scientific psychology, the ontological > nature of the world is perhaps less important (it is an issue for > metaphysics?), and I am inclined to assume a neutral monism (e.g. Russell). > So from this view, a materialist monism and a Spinozist monism wouldn't be > so different, so from both views it could be assumed that all is of the > same nature and all is similarly knowable (including mind) [which is the > ontological nature of the world and to what degree it is knowable are > issues that can be left to philosophy]. However, in my opinion, this does > not mean that, while assuming a monism, analytical distinctions cannot be > done when studying the world. In that sense, I had the impression that Roth > and Jornet tended to dilute analytical distinctions in the name of monism; > I repeat that I don't know if I understood them well, but if this was the > case, in my opinion, analysis would be impossible within the new psychology > suggested by Roth and Jornet, and, regarding perezhivanie, there would be > the danger, noted by Vygotsky in The Crisis and cautioned by Kozulin in his > commentary, that by meaning everything, perezhivanie ends by meaning > nothing. > > Best regards and happy new year, > > Marc. > > 2017-01-02 9:12 GMT+01:00 Alfredo Jornet Gil : > > > Dear all, > > > > > > I would like to join David, Luisa, Ana, Henry and the others to wish you > > all a Happy New Year! May it be full of joy, peace, and opportunity. > > > > > > I also would like to begin the year announcing our first ?MCA article > > discussion, ?although in fact corresponds to the last issue of the year > we > > just passed, Issue 4 on Perezhivanie. This is a very special *special* > > issue, not only because its topic has raised lots of interest lately in > the > > CHAT community but also because, greatly coordinated by Andy Blunden and > > the rest of the editorial team, the issue takes the form of a symposium > > where authors get the chance to present and respond to each others' ideas > > on the subject. In my view, this allows having a rich and > multidimensional > > approach to a subject as important as perezhivanie. > > > > > > Following with the dialogical spirit in which the special issue was > > assembled, we will focus on one lead article, but hoping to also engage > > ideas and insights present in or relevant to other contributions in the > > issue. ?Marc Clar?'s "Vygotsky and Vasilyuk on Perezhivanie: Two Notions > > and One Word" will be our focus. The article very nicely engages the lead > > work of Vygotsky, but also the less known ??(?in educational literature) > > but totally relevant works of psychologist ?F. Vasilyuk and semiotician > A. > > J. Greimas, mobilising a number of key concepts including those of > semiotic > > mediation and transformation. > > > > ?In addition to Marc, who will soon join us, I have encouraged some of > the > > other authors in the special issue to also join as "relevant others," if > > time and circumstances allow them. Let's hope that this will help keeping > > the symposium spirit up. > > > > > > Marc's article is attached to this e-mail and will be made open access at > > the T&F pages as soon as people is back from the holidays. The T&F link > is > > this: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039.2016.1186194 > > > > The link to the MCA Forum pages, where we announce our discussions and > > other xmca things, is here: http://lchc.ucsd.edu/MCA/ > > > > > > I wish us all a very productive and interesting discussion. > > > > Alfredo > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From dkellogg60@gmail.com Wed Jan 4 23:53:30 2017 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2017 18:53:30 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: References: <586ae645.475a620a.84afb.9951@mx.google.com> <586bfabd.4133620a.c1947.e4b2@mx.google.com> Message-ID: Dear Marc: Perhaps I cast the net a little wide. I was trying to provide some rationale for my critique by developing the argument that words (and concepts) acquire their value in a text in relation to each other and not in relation to any pre-existing concepts. If you get straight into this argument, it sounds like I am arguing that words (and concepts) cannot be applied to actual data, and I don't mean that at all. So I started out by arguing against your assertion in the abstract that perezhivanie is a "special" type of activity in Vasilyuk and a "special" type of meaning in Vygotsky, and also your assertion on p. 4 that perezhivanie is introduced as a pre-existing "special" term. on p. 4. Then I tried to cast the net even wider by including not only your discussion of translation difficulties but also some of the other work that came in the special issue (e.g. two articles by Blunden and Veresov and Fleer). I am a translator myself, and like most translators I have gone through the phase of believing that words are essentially aliquot and fungible, and can be exchanged like currencies in a bank. Like most writers, I really believe that the root value of a word is its use value, and the use value has to be found by comparing it to other words in the text. This is why we have to keep reminding ourselves when the word is being used by Vygotsky and when it is being used by someone else who wants to cite Vygotsky's name without actually invoking his ideas (e.g., Vasilyuk). I think one of the undoubted merits of your work--and also Roth's work--is that you make this very explicit: in your conclusion it becomes pretty clear that what is really happening with Carla is that we are simply learning new words with which to describe all too common experiences. I think that the points you make about "the child's disruption (being) caused by out of school conditions" are not new, but of course this doesn't make them any more valid. It just means that we shouldn't try to use brand new words to describe them. Speaking of which, I really loved the example from MacBeth, not least as an introduction to the idea of emotion as "sputnik" (that is, companion god, but also as new moon) to development. The problem is that perezhivanie, and also emotion, are always there; what we need to do when we study children is discover what is not always there; what is specific to this zone of development and what is a unique harbinger of the proximate zone of development. And--what I loved most--you have a very clear sense that it is precisely the semiotic and not the activity interpretation of "perezhivanie" that addresses this problem. Why so? Because, as we know from Vygotsky, perezhivanie is constructed from two sides at once: the experienced and the experiential. That is, it is "constructed" on one side, but it is "construed" on the other. "The Thane of Fife He had a Wife Where is she now?" That's all we know.... David Kellogg Macquarie University On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 11:47 AM, Marc Clar? wrote: > Hi, David, and thank you for your comments, they certainly will help me to > improve my approach -since, of course, my intention was not to distract. > However, I don't completely understand your first two critiques. In the > paper, I recognize the translation problems of the word perezhivanie, but I > argue that it is even more problematic the distinction between the everyday > sense of the term, the traditional use of the term in psychology, and the > specific use that Vasilyuk tries to introduce. I don't say that > perezhivanie is originally a special term in Russian; I just recognize that > there is a terminological problem that have some influence on the vagueness > of the concept, and that the different usages of the word should be > distinguished to approach the scientific concept(s) of perezhivanie. I > understand even less your second critique, since although recognizing in > the beginning of my paper these terminological issues, I think that in the > remaining of my paper I don't try to address the issue from a "my > dictionary is bigger than yours" stance, but on the contrary, I think I > rely heavily on the texts by both Vygotsky and Vasilyuk and try to built a > comprehensive interpretation of the concepts, which I exemplify with > empirical data (also to exemplify the usefulness of this interpretation). I > understand better your third critique, and I agree. Of course, by using my > interpretation of Vygotsky's perezhivanie to study experiencing-as-struggle > in teachers, I am pushing the concept out of the terrain and the problem in > which Vygotsky proposed the concept. Here, it's true, I assume that > perezhivanie (as a type of mediator, in my interpretation) is crucial to > understand many issues (of course, child development, but many other issues > as well). In fact, I made this assumption explicit in the paper. I accept > the critique that this assumption was not made by Vygotsky, so if I was a > psychology historian, this would be a limitation. However, I also see some > potentiality in this kind of approach (i.e., pushing forward the concepts > proposed by others), since it may permit the concept gain new explanatory > power. > Best regards, > Marc. > > 2017-01-03 23:08 GMT+01:00 David Kellogg : > > > I agree that LSV's Spinozism (not any kind of supposed Buberism and not > > Judaism in general)--is relevant to his monism. To that extent, it is > > relevant to his holistic approach to what we are calling > > "perezhivanie": perezhivanie is a holistic, monist unit which includes > both > > the experience and the experiencer. But there are a lot of things in > Marc's > > article that I think are essentially distractions--things which direct > our > > attention away from the system of concepts that LSV is trying to evoke > with > > his use of the term. Here are three. > > > > First of all, I don't think that "perezhivanie" is originally a "special > > term" in Russian: there is nothing special about the prefix "pere~" > > ("trans") or the root "zhivanie" ("life") and Vygotsky was hardly the > first > > to put them together, even in the context of psychology. When he > introduce > > the term, he introduces it as a term which is already widely used. As an > > analogy, "experience" is not a special term in English, although if you > are > > a systemic-functional linguist, "experiential" takes on a special meaning > > in relation to a system of other functions. So I think that the key to > > understanding Vygotsky's "perezhivanie" is not in Vasilyuk (who appears > to > > be an adept of the anti-Semitic Russian Orthodox church). The key to > > understanding Vygotsky's "perezhivanie" is in Vygotsky. > > > > Secondly, and accordingly, I don't think that "perezhivanie" or any > other > > term in Vygotsky can be resolved by the kind of "my dictionary is bigger > > than yours" arguments that we translators love so much. Just last week we > > had a rumble in Seoul over whether the word usually translated as > > "spontaneous" could be translated by a Korean word meaning "spontaneous", > > or by another one meaning "volitional" or by a different one meaning > > roughly "indigeneous". A big enough dictionary allows all three > > translations. But when we look in Vygotsky (his report on the > construction > > of preschoools to the All Russian Working Group on the topic), we see > that > > the real meaning is none of these: "spontaneous" learning, driven by the > > child's needs, is contrased with "spontaneous reactive" learning. At this > > point it becomes possible to consult a HUGE dictionary and include a VAST > > footnote on the various possible meanings of "reactive". But it is also > > possible to stop blaming our tools and just return to Vygotsky's report, > > where it becomes clear that what Vygotsky really means has nothing to do > > with reactology or behaviorism: he is referring to learning that is a > > reaction to and against and eventually with a teacher-parent-state > > syllabus. So "spontaneous" doesn't mean spontaneous or volitional or > > indigenous; it means non-reactive, and "reactive" doesn't mean > reactionary > > or reactological or radioactive but rather non-spontaneous: Vygotsky's > > concepts are part of a system, and their meaning owes, just as Spinoza > > would have it, to their position in the system and not to their position > in > > a dictionary or a thesaurus. > > > > Thirdly, and as a more or less final result, I don't see that the data > that > > Marc ends his article with is relevant to Vygotsky's perezhivanie at all, > > because LSV's "perezhivanie" is designed as a unit for describing the > > development of the child's personality in the child's environment. On the > > one hand, that means it has to include both the feeling of what happens > to > > the infant as it happens (e.g. the use of "perezhivanie" to describe the > > infant drinking milk in Vygotsky's lecture on infancy" and it has to > > include the thougth of what has happened when we reflect on its > > consequences *e.g. the use of "perezhivanie" to describe the three > children > > in the dysfunctional family of "Problem of the Environment"). On the > other > > hand, it does not have to include--and I think it cannot include--the > > response of an adult teacher to an unruly classroom, as Marc would have > it > > do. > > > > David Kellogg > > Macquarie University > > > > On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 4:45 AM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > > > > > The attached article is focused on Vygotsky's Jewish legacy, also by a > > > Bella (in response to Larry's "Bella has written a book on the relation > > of > > > Judaic tradition and Vygotsky (which I have not read) but at the heart > of > > > the Judaic tradition is the human path and humanity existing here and > now > > > in our living relations.") > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ > > > mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of lpscholar2@gmail.com > > > Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2017 2:25 PM > > > To: Christopher Schuck ; eXtended Mind, > > Culture, > > > Activity > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie > > > > > > Christopher, your way of reading (entering into) and responding that > > > offers examples and then alternatives (the otherwise) i believe > captures > > > the flow of perezhivanie. > > > If the struggle between meaningfulness-meaninglessness is at the heart > of > > > this month?s article as the heart of crisis, I believe this is also the > > > deep question that most often brings persons to Western forms of > > > psycho-therapy -in our particular localized time and place. > > > Your 2nd question of the relation between perezhivanie and (force) > seems > > > to be relevant. The relation of perezhivanie with less forceful, WEAKER > > > notions of (entering into) such as enduring, revisiting, working > > through. I > > > would add (going out on a limb) that we may also want to explore the > > notion > > > of the Judaic tradition that runs through what Zukerman calls (the > human > > > path) of humanity. I lack background to be specific but do notice the > > > number of Judaic scholars who have been and are engaged with > > psychotherapy > > > as expressing the character of human salvation and redemption. > > > Martin Buber?s name is often mentioned in this regard. > > > Bella has written a book on the relation of Judaic tradition and > Vygotsky > > > (which I have not read) but at the heart of the Judaic tradition is the > > > human path and humanity existing here and now in our living relations. > > > If this is going a step too far, just ignore, and return to the > question > > > of less forceful (weaker) human paths of enduring and working through > by > > > (entering into) the meaningfulness-meaninglessness (crisis) as both > > > existential and cultural-historical. > > > An alternative image to forcefully hammering and smashing the bricks in > > > the hope of clearing a space for something new to emerge or be created > as > > > the bricks scatter and we begin to (de-sign) something brand new from > the > > > rubble. > > > The back and forth that feels like repetition and sameness and being > > stuck > > > may be actually a mood and an (entering into) and (living through) and > > > (working through) the crisis. > > > I would add and highlight this movement is not an interior journey of > > > mastery towards (independence) but is, using Zukerman?s words, an > > > inter/mental back and forth generating a meaningful way forward from > > within > > > the tension of the crisis of perezhivanie. > > > > > > My belief is when moving through the crisis we do not travel alone but > > > travel with others expressing care and concern for us. The time for > > heroic > > > journeys is now in question? > > > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > > > From: Christopher Schuck > > > Sent: January 3, 2017 9:39 AM > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] New Year's Perezhivanie > > > > > > It's an interesting question (about the brick and perezhivanie), partly > > > because that extended, "living-through", repeated doubling-back process > > > evoked by the Vygotskian sense of the concept would seem to be at odds > > with > > > a single, discrete act of "smashing" that is immediate, forceful and > even > > > violent. It would suggest that part of what perezhivanie means is > wrapped > > > up in the symbolic marking of its end - and that this end, when it > comes, > > > can be forceful. Certainly, the image could not be more unified and > > > embodying of a particular set of meaningful experiences. But is that > how > > > perezhivanie works? This leads me to ask: > > > > > > 1) what are the problems and contradictions encountered in using > > > particular metaphors to depict perezhivanie, where perezhivanie is > itself > > > so defined by imagination and narrativity? Part of this might also be a > > > question of what it means to describe and represent one's own > > perezhivanie > > > figuratively/narratively (whether to others, or to oneself), as opposed > > to > > > living that perezhivanie. Especially if the attempt to > capture/represent > > > one's own perezhivanie is, perhaps, also central to the living of it? > > > > > > 2) What is the nature of the relationship between perezhivanie and > > force, > > > either in terms of the internal process or in terms of how it finally > > > "ends"? (Not to mention, how it begins). It would seem that in both > > > conceptions discussed in the article there is a certain intensity > > required. > > > But does this in some cases require something more explosive - and does > > > Vasilyuk's conception of perezhivanie as activity speak more to this > > > possibility? And how do we reconcile this with the less "forceful" > notion > > > of enduring, revisiting, and working through? > > > > > > On Monday, January 2, 2017, mike cole wrote: > > > > > > > The pieces of brick thrown up by this political hammering have not > yet > > > > fallen and made the devastation personally experienced by the > > > nation/world. > > > > > > > > Still, genuinely, we can wish all of us 7.3 billion well in the new > > year. > > > > > > > > So what do you think chuck, is this a good representation of > > > perezhivanie? > > > > :-) > > > > Mike > > > > > > > > On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 11:24 AM Charles Bazerman < > > > > bazerman@education.ucsb.edu> wrote: > > > > > > > > > So you think 2017 has any hope of being any better? > > > > > > > > > > Chuck > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > > > > > > > From: mike cole > > > > > > > > > > Date: Monday, January 2, 2017 11:01 am > > > > > > > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] New Year's Perezhivanie > > > > > > > > > > To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > With the New Year, as our Russian colleagues put it! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This image forwarded from a friend more or less sums up my > > > > > > experience > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > the past year. Thought you might find it interesting too. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vis a vis the discussion of perezhivanie: Does this image provide > > > > > > us > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > used (re-presented) behavioral evidence of a person undergoing > > > > > perezhivanie? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Looking forward to the discussion. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Feliz a?o nuevo! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mike > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From lpscholar2@gmail.com Thu Jan 5 09:31:00 2017 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2017 09:31:00 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: References: <586ae645.475a620a.84afb.9951@mx.google.com> <1483537304474.33665@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <586e82d6.c2de620a.db8ed.f18d@mx.google.com> Beth, Alfredo, and Marc and others who have responded or are reading these threads. Beth mentioned it is hard to contain the many strands in XMCA discussions, but never more so than when we discuss this topic [perezhivanie]. I agree, which to me indicates it has a vitality. I woke up today and while half asleep had various responses playing through my memory. So how do we together engage with this topic? I want to mention some things I did with my hands and feet last night. There are two parallel links to our topic so I printed out these two email links and stapled them together. This act was my way to slow down the proliferation of links and to try to stay on [or enter into] this months topic as generated by Marc?s article. I then reflected on the actual term [perezhivanie] and noticed how it is TRANSlated into English as [experience]. David K pointing out [gesturing] to the fact that the prefix [perez] means [trans] suggested I could create a hybrid term [trans/hivanie] to allow me to hold onto the phenomena the word perezhivanie ?means? for myself. We are exploring ?trans? phenomena when we explore perezhivanie. Now why does this topic generate such proliferation of [paths] that open up and invite [entering into]. What came to mind was Pegg?s earlier reference to her ?work? as something to be ?picked up? at a future time and re=engaged as memory work through her archive. These were various thoughts occurring while half asleep as I ?struggled? to find my way ?through? the proliferation and suggest ways to slow down the process. [a major theme of last months postings]. I considered opening another thread to bring to the fore Beth?s provoking comments, while keeping the conversation between Marc and Alfredo contained in the other strand where the focus is on Marc?s KEYSTONE notion of what is central to trans/hivanie. However, I decided as an ?alternative? otherwise and decided to stay with this thread and bring forward Beth?s contribution to this topic. So here goes. Beth, takes the image Mike sent of 2016 being hammered into ?bits? or demolished as an act of ?deconstruction? and juxtaposes it with two more images from Maurice Sendak as illustrations of trans/hivanie. [where capturing/representing/living takes place]. She [reads into] these two images a trans/hivanie that shares in common the meaning that Mike?s image [captured/represented]. Beth ADDS that these three images can be [thought] as stage 0 ?fixed boundaries?. What Beth thinks by this move is that [in order to] START the process of trans/hivanie [the moving ?forward?] THAT IS LIFE we must enter into an ?alternative? moment which is caprtured by the term [pause] by which she explores [despair]. I would add that a pause is a ?gap? or an ?interval? Now what is central to my understanding of this moment this interval or pause [which the Japanese call ?ma?] is that it must IN ADDITION be RECOGNIZED. The centrality of ?mitsein? or ?being with? the person ?in? trans/hivanie. THIS is the moral/ethical realm that can be referred to as a ?style? of being and may relate to Judaic ways of moving along the [human path]? The ADDITION to my ears must be highlighted and returns us to Zukerman?s notion of the ?intermental? in last month?s article. Now I sugg of the rainbowest that in TRANSferring trans/hivanie to North America with its hyper individualism this ADDITION gets WITHDRAWN and must be retrieved or carried back in this movement of memory and the forward thrust of being alive [after the pause of the zero stage] This also requires ?mourning? as part of the crisis. Beth sensitively said ?I don?t want to bypass the other strands? and this is my way of honouring both Beth?s strand with its mention of the pause of STAGE 0 [the struggle of meaningfulness-meaninglessness that is navigated ideally through the care and concern WITH others AS Beth?s ADDITION]. Beth concludes her turn in the commentary with an example she believes will be particularly useful as we continue to explore this multifaceted topic of trans/hivanie. A child?s ?entering into? the ?reality? of the book?s [live fire] and living through the trans/hivanie of the apartment fire leading to wanting to cut up or demolish the fixed materialal(ity) of the book. Stage 0 or the ?interval? or ?ma? BEFORE moving forward into living vitality. This topic is like a prism, taking the materiality of colour and TRANS forming the monism of colour into multifaceted flowing PATTERNS through the mediation of the prism. It to me has the same feel as when we explore ?what is thinking? as a trans/hivanie phenomena. Putting Beth?s contribution into what may become one strand before returning to Alfredo and Marc?s exploration of the KEYSTONE idea of mediation in relation to meaning. Beth?s stage 0 moment that requires [necessarily] the pause [entering or falling into the mood of despair] . ALSO highlighting Beth?s ADDITION that within stage 0 the other person continues to be recognized through the mourning. This moment that calls us ethically to enter into through mitsein or intermental reality the other?s despair and struggle and crisis. I would add that trans/hivanie also in addition requires ?institutional? support but I have said enough. Thanks Beth for writing the article that Peter sent which I see as a part of this strand, but today is in the background. The element of [redemption] that I note in your article on the strands that were central to Vygotsky?s moral/ethical development. That may require another strand. Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From: Beth Ferholt Sent: January 4, 2017 10:19 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Cc: mike cole Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie You see in the picture on the wall in the first Sendak illustration that the wild thing that the child (Max) will become, in order to complete his stages of perezhivanie, is first a mediating meaning ... made by a real wild thing ... On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 1:13 PM, Beth Ferholt wrote: > It is often hard to contain the many strands in an XMCA discussion, but > never more so than when we discuss this topic. > > In Reggio Emilia's early childhood pedagogy it could be called a spaghetti > mess. > > I am thinking about three strands of pasta, now: > > From Marc -- My current research concern is trying to find > *ways to study* and understand how this mediation occurs and how these > semiotic mediators are transformed and distributed. > > From Chris -- Part of this might also be a question of > what it means to describe and represent one's own perezhivanie > figuratively/narratively (whether to others, or to oneself), as opposed to > living that perezhivanie. *Especially if the attempt to capture/represent* > *one's own perezhivanie is, perhaps, also central to the living of it?* > > And our US Narnia playworld study, where this > capturing/representing(/living) took place with Maurice Sendak's > illustrations of perezhivanie. > > Two of the stages ("making mischief of one kind ... and another" and > "saying I'LL EAT YOU UP!) of perezhivanie look a lot like the image Mike > sent ... we have called them stage 0, Fixed Boundaries, which means that in > order to start the process of perezhivanie the moving forward that is life > has to pause (despair) and also be recognized (with almost joyful anger and > abandon before declaring oneself) (I have to check but I am pretty sure > this was originally from Crime and Punishment via Vasilyuk). > > The difference between experiencing as struggle and the meaning that > mediates experiencing as struggle is certainly a key questions. But how to > access/study this question is still a problem. Again I turn to children -- > and although the following example is still very emotionally powerful for > me, I think it is particularly useful here -- for others as well as myself. > > Last night my family and I had to run out of our apartment because there > was a large fire in the building next door that the firepeople could not > contain for an hour or so. My five year old had trouble going to sleep, as > we all did, after the blaze was extinguished and we were allowed to go > home. He said he had read a book about volcanos at school and lava was > live fire, and the book and the real fire had scared him, so the book had > come true, so he wanted to cut up the book. > > I don't mean to bypass the other strands but this is what came to mind. > Beth > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 8:41 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > wrote: > >> That surely has a touch of catharsis to it, Beth, thanks for sharing! >> Alfredo >> ________________________________________ >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> on behalf of Beth Ferholt >> Sent: 03 January 2017 16:50 >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> Cc: mike cole >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie >> >> Several people did tell me, independently, that the great end of the John >> Oliver segment on 2016, where different NYers curse 2016 on the street, >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQ6WPo-oW5Q, helped them to overcome >> feelings of despair at the end of last year. So maybe it is related to >> perezhivanie. But maybe just to one part of the process. Beth >> >> On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 6:45 PM, wrote: >> >> > Mike, >> > When you use the phrase (by this poltical hammering) then i would >> suggest >> > this political activity is not capturing the full meaning of >> perezhivanie. >> > My reason for saying this must first refer to page 5 of the article >> where >> > perezhivanie?s meaning is approached through the >> > meaningfulness-meaninglessness opposition and the back and forth within >> > this struggle. >> > The image of the hammer as presented has its source in the >> meaning-forming >> > motive proceeding in a direction towards realization of her >> meaning-forming >> > political motives. Only within this aspect of the opposition will the >> > situation in the image HAVE meaning and BE meaningful. >> > Vasilyuk however adds the other aspect : If things are proceeding >> > OTHERWISE the situation becomes meaningless (LP ? and then we enter the >> > crisis of meaninglessness ? the otherwise - where words no longer >> mediate >> > the situation). >> > >> > This nature of perezhivanie Vasilyuk metaphorically describes as >> learning >> > ( as ENTERING INTO) this type of meaning that is NOT formal, scientific >> > conceptual knowledge. It is a place of moods and shifting experiences. >> > >> > So in my reading of perezhivanie there is this tension between (entering >> > into) volitional acts and the alternative aspect of perizihavanie as >> > overwhelming crisis of (meaninglessness) which must be mediated and the >> > mediators transformed. >> > >> > Turning back to page 2 and the situation where Macduff must feel his >> > situation as a man when his entire family are killed. No practical >> activity >> > can bring his family back. Another type of work is needed (and >> necessary) >> > which Macduff calls (feeling the situation as a man). THIS WORK Vasilyuk >> > calls perezhivanie. >> > >> > So, my way of reading the image of the hammer smashing 2016 highlights >> the >> > aspect of (entering into) a meaningful motive as (political activity) >> that >> > is represented but what is not is the alternative, represented in the >> > crisis of meaninglessness that is the other aspect of perezhivanie. >> > Marc Clara speaks of the mediator that transforms this crisis of >> > experiencing, but i am not sure the the image of the girl and hammer >> > portrays the aspect of perezhivanie as involving a transformative >> mediator >> > existing between meaningfulness and meaninglessness? >> > That time when words and practical activity fail and the person is >> facing >> > existential dread when (feeling as a man) that all hope has left the >> world. >> > That moment is the moment in which Clara opened and (entered into) her >> > article exploring the two notions of perizhivanie using the same word. >> > At the heart of this matter is the existential dread of meaninglessness >> > unique for each person and our ways of answering as alternative waysthat >> > give a deep sense of meaningfulness. >> > It is here that there is overlap with last month?s article where >> Zukerman >> > addressed the unique existential aspect entering into cultural >> historical >> > (human paths) >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > Sent from my Windows 10 phone >> > >> > From: mike cole >> > Sent: January 2, 2017 12:06 PM >> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie >> > >> > The pieces of brick thrown up by this political hammering have not yet >> > fallen and made the devastation personally experienced by the >> nation/world. >> > >> > Still, genuinely, we can wish all of us 7.3 billion well in the new >> year. >> > >> > So what do you think chuck, is this a good representation of >> perezhivanie? >> > :-) >> > Mike >> > >> > On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 11:24 AM Charles Bazerman < >> > bazerman@education.ucsb.edu> wrote: >> > >> > > So you think 2017 has any hope of being any better? >> > > >> > > Chuck >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > ----- Original Message ----- >> > > >> > > From: mike cole >> > > >> > > Date: Monday, January 2, 2017 11:01 am >> > > >> > > Subject: [Xmca-l] New Year's Perezhivanie >> > > >> > > To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > With the New Year, as our Russian colleagues put it! >> > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > This image forwarded from a friend more or less sums up my >> experience >> > > >> > > > of >> > > >> > > > the past year. Thought you might find it interesting too. >> > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > Vis a vis the discussion of perezhivanie: Does this image provide us >> > with >> > > >> > > > used (re-presented) behavioral evidence of a person undergoing >> > > perezhivanie? >> > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > Looking forward to the discussion. >> > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > Feliz a?o nuevo! >> > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > Mike >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > >> > >> >> >> -- >> Beth Ferholt >> Assistant Professor >> Department of Early Childhood and Art Education >> Brooklyn College, City University of New York >> 2900 Bedford Avenue >> Brooklyn, NY 11210-2889 >> >> Email: bferholt@brooklyn.cuny.edu >> Phone: (718) 951-5205 >> Fax: (718) 951-4816 >> >> > > > -- > Beth Ferholt > Assistant Professor > Department of Early Childhood and Art Education > Brooklyn College, City University of New York > 2900 Bedford Avenue > Brooklyn, NY 11210-2889 > > Email: bferholt@brooklyn.cuny.edu > Phone: (718) 951-5205 > Fax: (718) 951-4816 > -- Beth Ferholt Assistant Professor Department of Early Childhood and Art Education Brooklyn College, City University of New York 2900 Bedford Avenue Brooklyn, NY 11210-2889 Email: bferholt@brooklyn.cuny.edu Phone: (718) 951-5205 Fax: (718) 951-4816 From hshonerd@gmail.com Thu Jan 5 10:03:38 2017 From: hshonerd@gmail.com (HENRY SHONERD) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2017 11:03:38 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: <586e82d6.c2de620a.db8ed.f18d@mx.google.com> References: <586ae645.475a620a.84afb.9951@mx.google.com> <1483537304474.33665@iped.uio.no> <586e82d6.c2de620a.db8ed.f18d@mx.google.com> Message-ID: Larry, A footnote perhaps to the discussion, but one that lights up my own engagement in the discussion is tied to ?redemption" (at the end of your post) and how that is different from recanting. In a book by Geraldine Brooks (Year of Wonders) set during a few years during a plague-plagued 17th century England, we are explicitly told that recanting does not necessarily result in redemption. Recanting is the entering into, redemption the hard work that follows, if it follows at all. Henry > On Jan 5, 2017, at 10:31 AM, wrote: > > Beth, Alfredo, and Marc and others who have responded or are reading these threads. > > Beth mentioned it is hard to contain the many strands in XMCA discussions, but never more so than when we discuss this topic [perezhivanie]. I agree, which to me indicates it has a vitality. I woke up today and while half asleep had various responses playing through my memory. So how do we together engage with this topic? I want to mention some things I did with my hands and feet last night. > There are two parallel links to our topic so I printed out these two email links and stapled them together. This act was my way to slow down the proliferation of links and to try to stay on [or enter into] this months topic as generated by Marc?s article. > > I then reflected on the actual term [perezhivanie] and noticed how it is TRANSlated into English as [experience]. David K pointing out [gesturing] to the fact that the prefix [perez] means [trans] suggested I could create a hybrid term [trans/hivanie] to allow me to hold onto the phenomena the word perezhivanie ?means? for myself. We are exploring ?trans? phenomena when we explore perezhivanie. > > Now why does this topic generate such proliferation of [paths] that open up and invite [entering into]. What came to mind was Pegg?s earlier reference to her ?work? as something to be ?picked up? at a future time and re=engaged as memory work through her archive. > > These were various thoughts occurring while half asleep as I ?struggled? to find my way ?through? the proliferation and suggest ways to slow down the process. [a major theme of last months postings]. I considered opening another thread to bring to the fore Beth?s provoking comments, while keeping the conversation between Marc and Alfredo contained in the other strand where the focus is on Marc?s KEYSTONE notion of what is central to trans/hivanie. However, I decided as an ?alternative? otherwise and decided to stay with this thread and bring forward Beth?s contribution to this topic. So here goes. > > Beth, takes the image Mike sent of 2016 being hammered into ?bits? or demolished as an act of ?deconstruction? and juxtaposes it with two more images from Maurice Sendak as illustrations of trans/hivanie. [where capturing/representing/living takes place]. She [reads into] these two images a trans/hivanie that shares in common the meaning that Mike?s image [captured/represented]. > > Beth ADDS that these three images can be [thought] as stage 0 ?fixed boundaries?. What Beth thinks by this move is that [in order to] START the process of trans/hivanie [the moving ?forward?] THAT IS LIFE we must enter into an ?alternative? moment which is caprtured by the term [pause] by which she explores [despair]. I would add that a pause is a ?gap? or an ?interval? Now what is central to my understanding of this moment this interval or pause [which the Japanese call ?ma?] is that it must IN ADDITION be RECOGNIZED. The centrality of ?mitsein? or ?being with? the person ?in? trans/hivanie. THIS is the moral/ethical realm that can be referred to as a ?style? of being and may relate to Judaic ways of moving along the [human path]? The ADDITION to my ears must be highlighted and returns us to Zukerman?s notion of the ?intermental? in last month?s article. Now I sugg of the rainbowest that in TRANSferring trans/hivanie to North America with its hyper individualism this ADDITION gets WITHDRAWN and must be retrieved or carried back in this movement of memory and the forward thrust of being alive [after the pause of the zero stage] This also requires ?mourning? as part of the crisis. > Beth sensitively said ?I don?t want to bypass the other strands? and this is my way of honouring both Beth?s strand with its mention of the pause of STAGE 0 [the struggle of meaningfulness-meaninglessness that is navigated ideally through the care and concern WITH others AS Beth?s ADDITION]. > > Beth concludes her turn in the commentary with an example she believes will be particularly useful as we continue to explore this multifaceted topic of trans/hivanie. A child?s ?entering into? the ?reality? of the book?s [live fire] and living through the trans/hivanie of the apartment fire leading to wanting to cut up or demolish the fixed materialal(ity) of the book. Stage 0 or the ?interval? or ?ma? BEFORE moving forward into living vitality. > > This topic is like a prism, taking the materiality of colour and TRANS forming the monism of colour into multifaceted flowing PATTERNS through the mediation of the prism. It to me has the same feel as when we explore ?what is thinking? as a trans/hivanie phenomena. > > Putting Beth?s contribution into what may become one strand before returning to Alfredo and Marc?s exploration of the KEYSTONE idea of mediation in relation to meaning. Beth?s stage 0 moment that requires [necessarily] the pause [entering or falling into the mood of despair] . ALSO highlighting Beth?s ADDITION that within stage 0 the other person continues to be recognized through the mourning. This moment that calls us ethically to enter into through mitsein or intermental reality the other?s despair and struggle and crisis. I would add that trans/hivanie also in addition requires ?institutional? support but I have said enough. > Thanks Beth for writing the article that Peter sent which I see as a part of this strand, but today is in the background. The element of [redemption] that I note in your article on the strands that were central to Vygotsky?s moral/ethical development. That may require another strand. > > Sent from Mail for Windows 10 > > From: Beth Ferholt > Sent: January 4, 2017 10:19 AM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Cc: mike cole > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie > > You see in the picture on the wall in the first Sendak illustration that > the wild thing that the child (Max) will become, in order to complete his > stages of perezhivanie, is first a mediating meaning ... made by a real > wild thing ... > > On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 1:13 PM, Beth Ferholt wrote: > >> It is often hard to contain the many strands in an XMCA discussion, but >> never more so than when we discuss this topic. >> >> In Reggio Emilia's early childhood pedagogy it could be called a spaghetti >> mess. >> >> I am thinking about three strands of pasta, now: >> >> From Marc -- My current research concern is trying to find >> *ways to study* and understand how this mediation occurs and how these >> semiotic mediators are transformed and distributed. >> >> From Chris -- Part of this might also be a question of >> what it means to describe and represent one's own perezhivanie >> figuratively/narratively (whether to others, or to oneself), as opposed to >> living that perezhivanie. *Especially if the attempt to capture/represent* >> *one's own perezhivanie is, perhaps, also central to the living of it?* >> >> And our US Narnia playworld study, where this >> capturing/representing(/living) took place with Maurice Sendak's >> illustrations of perezhivanie. >> >> Two of the stages ("making mischief of one kind ... and another" and >> "saying I'LL EAT YOU UP!) of perezhivanie look a lot like the image Mike >> sent ... we have called them stage 0, Fixed Boundaries, which means that in >> order to start the process of perezhivanie the moving forward that is life >> has to pause (despair) and also be recognized (with almost joyful anger and >> abandon before declaring oneself) (I have to check but I am pretty sure >> this was originally from Crime and Punishment via Vasilyuk). >> >> The difference between experiencing as struggle and the meaning that >> mediates experiencing as struggle is certainly a key questions. But how to >> access/study this question is still a problem. Again I turn to children -- >> and although the following example is still very emotionally powerful for >> me, I think it is particularly useful here -- for others as well as myself. >> >> Last night my family and I had to run out of our apartment because there >> was a large fire in the building next door that the firepeople could not >> contain for an hour or so. My five year old had trouble going to sleep, as >> we all did, after the blaze was extinguished and we were allowed to go >> home. He said he had read a book about volcanos at school and lava was >> live fire, and the book and the real fire had scared him, so the book had >> come true, so he wanted to cut up the book. >> >> I don't mean to bypass the other strands but this is what came to mind. >> Beth >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 8:41 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >> wrote: >> >>> That surely has a touch of catharsis to it, Beth, thanks for sharing! >>> Alfredo >>> ________________________________________ >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>> on behalf of Beth Ferholt >>> Sent: 03 January 2017 16:50 >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>> Cc: mike cole >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie >>> >>> Several people did tell me, independently, that the great end of the John >>> Oliver segment on 2016, where different NYers curse 2016 on the street, >>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQ6WPo-oW5Q, helped them to overcome >>> feelings of despair at the end of last year. So maybe it is related to >>> perezhivanie. But maybe just to one part of the process. Beth >>> >>> On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 6:45 PM, wrote: >>> >>>> Mike, >>>> When you use the phrase (by this poltical hammering) then i would >>> suggest >>>> this political activity is not capturing the full meaning of >>> perezhivanie. >>>> My reason for saying this must first refer to page 5 of the article >>> where >>>> perezhivanie?s meaning is approached through the >>>> meaningfulness-meaninglessness opposition and the back and forth within >>>> this struggle. >>>> The image of the hammer as presented has its source in the >>> meaning-forming >>>> motive proceeding in a direction towards realization of her >>> meaning-forming >>>> political motives. Only within this aspect of the opposition will the >>>> situation in the image HAVE meaning and BE meaningful. >>>> Vasilyuk however adds the other aspect : If things are proceeding >>>> OTHERWISE the situation becomes meaningless (LP ? and then we enter the >>>> crisis of meaninglessness ? the otherwise - where words no longer >>> mediate >>>> the situation). >>>> >>>> This nature of perezhivanie Vasilyuk metaphorically describes as >>> learning >>>> ( as ENTERING INTO) this type of meaning that is NOT formal, scientific >>>> conceptual knowledge. It is a place of moods and shifting experiences. >>>> >>>> So in my reading of perezhivanie there is this tension between (entering >>>> into) volitional acts and the alternative aspect of perizihavanie as >>>> overwhelming crisis of (meaninglessness) which must be mediated and the >>>> mediators transformed. >>>> >>>> Turning back to page 2 and the situation where Macduff must feel his >>>> situation as a man when his entire family are killed. No practical >>> activity >>>> can bring his family back. Another type of work is needed (and >>> necessary) >>>> which Macduff calls (feeling the situation as a man). THIS WORK Vasilyuk >>>> calls perezhivanie. >>>> >>>> So, my way of reading the image of the hammer smashing 2016 highlights >>> the >>>> aspect of (entering into) a meaningful motive as (political activity) >>> that >>>> is represented but what is not is the alternative, represented in the >>>> crisis of meaninglessness that is the other aspect of perezhivanie. >>>> Marc Clara speaks of the mediator that transforms this crisis of >>>> experiencing, but i am not sure the the image of the girl and hammer >>>> portrays the aspect of perezhivanie as involving a transformative >>> mediator >>>> existing between meaningfulness and meaninglessness? >>>> That time when words and practical activity fail and the person is >>> facing >>>> existential dread when (feeling as a man) that all hope has left the >>> world. >>>> That moment is the moment in which Clara opened and (entered into) her >>>> article exploring the two notions of perizhivanie using the same word. >>>> At the heart of this matter is the existential dread of meaninglessness >>>> unique for each person and our ways of answering as alternative waysthat >>>> give a deep sense of meaningfulness. >>>> It is here that there is overlap with last month?s article where >>> Zukerman >>>> addressed the unique existential aspect entering into cultural >>> historical >>>> (human paths) >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Sent from my Windows 10 phone >>>> >>>> From: mike cole >>>> Sent: January 2, 2017 12:06 PM >>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie >>>> >>>> The pieces of brick thrown up by this political hammering have not yet >>>> fallen and made the devastation personally experienced by the >>> nation/world. >>>> >>>> Still, genuinely, we can wish all of us 7.3 billion well in the new >>> year. >>>> >>>> So what do you think chuck, is this a good representation of >>> perezhivanie? >>>> :-) >>>> Mike >>>> >>>> On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 11:24 AM Charles Bazerman < >>>> bazerman@education.ucsb.edu> wrote: >>>> >>>>> So you think 2017 has any hope of being any better? >>>>> >>>>> Chuck >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>> >>>>> From: mike cole >>>>> >>>>> Date: Monday, January 2, 2017 11:01 am >>>>> >>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] New Year's Perezhivanie >>>>> >>>>> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> With the New Year, as our Russian colleagues put it! >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> This image forwarded from a friend more or less sums up my >>> experience >>>>> >>>>>> of >>>>> >>>>>> the past year. Thought you might find it interesting too. >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Vis a vis the discussion of perezhivanie: Does this image provide us >>>> with >>>>> >>>>>> used (re-presented) behavioral evidence of a person undergoing >>>>> perezhivanie? >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Looking forward to the discussion. >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Feliz a?o nuevo! >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Mike >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Beth Ferholt >>> Assistant Professor >>> Department of Early Childhood and Art Education >>> Brooklyn College, City University of New York >>> 2900 Bedford Avenue >>> Brooklyn, NY 11210-2889 >>> >>> Email: bferholt@brooklyn.cuny.edu >>> Phone: (718) 951-5205 >>> Fax: (718) 951-4816 >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Beth Ferholt >> Assistant Professor >> Department of Early Childhood and Art Education >> Brooklyn College, City University of New York >> 2900 Bedford Avenue >> Brooklyn, NY 11210-2889 >> >> Email: bferholt@brooklyn.cuny.edu >> Phone: (718) 951-5205 >> Fax: (718) 951-4816 >> > > > > -- > Beth Ferholt > Assistant Professor > Department of Early Childhood and Art Education > Brooklyn College, City University of New York > 2900 Bedford Avenue > Brooklyn, NY 11210-2889 > > Email: bferholt@brooklyn.cuny.edu > Phone: (718) 951-5205 > Fax: (718) 951-4816 > From lpscholar2@gmail.com Thu Jan 5 12:17:31 2017 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2017 12:17:31 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: References: <586ae645.475a620a.84afb.9951@mx.google.com> <1483537304474.33665@iped.uio.no> <586e82d6.c2de620a.db8ed.f18d@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <586ea9ff.4379630a.621eb.0603@mx.google.com> Alfredo, In my limited knowledge of the Judaic tradition the hard work of ?redemption? is the human path occurring on the shared ground of humanity. This in contrast to the notion of a realm beyond this earth. THEN as scholars of Jewish ancestry who move back into memory and return to the present the theme often become secular. However, I notice a particular style that remains (though hidden) that can be understood as a TRANS formation within a continuing moral/ethical relation to the Judaic past. Beth?s article expresses this movement as Vygotsky transversing this trans formation to secular themes but as also carrying forward the human path read as now occurring within this particular cultural historical & existential moment. A con-jecture offered as an image that is moving beyond stage 0. Not sure if I am reading my own prejudices into Beth?s article? Time will tell.?:- ) Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: HENRY SHONERD Sent: January 5, 2017 10:06 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Cc: mike cole Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie Larry, A footnote perhaps to the discussion, but one that lights up my own engagement in the discussion is tied to ?redemption" (at the end of your post) and how that is different from recanting. In a book by Geraldine Brooks (Year of Wonders) set during a few years during a plague-plagued 17th century England, we are explicitly told that recanting does not necessarily result in redemption. Recanting is the entering into, redemption the hard work that follows, if it follows at all. Henry > On Jan 5, 2017, at 10:31 AM, wrote: > > Beth, Alfredo, and Marc and others who have responded or are reading these threads. > > Beth mentioned it is hard to contain the many strands in XMCA discussions, but never more so than when we discuss this topic [perezhivanie]. I agree, which to me indicates it has a vitality. I woke up today and while half asleep had various responses playing through my memory. So how do we together engage with this topic? I want to mention some things I did with my hands and feet last night. > There are two parallel links to our topic so I printed out these two email links and stapled them together. This act was my way to slow down the proliferation of links and to try to stay on [or enter into] this months topic as generated by Marc?s article. > > I then reflected on the actual term [perezhivanie] and noticed how it is TRANSlated into English as [experience]. David K pointing out [gesturing] to the fact that the prefix [perez] means [trans] suggested I could create a hybrid term [trans/hivanie] to allow me to hold onto the phenomena the word perezhivanie ?means? for myself. We are exploring ?trans? phenomena when we explore perezhivanie. > > Now why does this topic generate such proliferation of [paths] that open up and invite [entering into]. What came to mind was Pegg?s earlier reference to her ?work? as something to be ?picked up? at a future time and re=engaged as memory work through her archive. > > These were various thoughts occurring while half asleep as I ?struggled? to find my way ?through? the proliferation and suggest ways to slow down the process. [a major theme of last months postings]. I considered opening another thread to bring to the fore Beth?s provoking comments, while keeping the conversation between Marc and Alfredo contained in the other strand where the focus is on Marc?s KEYSTONE notion of what is central to trans/hivanie. However, I decided as an ?alternative? otherwise and decided to stay with this thread and bring forward Beth?s contribution to this topic. So here goes. > > Beth, takes the image Mike sent of 2016 being hammered into ?bits? or demolished as an act of ?deconstruction? and juxtaposes it with two more images from Maurice Sendak as illustrations of trans/hivanie. [where capturing/representing/living takes place]. She [reads into] these two images a trans/hivanie that shares in common the meaning that Mike?s image [captured/represented]. > > Beth ADDS that these three images can be [thought] as stage 0 ?fixed boundaries?. What Beth thinks by this move is that [in order to] START the process of trans/hivanie [the moving ?forward?] THAT IS LIFE we must enter into an ?alternative? moment which is caprtured by the term [pause] by which she explores [despair]. I would add that a pause is a ?gap? or an ?interval? Now what is central to my understanding of this moment this interval or pause [which the Japanese call ?ma?] is that it must IN ADDITION be RECOGNIZED. The centrality of ?mitsein? or ?being with? the person ?in? trans/hivanie. THIS is the moral/ethical realm that can be referred to as a ?style? of being and may relate to Judaic ways of moving along the [human path]? The ADDITION to my ears must be highlighted and returns us to Zukerman?s notion of the ?intermental? in last month?s article. Now I sugg of the rainbowest that in TRANSferring trans/hivanie to North America with its hyper individualism this ADDITION gets WITHDRAWN and must be retrieved or carried back in this movement of memory and the forward thrust of being alive [after the pause of the zero stage] This also requires ?mourning? as part of the crisis. > Beth sensitively said ?I don?t want to bypass the other strands? and this is my way of honouring both Beth?s strand with its mention of the pause of STAGE 0 [the struggle of meaningfulness-meaninglessness that is navigated ideally through the care and concern WITH others AS Beth?s ADDITION]. > > Beth concludes her turn in the commentary with an example she believes will be particularly useful as we continue to explore this multifaceted topic of trans/hivanie. A child?s ?entering into? the ?reality? of the book?s [live fire] and living through the trans/hivanie of the apartment fire leading to wanting to cut up or demolish the fixed materialal(ity) of the book. Stage 0 or the ?interval? or ?ma? BEFORE moving forward into living vitality. > > This topic is like a prism, taking the materiality of colour and TRANS forming the monism of colour into multifaceted flowing PATTERNS through the mediation of the prism. It to me has the same feel as when we explore ?what is thinking? as a trans/hivanie phenomena. > > Putting Beth?s contribution into what may become one strand before returning to Alfredo and Marc?s exploration of the KEYSTONE idea of mediation in relation to meaning. Beth?s stage 0 moment that requires [necessarily] the pause [entering or falling into the mood of despair] . ALSO highlighting Beth?s ADDITION that within stage 0 the other person continues to be recognized through the mourning. This moment that calls us ethically to enter into through mitsein or intermental reality the other?s despair and struggle and crisis. I would add that trans/hivanie also in addition requires ?institutional? support but I have said enough. > Thanks Beth for writing the article that Peter sent which I see as a part of this strand, but today is in the background. The element of [redemption] that I note in your article on the strands that were central to Vygotsky?s moral/ethical development. That may require another strand. > > Sent from Mail for Windows 10 > > From: Beth Ferholt > Sent: January 4, 2017 10:19 AM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Cc: mike cole > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie > > You see in the picture on the wall in the first Sendak illustration that > the wild thing that the child (Max) will become, in order to complete his > stages of perezhivanie, is first a mediating meaning ... made by a real > wild thing ... > > On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 1:13 PM, Beth Ferholt wrote: > >> It is often hard to contain the many strands in an XMCA discussion, but >> never more so than when we discuss this topic. >> >> In Reggio Emilia's early childhood pedagogy it could be called a spaghetti >> mess. >> >> I am thinking about three strands of pasta, now: >> >> From Marc -- My current research concern is trying to find >> *ways to study* and understand how this mediation occurs and how these >> semiotic mediators are transformed and distributed. >> >> From Chris -- Part of this might also be a question of >> what it means to describe and represent one's own perezhivanie >> figuratively/narratively (whether to others, or to oneself), as opposed to >> living that perezhivanie. *Especially if the attempt to capture/represent* >> *one's own perezhivanie is, perhaps, also central to the living of it?* >> >> And our US Narnia playworld study, where this >> capturing/representing(/living) took place with Maurice Sendak's >> illustrations of perezhivanie. >> >> Two of the stages ("making mischief of one kind ... and another" and >> "saying I'LL EAT YOU UP!) of perezhivanie look a lot like the image Mike >> sent ... we have called them stage 0, Fixed Boundaries, which means that in >> order to start the process of perezhivanie the moving forward that is life >> has to pause (despair) and also be recognized (with almost joyful anger and >> abandon before declaring oneself) (I have to check but I am pretty sure >> this was originally from Crime and Punishment via Vasilyuk). >> >> The difference between experiencing as struggle and the meaning that >> mediates experiencing as struggle is certainly a key questions. But how to >> access/study this question is still a problem. Again I turn to children -- >> and although the following example is still very emotionally powerful for >> me, I think it is particularly useful here -- for others as well as myself. >> >> Last night my family and I had to run out of our apartment because there >> was a large fire in the building next door that the firepeople could not >> contain for an hour or so. My five year old had trouble going to sleep, as >> we all did, after the blaze was extinguished and we were allowed to go >> home. He said he had read a book about volcanos at school and lava was >> live fire, and the book and the real fire had scared him, so the book had >> come true, so he wanted to cut up the book. >> >> I don't mean to bypass the other strands but this is what came to mind. >> Beth >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 8:41 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >> wrote: >> >>> That surely has a touch of catharsis to it, Beth, thanks for sharing! >>> Alfredo >>> ________________________________________ >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>> on behalf of Beth Ferholt >>> Sent: 03 January 2017 16:50 >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>> Cc: mike cole >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie >>> >>> Several people did tell me, independently, that the great end of the John >>> Oliver segment on 2016, where different NYers curse 2016 on the street, >>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQ6WPo-oW5Q, helped them to overcome >>> feelings of despair at the end of last year. So maybe it is related to >>> perezhivanie. But maybe just to one part of the process. Beth >>> >>> On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 6:45 PM, wrote: >>> >>>> Mike, >>>> When you use the phrase (by this poltical hammering) then i would >>> suggest >>>> this political activity is not capturing the full meaning of >>> perezhivanie. >>>> My reason for saying this must first refer to page 5 of the article >>> where >>>> perezhivanie?s meaning is approached through the >>>> meaningfulness-meaninglessness opposition and the back and forth within >>>> this struggle. >>>> The image of the hammer as presented has its source in the >>> meaning-forming >>>> motive proceeding in a direction towards realization of her >>> meaning-forming >>>> political motives. Only within this aspect of the opposition will the >>>> situation in the image HAVE meaning and BE meaningful. >>>> Vasilyuk however adds the other aspect : If things are proceeding >>>> OTHERWISE the situation becomes meaningless (LP ? and then we enter the >>>> crisis of meaninglessness ? the otherwise - where words no longer >>> mediate >>>> the situation). >>>> >>>> This nature of perezhivanie Vasilyuk metaphorically describes as >>> learning >>>> ( as ENTERING INTO) this type of meaning that is NOT formal, scientific >>>> conceptual knowledge. It is a place of moods and shifting experiences. >>>> >>>> So in my reading of perezhivanie there is this tension between (entering >>>> into) volitional acts and the alternative aspect of perizihavanie as >>>> overwhelming crisis of (meaninglessness) which must be mediated and the >>>> mediators transformed. >>>> >>>> Turning back to page 2 and the situation where Macduff must feel his >>>> situation as a man when his entire family are killed. No practical >>> activity >>>> can bring his family back. Another type of work is needed (and >>> necessary) >>>> which Macduff calls (feeling the situation as a man). THIS WORK Vasilyuk >>>> calls perezhivanie. >>>> >>>> So, my way of reading the image of the hammer smashing 2016 highlights >>> the >>>> aspect of (entering into) a meaningful motive as (political activity) >>> that >>>> is represented but what is not is the alternative, represented in the >>>> crisis of meaninglessness that is the other aspect of perezhivanie. >>>> Marc Clara speaks of the mediator that transforms this crisis of >>>> experiencing, but i am not sure the the image of the girl and hammer >>>> portrays the aspect of perezhivanie as involving a transformative >>> mediator >>>> existing between meaningfulness and meaninglessness? >>>> That time when words and practical activity fail and the person is >>> facing >>>> existential dread when (feeling as a man) that all hope has left the >>> world. >>>> That moment is the moment in which Clara opened and (entered into) her >>>> article exploring the two notions of perizhivanie using the same word. >>>> At the heart of this matter is the existential dread of meaninglessness >>>> unique for each person and our ways of answering as alternative waysthat >>>> give a deep sense of meaningfulness. >>>> It is here that there is overlap with last month?s article where >>> Zukerman >>>> addressed the unique existential aspect entering into cultural >>> historical >>>> (human paths) >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Sent from my Windows 10 phone >>>> >>>> From: mike cole >>>> Sent: January 2, 2017 12:06 PM >>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie >>>> >>>> The pieces of brick thrown up by this political hammering have not yet >>>> fallen and made the devastation personally experienced by the >>> nation/world. >>>> >>>> Still, genuinely, we can wish all of us 7.3 billion well in the new >>> year. >>>> >>>> So what do you think chuck, is this a good representation of >>> perezhivanie? >>>> :-) >>>> Mike >>>> >>>> On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 11:24 AM Charles Bazerman < >>>> bazerman@education.ucsb.edu> wrote: >>>> >>>>> So you think 2017 has any hope of being any better? >>>>> >>>>> Chuck >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>> >>>>> From: mike cole >>>>> >>>>> Date: Monday, January 2, 2017 11:01 am >>>>> >>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] New Year's Perezhivanie >>>>> >>>>> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> With the New Year, as our Russian colleagues put it! >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> This image forwarded from a friend more or less sums up my >>> experience >>>>> >>>>>> of >>>>> >>>>>> the past year. Thought you might find it interesting too. >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Vis a vis the discussion of perezhivanie: Does this image provide us >>>> with >>>>> >>>>>> used (re-presented) behavioral evidence of a person undergoing >>>>> perezhivanie? >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Looking forward to the discussion. >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Feliz a?o nuevo! >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Mike >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Beth Ferholt >>> Assistant Professor >>> Department of Early Childhood and Art Education >>> Brooklyn College, City University of New York >>> 2900 Bedford Avenue >>> Brooklyn, NY 11210-2889 >>> >>> Email: bferholt@brooklyn.cuny.edu >>> Phone: (718) 951-5205 >>> Fax: (718) 951-4816 >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Beth Ferholt >> Assistant Professor >> Department of Early Childhood and Art Education >> Brooklyn College, City University of New York >> 2900 Bedford Avenue >> Brooklyn, NY 11210-2889 >> >> Email: bferholt@brooklyn.cuny.edu >> Phone: (718) 951-5205 >> Fax: (718) 951-4816 >> > > > > -- > Beth Ferholt > Assistant Professor > Department of Early Childhood and Art Education > Brooklyn College, City University of New York > 2900 Bedford Avenue > Brooklyn, NY 11210-2889 > > Email: bferholt@brooklyn.cuny.edu > Phone: (718) 951-5205 > Fax: (718) 951-4816 > From r.j.s.parsons@open.ac.uk Fri Jan 6 06:41:20 2017 From: r.j.s.parsons@open.ac.uk (R.J.S.Parsons) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2017 14:41:20 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: References: <586ae645.475a620a.84afb.9951@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <25cde5c9-9e15-b7f4-6f4c-18f763423cbc@open.ac.uk> In thinking about "experience as struggle", I found myself considering Nozick's thought experiment of the experience machine, which he uses to explore the issue of ethical hedonism.* Consider a machine which could stimulate a person's brain to induce pleasurable experiences that the subject could not distinguish from those he would have apart from the machine. Nozick then asks, if given the choice, would we prefer the machine to real life? (this description from Wikipedia). It strikes me that the experience delivered by the machine is experience without struggle. There is no activity from the subject, meaning making is not necessary, and therefore there is no development. Clara quotes Vygotsky "A perezhivanie is a unit where, on the one hand, in an indivisible state, the environment is represented, i.e. that which is being experienced?a perezhivanie is always related to something which is found outside the person?and on the other hand, what is represented is how I, myself, am experiencing this," - the thought experiment breaks the unit, and in doing so, I think, demonstrates how important its existence as a unit is. *Also brilliantly explored in the "Total Immersion Video game" in Red Dwarf Season 5 episode 6 Back To Reality. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2IzX6b1YJHI Rob On 03/01/2017 17:37, Christopher Schuck wrote: > It's an interesting question (about the brick and perezhivanie), partly > because that extended, "living-through", repeated doubling-back process > evoked by the Vygotskian sense of the concept would seem to be at odds with > a single, discrete act of "smashing" that is immediate, forceful and even > violent. It would suggest that part of what perezhivanie means is wrapped > up in the symbolic marking of its end - and that this end, when it comes, > can be forceful. Certainly, the image could not be more unified and > embodying of a particular set of meaningful experiences. But is that how > perezhivanie works? This leads me to ask: > > 1) what are the problems and contradictions encountered in using particular > metaphors to depict perezhivanie, where perezhivanie is itself so defined > by imagination and narrativity? Part of this might also be a question of > what it means to describe and represent one's own perezhivanie > figuratively/narratively (whether to others, or to oneself), as opposed to > living that perezhivanie. Especially if the attempt to capture/represent > one's own perezhivanie is, perhaps, also central to the living of it? > > 2) What is the nature of the relationship between perezhivanie and force, > either in terms of the internal process or in terms of how it finally > "ends"? (Not to mention, how it begins). It would seem that in both > conceptions discussed in the article there is a certain intensity required. > But does this in some cases require something more explosive - and does > Vasilyuk's conception of perezhivanie as activity speak more to this > possibility? And how do we reconcile this with the less "forceful" notion > of enduring, revisiting, and working through? > > On Monday, January 2, 2017, mike cole wrote: > >> The pieces of brick thrown up by this political hammering have not yet >> fallen and made the devastation personally experienced by the nation/world. >> >> Still, genuinely, we can wish all of us 7.3 billion well in the new year. >> >> So what do you think chuck, is this a good representation of perezhivanie? >> :-) >> Mike >> >> On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 11:24 AM Charles Bazerman < >> bazerman@education.ucsb.edu> wrote: >> >>> So you think 2017 has any hope of being any better? >>> >>> Chuck >>> >>> >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> >>> From: mike cole >>> >>> Date: Monday, January 2, 2017 11:01 am >>> >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] New Year's Perezhivanie >>> >>> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >>> >>> >>> >>>> With the New Year, as our Russian colleagues put it! >>>> This image forwarded from a friend more or less sums up my experience >>>> of >>>> the past year. Thought you might find it interesting too. >>>> Vis a vis the discussion of perezhivanie: Does this image provide us >> with >>>> used (re-presented) behavioral evidence of a person undergoing >>> perezhivanie? >>> >>>> Looking forward to the discussion. >>>> Feliz a?o nuevo! >>>> Mike >>> >>> >>> From r.j.s.parsons@open.ac.uk Fri Jan 6 06:49:34 2017 From: r.j.s.parsons@open.ac.uk (R.J.S.Parsons) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2017 14:49:34 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: <25cde5c9-9e15-b7f4-6f4c-18f763423cbc@open.ac.uk> References: <586ae645.475a620a.84afb.9951@mx.google.com> <25cde5c9-9e15-b7f4-6f4c-18f763423cbc@open.ac.uk> Message-ID: And this machine thinks I'm a fraud. Hmmm. Perhaps it knows more than I do !?!?!? Rob On 06/01/2017 14:41, R.J.S.Parsons wrote: > [This sender failed our fraud detection checks and may not be who they appear to be. Learn about spoofing at http://aka.ms/LearnAboutSpoofing] > > In thinking about "experience as struggle", I found myself considering > Nozick's thought experiment of the experience machine, which he uses to > explore the issue of ethical hedonism.* Consider a machine which could > stimulate a person's brain to induce pleasurable experiences that the > subject could not distinguish from those he would have apart from the > machine. Nozick then asks, if given the choice, would we prefer the > machine to real life? (this description from Wikipedia). It strikes me > that the experience delivered by the machine is experience without > struggle. There is no activity from the subject, meaning making is not > necessary, and therefore there is no development. > > Clara quotes Vygotsky "A perezhivanie is a unit where, on the one hand, > in an indivisible state, the environment is represented, i.e. that which > is being experienced?a perezhivanie is always related to something which > is found outside the person?and on the other hand, what is represented > is how I, myself, am experiencing this," - the thought experiment breaks > the unit, and in doing so, I think, demonstrates how important its > existence as a unit is. > > *Also brilliantly explored in the "Total Immersion Video game" in Red > Dwarf Season 5 episode 6 Back To Reality. > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2IzX6b1YJHI > > Rob > > On 03/01/2017 17:37, Christopher Schuck wrote: >> It's an interesting question (about the brick and perezhivanie), partly >> because that extended, "living-through", repeated doubling-back process >> evoked by the Vygotskian sense of the concept would seem to be at odds with >> a single, discrete act of "smashing" that is immediate, forceful and even >> violent. It would suggest that part of what perezhivanie means is wrapped >> up in the symbolic marking of its end - and that this end, when it comes, >> can be forceful. Certainly, the image could not be more unified and >> embodying of a particular set of meaningful experiences. But is that how >> perezhivanie works? This leads me to ask: >> >> 1) what are the problems and contradictions encountered in using particular >> metaphors to depict perezhivanie, where perezhivanie is itself so defined >> by imagination and narrativity? Part of this might also be a question of >> what it means to describe and represent one's own perezhivanie >> figuratively/narratively (whether to others, or to oneself), as opposed to >> living that perezhivanie. Especially if the attempt to capture/represent >> one's own perezhivanie is, perhaps, also central to the living of it? >> >> 2) What is the nature of the relationship between perezhivanie and force, >> either in terms of the internal process or in terms of how it finally >> "ends"? (Not to mention, how it begins). It would seem that in both >> conceptions discussed in the article there is a certain intensity required. >> But does this in some cases require something more explosive - and does >> Vasilyuk's conception of perezhivanie as activity speak more to this >> possibility? And how do we reconcile this with the less "forceful" notion >> of enduring, revisiting, and working through? >> >> On Monday, January 2, 2017, mike cole wrote: >> >>> The pieces of brick thrown up by this political hammering have not yet >>> fallen and made the devastation personally experienced by the nation/world. >>> >>> Still, genuinely, we can wish all of us 7.3 billion well in the new year. >>> >>> So what do you think chuck, is this a good representation of perezhivanie? >>> :-) >>> Mike >>> >>> On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 11:24 AM Charles Bazerman < >>> bazerman@education.ucsb.edu> wrote: >>> >>>> So you think 2017 has any hope of being any better? >>>> >>>> Chuck >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>> >>>> From: mike cole >>>> >>>> Date: Monday, January 2, 2017 11:01 am >>>> >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] New Year's Perezhivanie >>>> >>>> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> With the New Year, as our Russian colleagues put it! >>>>> This image forwarded from a friend more or less sums up my experience >>>>> of >>>>> the past year. Thought you might find it interesting too. >>>>> Vis a vis the discussion of perezhivanie: Does this image provide us >>> with >>>>> used (re-presented) behavioral evidence of a person undergoing >>>> perezhivanie? >>>> >>>>> Looking forward to the discussion. >>>>> Feliz a?o nuevo! >>>>> Mike >>>> >>>> From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Fri Jan 6 07:11:55 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2017 15:11:55 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: <25cde5c9-9e15-b7f4-6f4c-18f763423cbc@open.ac.uk> References: <586ae645.475a620a.84afb.9951@mx.google.com> , <25cde5c9-9e15-b7f4-6f4c-18f763423cbc@open.ac.uk> Message-ID: <1483715539761.38866@iped.uio.no> Rob, how appropriate the thought experiment! Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of R.J.S.Parsons Sent: 06 January 2017 15:41 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie In thinking about "experience as struggle", I found myself considering Nozick's thought experiment of the experience machine, which he uses to explore the issue of ethical hedonism.* Consider a machine which could stimulate a person's brain to induce pleasurable experiences that the subject could not distinguish from those he would have apart from the machine. Nozick then asks, if given the choice, would we prefer the machine to real life? (this description from Wikipedia). It strikes me that the experience delivered by the machine is experience without struggle. There is no activity from the subject, meaning making is not necessary, and therefore there is no development. Clara quotes Vygotsky "A perezhivanie is a unit where, on the one hand, in an indivisible state, the environment is represented, i.e. that which is being experienced?a perezhivanie is always related to something which is found outside the person?and on the other hand, what is represented is how I, myself, am experiencing this," - the thought experiment breaks the unit, and in doing so, I think, demonstrates how important its existence as a unit is. *Also brilliantly explored in the "Total Immersion Video game" in Red Dwarf Season 5 episode 6 Back To Reality. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2IzX6b1YJHI Rob On 03/01/2017 17:37, Christopher Schuck wrote: > It's an interesting question (about the brick and perezhivanie), partly > because that extended, "living-through", repeated doubling-back process > evoked by the Vygotskian sense of the concept would seem to be at odds with > a single, discrete act of "smashing" that is immediate, forceful and even > violent. It would suggest that part of what perezhivanie means is wrapped > up in the symbolic marking of its end - and that this end, when it comes, > can be forceful. Certainly, the image could not be more unified and > embodying of a particular set of meaningful experiences. But is that how > perezhivanie works? This leads me to ask: > > 1) what are the problems and contradictions encountered in using particular > metaphors to depict perezhivanie, where perezhivanie is itself so defined > by imagination and narrativity? Part of this might also be a question of > what it means to describe and represent one's own perezhivanie > figuratively/narratively (whether to others, or to oneself), as opposed to > living that perezhivanie. Especially if the attempt to capture/represent > one's own perezhivanie is, perhaps, also central to the living of it? > > 2) What is the nature of the relationship between perezhivanie and force, > either in terms of the internal process or in terms of how it finally > "ends"? (Not to mention, how it begins). It would seem that in both > conceptions discussed in the article there is a certain intensity required. > But does this in some cases require something more explosive - and does > Vasilyuk's conception of perezhivanie as activity speak more to this > possibility? And how do we reconcile this with the less "forceful" notion > of enduring, revisiting, and working through? > > On Monday, January 2, 2017, mike cole wrote: > >> The pieces of brick thrown up by this political hammering have not yet >> fallen and made the devastation personally experienced by the nation/world. >> >> Still, genuinely, we can wish all of us 7.3 billion well in the new year. >> >> So what do you think chuck, is this a good representation of perezhivanie? >> :-) >> Mike >> >> On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 11:24 AM Charles Bazerman < >> bazerman@education.ucsb.edu> wrote: >> >>> So you think 2017 has any hope of being any better? >>> >>> Chuck >>> >>> >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> >>> From: mike cole >>> >>> Date: Monday, January 2, 2017 11:01 am >>> >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] New Year's Perezhivanie >>> >>> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >>> >>> >>> >>>> With the New Year, as our Russian colleagues put it! >>>> This image forwarded from a friend more or less sums up my experience >>>> of >>>> the past year. Thought you might find it interesting too. >>>> Vis a vis the discussion of perezhivanie: Does this image provide us >> with >>>> used (re-presented) behavioral evidence of a person undergoing >>> perezhivanie? >>> >>>> Looking forward to the discussion. >>>> Feliz a?o nuevo! >>>> Mike >>> >>> >>> From lpscholar2@gmail.com Fri Jan 6 09:27:54 2017 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2017 09:27:54 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: <1483715539761.38866@iped.uio.no> References: <586ae645.475a620a.84afb.9951@mx.google.com> , <25cde5c9-9e15-b7f4-6f4c-18f763423cbc@open.ac.uk> <1483715539761.38866@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <586fd3be.45da620a.2a730.8da3@mx.google.com> Rob, and Christopher, and Alfreda, and Marc, This is an interesting reference to Nozick and achieving an experience without struggle. I want to refocus us on how this insight is an extension to Christopher?s posting. In particular the opening paragraph. The image of smashing to bits the bricks is wrapped up in the end moment of trans/hivanie. SO the focus on what occurs before this end point central to Christopher?s question?: ?but is this how trans/hivanie works?? AND Christopher answers by focusing on the?: ?extended back and forth, the REPEATED back and forth, the (living-through) that seems to be exemplary of trans/hivanie. Marc says it is ?this? phenomena that brought him to trans/hivanie and not the other way around. What is occurring within the ?repetition? being lived through. As an aside Nozick turned to eastern philosophy from the Indian subcontinent for deeper inspiration. I could add more if interest warrants (possibly another thread). ALSO, i recommend going to page 27 of Bella?s article (that Peter posted) to get a sense of Vygotsky?s extended repeated (living through) of the Jewish question that he was writing extensively about in 1916. On that page Bella refers to two articles Vygotsky wrote on this theme. One was in a (literary) mode while the other was written in a (psychological) mode. Trans/hivanie at work implicitly as formative of the later Vygotsky. This topic, as Bella images as spaghetti tangles. In Vygotsky?s own words from 1916?on the incomprehensible riddle-like companion of Jewish history?as?: ?riddle-like, inexplicability, the MYSTERY of Isreal .... eternal fellow traveler of the eternal people, the SECRET of the eternity of the Jewish people? To further this strand we should possibly keep distinct from this month?s article. However the theme of ?repetition? that had the mood of profound struggle or at a deeper level a mood of no movement and closed off, is the process occuring which maybat some point in time erupt as smashing 2016 to bits and bricks scattering as an act of ?deconstruction? that i believe can loose the reality of what came before, starting with Bella?s zero stage that is (existential). A time when the person traversing the zero stage should be ?recognized? through moral/ethical care and concern. Not a journey of (mineness) through Heidegger which is a protesting protestant approach, but through mitsein as living-through. I hope my referencing multiple speakers but trying to stay within strands is clear? Perezhivanie as trans/hivanie as Marc says is approached through multiple pluaristic traditions that are psychological, literary, and philosophical and extend through historical consciousness as the living-through repetitive back and forth traversal that INCLUDES as central the PAUSE or MA or INTERVAL or GAP. Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Alfredo Jornet Gil Sent: January 6, 2017 7:17 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie Rob, how appropriate the thought experiment! Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of R.J.S.Parsons Sent: 06 January 2017 15:41 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie In thinking about "experience as struggle", I found myself considering Nozick's thought experiment of the experience machine, which he uses to explore the issue of ethical hedonism.* Consider a machine which could stimulate a person's brain to induce pleasurable experiences that the subject could not distinguish from those he would have apart from the machine. Nozick then asks, if given the choice, would we prefer the machine to real life? (this description from Wikipedia). It strikes me that the experience delivered by the machine is experience without struggle. There is no activity from the subject, meaning making is not necessary, and therefore there is no development. Clara quotes Vygotsky "A perezhivanie is a unit where, on the one hand, in an indivisible state, the environment is represented, i.e. that which is being experienced?a perezhivanie is always related to something which is found outside the person?and on the other hand, what is represented is how I, myself, am experiencing this," - the thought experiment breaks the unit, and in doing so, I think, demonstrates how important its existence as a unit is. *Also brilliantly explored in the "Total Immersion Video game" in Red Dwarf Season 5 episode 6 Back To Reality. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2IzX6b1YJHI Rob On 03/01/2017 17:37, Christopher Schuck wrote: > It's an interesting question (about the brick and perezhivanie), partly > because that extended, "living-through", repeated doubling-back process > evoked by the Vygotskian sense of the concept would seem to be at odds with > a single, discrete act of "smashing" that is immediate, forceful and even > violent. It would suggest that part of what perezhivanie means is wrapped > up in the symbolic marking of its end - and that this end, when it comes, > can be forceful. Certainly, the image could not be more unified and > embodying of a particular set of meaningful experiences. But is that how > perezhivanie works? This leads me to ask: > > 1) what are the problems and contradictions encountered in using particular > metaphors to depict perezhivanie, where perezhivanie is itself so defined > by imagination and narrativity? Part of this might also be a question of > what it means to describe and represent one's own perezhivanie > figuratively/narratively (whether to others, or to oneself), as opposed to > living that perezhivanie. Especially if the attempt to capture/represent > one's own perezhivanie is, perhaps, also central to the living of it? > > 2) What is the nature of the relationship between perezhivanie and force, > either in terms of the internal process or in terms of how it finally > "ends"? (Not to mention, how it begins). It would seem that in both > conceptions discussed in the article there is a certain intensity required. > But does this in some cases require something more explosive - and does > Vasilyuk's conception of perezhivanie as activity speak more to this > possibility? And how do we reconcile this with the less "forceful" notion > of enduring, revisiting, and working through? > > On Monday, January 2, 2017, mike cole wrote: > >> The pieces of brick thrown up by this political hammering have not yet >> fallen and made the devastation personally experienced by the nation/world. >> >> Still, genuinely, we can wish all of us 7.3 billion well in the new year. >> >> So what do you think chuck, is this a good representation of perezhivanie? >> :-) >> Mike >> >> On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 11:24 AM Charles Bazerman < >> bazerman@education.ucsb.edu> wrote: >> >>> So you think 2017 has any hope of being any better? >>> >>> Chuck >>> >>> >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> >>> From: mike cole >>> >>> Date: Monday, January 2, 2017 11:01 am >>> >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] New Year's Perezhivanie >>> >>> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >>> >>> >>> >>>> With the New Year, as our Russian colleagues put it! >>>> This image forwarded from a friend more or less sums up my experience >>>> of >>>> the past year. Thought you might find it interesting too. >>>> Vis a vis the discussion of perezhivanie: Does this image provide us >> with >>>> used (re-presented) behavioral evidence of a person undergoing >>> perezhivanie? >>> >>>> Looking forward to the discussion. >>>> Feliz a?o nuevo! >>>> Mike >>> >>> >>> From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Fri Jan 6 09:43:26 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2017 17:43:26 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: <586fd3be.45da620a.2a730.8da3@mx.google.com> References: <586ae645.475a620a.84afb.9951@mx.google.com> , <25cde5c9-9e15-b7f4-6f4c-18f763423cbc@open.ac.uk> <1483715539761.38866@iped.uio.no>, <586fd3be.45da620a.2a730.8da3@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <1483724630007.83825@iped.uio.no> Larry, great additions, but why writing "trans/hivanie" when we have a number of resources to be aware of the etymological roots of perezhivanie? One such resource is in Andy Blunden's article in the special issue. Another is an earlier paper Michael and myself co-authored a few years ago and which you can find attached. I quote from the paper: "Experience (perezhivanie) in its original sense?in English and Russian as well as in the French exp?er ience or the German equivalent Erfahr ung?suggests that in contrast to the repetition of something, experience is related to travel, traversal, peril, risk, and change. The Proto-Indo-European root per(e) -denotes the verbs to try, dare, and risk, put oneself in danger; as such, it also made it into suchwords as exper iment (Greek pe??rama, experiment) and perilous." Alfredo ________________________________ From: lpscholar2@gmail.com Sent: 06 January 2017 18:27 To: Alfredo Jornet Gil; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: RE: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie Rob, and Christopher, and Alfreda, and Marc, This is an interesting reference to Nozick and achieving an experience without struggle. I want to refocus us on how this insight is an extension to Christopher?s posting. In particular the opening paragraph. The image of smashing to bits the bricks is wrapped up in the end moment of trans/hivanie. SO the focus on what occurs before this end point central to Christopher?s question : ?but is this how trans/hivanie works?? AND Christopher answers by focusing on the : ?extended back and forth, the REPEATED back and forth, the (living-through) that seems to be exemplary of trans/hivanie. Marc says it is ?this? phenomena that brought him to trans/hivanie and not the other way around. What is occurring within the ?repetition? being lived through. As an aside Nozick turned to eastern philosophy from the Indian subcontinent for deeper inspiration. I could add more if interest warrants (possibly another thread). ALSO, i recommend going to page 27 of Bella?s article (that Peter posted) to get a sense of Vygotsky?s extended repeated (living through) of the Jewish question that he was writing extensively about in 1916. On that page Bella refers to two articles Vygotsky wrote on this theme. One was in a (literary) mode while the other was written in a (psychological) mode. Trans/hivanie at work implicitly as formative of the later Vygotsky. This topic, as Bella images as spaghetti tangles. In Vygotsky?s own words from 1916 on the incomprehensible riddle-like companion of Jewish history as : ?riddle-like, inexplicability, the MYSTERY of Isreal .... eternal fellow traveler of the eternal people, the SECRET of the eternity of the Jewish people? To further this strand we should possibly keep distinct from this month?s article. However the theme of ?repetition? that had the mood of profound struggle or at a deeper level a mood of no movement and closed off, is the process occuring which maybat some point in time erupt as smashing 2016 to bits and bricks scattering as an act of ?deconstruction? that i believe can loose the reality of what came before, starting with Bella?s zero stage that is (existential). A time when the person traversing the zero stage should be ?recognized? through moral/ethical care and concern. Not a journey of (mineness) through Heidegger which is a protesting protestant approach, but through mitsein as living-through. I hope my referencing multiple speakers but trying to stay within strands is clear? Perezhivanie as trans/hivanie as Marc says is approached through multiple pluaristic traditions that are psychological, literary, and philosophical and extend through historical consciousness as the living-through repetitive back and forth traversal that INCLUDES as central the PAUSE or MA or INTERVAL or GAP. Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Alfredo Jornet Gil Sent: January 6, 2017 7:17 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie Rob, how appropriate the thought experiment! Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of R.J.S.Parsons Sent: 06 January 2017 15:41 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie In thinking about "experience as struggle", I found myself considering Nozick's thought experiment of the experience machine, which he uses to explore the issue of ethical hedonism.* Consider a machine which could stimulate a person's brain to induce pleasurable experiences that the subject could not distinguish from those he would have apart from the machine. Nozick then asks, if given the choice, would we prefer the machine to real life? (this description from Wikipedia). It strikes me that the experience delivered by the machine is experience without struggle. There is no activity from the subject, meaning making is not necessary, and therefore there is no development. Clara quotes Vygotsky "A perezhivanie is a unit where, on the one hand, in an indivisible state, the environment is represented, i.e. that which is being experienced?a perezhivanie is always related to something which is found outside the person?and on the other hand, what is represented is how I, myself, am experiencing this," - the thought experiment breaks the unit, and in doing so, I think, demonstrates how important its existence as a unit is. *Also brilliantly explored in the "Total Immersion Video game" in Red Dwarf Season 5 episode 6 Back To Reality. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2IzX6b1YJHI Rob On 03/01/2017 17:37, Christopher Schuck wrote: > It's an interesting question (about the brick and perezhivanie), partly > because that extended, "living-through", repeated doubling-back process > evoked by the Vygotskian sense of the concept would seem to be at odds with > a single, discrete act of "smashing" that is immediate, forceful and even > violent. It would suggest that part of what perezhivanie means is wrapped > up in the symbolic marking of its end - and that this end, when it comes, > can be forceful. Certainly, the image could not be more unified and > embodying of a particular set of meaningful experiences. But is that how > perezhivanie works? This leads me to ask: > > 1) what are the problems and contradictions encountered in using particular > metaphors to depict perezhivanie, where perezhivanie is itself so defined > by imagination and narrativity? Part of this might also be a question of > what it means to describe and represent one's own perezhivanie > figuratively/narratively (whether to others, or to oneself), as opposed to > living that perezhivanie. Especially if the attempt to capture/represent > one's own perezhivanie is, perhaps, also central to the living of it? > > 2) What is the nature of the relationship between perezhivanie and force, > either in terms of the internal process or in terms of how it finally > "ends"? (Not to mention, how it begins). It would seem that in both > conceptions discussed in the article there is a certain intensity required. > But does this in some cases require something more explosive - and does > Vasilyuk's conception of perezhivanie as activity speak more to this > possibility? And how do we reconcile this with the less "forceful" notion > of enduring, revisiting, and working through? > > On Monday, January 2, 2017, mike cole wrote: > >> The pieces of brick thrown up by this political hammering have not yet >> fallen and made the devastation personally experienced by the nation/world. >> >> Still, genuinely, we can wish all of us 7.3 billion well in the new year. >> >> So what do you think chuck, is this a good representation of perezhivanie? >> :-) >> Mike >> >> On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 11:24 AM Charles Bazerman < >> bazerman@education.ucsb.edu> wrote: >> >>> So you think 2017 has any hope of being any better? >>> >>> Chuck >>> >>> >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> >>> From: mike cole >>> >>> Date: Monday, January 2, 2017 11:01 am >>> >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] New Year's Perezhivanie >>> >>> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >>> >>> >>> >>>> With the New Year, as our Russian colleagues put it! >>>> This image forwarded from a friend more or less sums up my experience >>>> of >>>> the past year. Thought you might find it interesting too. >>>> Vis a vis the discussion of perezhivanie: Does this image provide us >> with >>>> used (re-presented) behavioral evidence of a person undergoing >>> perezhivanie? >>> >>>> Looking forward to the discussion. >>>> Feliz a?o nuevo! >>>> Mike >>> >>> >>> -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Roth & Jornet 2014 Toward a Theory of Experience.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 139168 bytes Desc: Roth & Jornet 2014 Toward a Theory of Experience.pdf Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20170106/5886e4c1/attachment.pdf From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Fri Jan 6 10:43:07 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2017 18:43:07 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: <1483724630007.83825@iped.uio.no> References: <586ae645.475a620a.84afb.9951@mx.google.com> , <25cde5c9-9e15-b7f4-6f4c-18f763423cbc@open.ac.uk> <1483715539761.38866@iped.uio.no>, <586fd3be.45da620a.2a730.8da3@mx.google.com>, <1483724630007.83825@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <1483728210180.41919@iped.uio.no> Concerning dictionary and perezhivanie, and more resources to follow the conversation: two introductory pieces for the special issue are available for download here: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039.2016.1201515 and here: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039.2016.1225310 Marc's paper can be downloaded here: http://lchc.ucsd.edu/mca/Vygotsky-Vasilyuk_Perezhivanie.pdf and should be open access as soon as T&F responds to our requests. Front matters/abstracts for all other articles in the issue can be found here: http://www.tandfonline.com/toc/hmca20/23/4?nav=tocList Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil Sent: 06 January 2017 18:43 To: lpscholar2@gmail.com; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie Larry, great additions, but why writing "trans/hivanie" when we have a number of resources to be aware of the etymological roots of perezhivanie? One such resource is in Andy Blunden's article in the special issue. Another is an earlier paper Michael and myself co-authored a few years ago and which you can find attached. I quote from the paper: "Experience (perezhivanie) in its original sense?in English and Russian as well as in the French exp?er ience or the German equivalent Erfahr ung?suggests that in contrast to the repetition of something, experience is related to travel, traversal, peril, risk, and change. The Proto-Indo-European root per(e) -denotes the verbs to try, dare, and risk, put oneself in danger; as such, it also made it into suchwords as exper iment (Greek pe??rama, experiment) and perilous." Alfredo ________________________________ From: lpscholar2@gmail.com Sent: 06 January 2017 18:27 To: Alfredo Jornet Gil; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: RE: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie Rob, and Christopher, and Alfreda, and Marc, This is an interesting reference to Nozick and achieving an experience without struggle. I want to refocus us on how this insight is an extension to Christopher?s posting. In particular the opening paragraph. The image of smashing to bits the bricks is wrapped up in the end moment of trans/hivanie. SO the focus on what occurs before this end point central to Christopher?s question : ?but is this how trans/hivanie works?? AND Christopher answers by focusing on the : ?extended back and forth, the REPEATED back and forth, the (living-through) that seems to be exemplary of trans/hivanie. Marc says it is ?this? phenomena that brought him to trans/hivanie and not the other way around. What is occurring within the ?repetition? being lived through. As an aside Nozick turned to eastern philosophy from the Indian subcontinent for deeper inspiration. I could add more if interest warrants (possibly another thread). ALSO, i recommend going to page 27 of Bella?s article (that Peter posted) to get a sense of Vygotsky?s extended repeated (living through) of the Jewish question that he was writing extensively about in 1916. On that page Bella refers to two articles Vygotsky wrote on this theme. One was in a (literary) mode while the other was written in a (psychological) mode. Trans/hivanie at work implicitly as formative of the later Vygotsky. This topic, as Bella images as spaghetti tangles. In Vygotsky?s own words from 1916 on the incomprehensible riddle-like companion of Jewish history as : ?riddle-like, inexplicability, the MYSTERY of Isreal .... eternal fellow traveler of the eternal people, the SECRET of the eternity of the Jewish people? To further this strand we should possibly keep distinct from this month?s article. However the theme of ?repetition? that had the mood of profound struggle or at a deeper level a mood of no movement and closed off, is the process occuring which maybat some point in time erupt as smashing 2016 to bits and bricks scattering as an act of ?deconstruction? that i believe can loose the reality of what came before, starting with Bella?s zero stage that is (existential). A time when the person traversing the zero stage should be ?recognized? through moral/ethical care and concern. Not a journey of (mineness) through Heidegger which is a protesting protestant approach, but through mitsein as living-through. I hope my referencing multiple speakers but trying to stay within strands is clear? Perezhivanie as trans/hivanie as Marc says is approached through multiple pluaristic traditions that are psychological, literary, and philosophical and extend through historical consciousness as the living-through repetitive back and forth traversal that INCLUDES as central the PAUSE or MA or INTERVAL or GAP. Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Alfredo Jornet Gil Sent: January 6, 2017 7:17 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie Rob, how appropriate the thought experiment! Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of R.J.S.Parsons Sent: 06 January 2017 15:41 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie In thinking about "experience as struggle", I found myself considering Nozick's thought experiment of the experience machine, which he uses to explore the issue of ethical hedonism.* Consider a machine which could stimulate a person's brain to induce pleasurable experiences that the subject could not distinguish from those he would have apart from the machine. Nozick then asks, if given the choice, would we prefer the machine to real life? (this description from Wikipedia). It strikes me that the experience delivered by the machine is experience without struggle. There is no activity from the subject, meaning making is not necessary, and therefore there is no development. Clara quotes Vygotsky "A perezhivanie is a unit where, on the one hand, in an indivisible state, the environment is represented, i.e. that which is being experienced?a perezhivanie is always related to something which is found outside the person?and on the other hand, what is represented is how I, myself, am experiencing this," - the thought experiment breaks the unit, and in doing so, I think, demonstrates how important its existence as a unit is. *Also brilliantly explored in the "Total Immersion Video game" in Red Dwarf Season 5 episode 6 Back To Reality. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2IzX6b1YJHI Rob On 03/01/2017 17:37, Christopher Schuck wrote: > It's an interesting question (about the brick and perezhivanie), partly > because that extended, "living-through", repeated doubling-back process > evoked by the Vygotskian sense of the concept would seem to be at odds with > a single, discrete act of "smashing" that is immediate, forceful and even > violent. It would suggest that part of what perezhivanie means is wrapped > up in the symbolic marking of its end - and that this end, when it comes, > can be forceful. Certainly, the image could not be more unified and > embodying of a particular set of meaningful experiences. But is that how > perezhivanie works? This leads me to ask: > > 1) what are the problems and contradictions encountered in using particular > metaphors to depict perezhivanie, where perezhivanie is itself so defined > by imagination and narrativity? Part of this might also be a question of > what it means to describe and represent one's own perezhivanie > figuratively/narratively (whether to others, or to oneself), as opposed to > living that perezhivanie. Especially if the attempt to capture/represent > one's own perezhivanie is, perhaps, also central to the living of it? > > 2) What is the nature of the relationship between perezhivanie and force, > either in terms of the internal process or in terms of how it finally > "ends"? (Not to mention, how it begins). It would seem that in both > conceptions discussed in the article there is a certain intensity required. > But does this in some cases require something more explosive - and does > Vasilyuk's conception of perezhivanie as activity speak more to this > possibility? And how do we reconcile this with the less "forceful" notion > of enduring, revisiting, and working through? > > On Monday, January 2, 2017, mike cole wrote: > >> The pieces of brick thrown up by this political hammering have not yet >> fallen and made the devastation personally experienced by the nation/world. >> >> Still, genuinely, we can wish all of us 7.3 billion well in the new year. >> >> So what do you think chuck, is this a good representation of perezhivanie? >> :-) >> Mike >> >> On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 11:24 AM Charles Bazerman < >> bazerman@education.ucsb.edu> wrote: >> >>> So you think 2017 has any hope of being any better? >>> >>> Chuck >>> >>> >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> >>> From: mike cole >>> >>> Date: Monday, January 2, 2017 11:01 am >>> >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] New Year's Perezhivanie >>> >>> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >>> >>> >>> >>>> With the New Year, as our Russian colleagues put it! >>>> This image forwarded from a friend more or less sums up my experience >>>> of >>>> the past year. Thought you might find it interesting too. >>>> Vis a vis the discussion of perezhivanie: Does this image provide us >> with >>>> used (re-presented) behavioral evidence of a person undergoing >>> perezhivanie? >>> >>>> Looking forward to the discussion. >>>> Feliz a?o nuevo! >>>> Mike >>> >>> >>> From mcole@ucsd.edu Fri Jan 6 11:02:32 2017 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2017 11:02:32 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: References: <586ae645.475a620a.84afb.9951@mx.google.com> <25cde5c9-9e15-b7f4-6f4c-18f763423cbc@open.ac.uk> Message-ID: All- I suggest that those following the perezhivanie discussion check out the materials from the special issue that Alfredo just posted. This material provides an explanation of why we went to all of the trouble we did in creating the special issue and some rough guide posts, such as a dictionary definition from an appropriate Russian dictionary and other relevant context for Marc's article. I was composing the following message when I got the links from Alfredo. I hope this adds to the coherence of the conversation that Larry mentions as a problem. It IS a problem. This is a really difficult issue for distinguishing between disagreements and misunderstandings. !! **** Rob-- Thanks for all of that. Regarding your second question: 2) What is the nature of the relationship between perezhivanie and force, > either in terms of the internal process or in terms of how it finally > "ends"? (Not to mention, how it begins). It would seem that in both > conceptions discussed in the article there is a certain intensity required. > But does this in some cases require something more explosive - and does > Vasilyuk's conception of perezhivanie as activity speak more to this > possibility? And how do we reconcile this with the less "forceful" notion > of enduring, revisiting, and working through? One of the ways in which one can use pererzhivanie in Russian is illustrated by the following sentence I heard often as a post-doc in the dorm out on what was then Lenin Hills. "I just perezhil the 111 bus ride" The 111 bus from the Department of Psychology to the dorm was incredibly crowded at its first stop near the Kremlin all the way to the University. Think of the Tokyo subway at rush hour but everyone wearing heavy fur and wool against the cold in a rickety bus. It required a LOT of force to get from the Department to the dorm without freezing to death. Everyone was plenty warm when the bus pulled up to the building. In *that* context, where people know/have themselves experience, the conditions being referred to, I think perezhil (past tense verb form) meant "I survived the 111 bus." That may be a low level example in your terms, and it is certainly not like the discovery that your wife and children have been murdered and you have to live through, survive. THAT sort of a discontinuity in your life/experience (perezhivanie) may indeed require a good deal of activity, which of course ensues in Macbeth. Its a struggle called war. *** A general comment about reading the Vasiliuk of the 1980's as the contemporary Vasiliuk. David makes the comment that Vasiliuk does not talk about Vygotsky. The 1980's were a period in which a number of the Russian Vygotskians were under great (political) pressure and Leontiev's version of his writings was taking as authoritative. Reference to LSV was circumscribed in a lot of public settings, like books and journal articles and access to people. Pentti- Are there recent articles in English by Fedor Vasiliuk you could recommend form JREEP? mike On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 6:49 AM, R.J.S.Parsons wrote: > And this machine thinks I'm a fraud. Hmmm. Perhaps it knows more than I > do !?!?!? > > Rob > > On 06/01/2017 14:41, R.J.S.Parsons wrote: > > [This sender failed our fraud detection checks and may not be who they > appear to be. Learn about spoofing at http://aka.ms/LearnAboutSpoofing] > > > > In thinking about "experience as struggle", I found myself considering > > Nozick's thought experiment of the experience machine, which he uses to > > explore the issue of ethical hedonism.* Consider a machine which could > > stimulate a person's brain to induce pleasurable experiences that the > > subject could not distinguish from those he would have apart from the > > machine. Nozick then asks, if given the choice, would we prefer the > > machine to real life? (this description from Wikipedia). It strikes me > > that the experience delivered by the machine is experience without > > struggle. There is no activity from the subject, meaning making is not > > necessary, and therefore there is no development. > > > > Clara quotes Vygotsky "A perezhivanie is a unit where, on the one hand, > > in an indivisible state, the environment is represented, i.e. that which > > is being experienced?a perezhivanie is always related to something which > > is found outside the person?and on the other hand, what is represented > > is how I, myself, am experiencing this," - the thought experiment breaks > > the unit, and in doing so, I think, demonstrates how important its > > existence as a unit is. > > > > *Also brilliantly explored in the "Total Immersion Video game" in Red > > Dwarf Season 5 episode 6 Back To Reality. > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2IzX6b1YJHI > > > > Rob > > > > On 03/01/2017 17:37, Christopher Schuck wrote: > >> It's an interesting question (about the brick and perezhivanie), partly > >> because that extended, "living-through", repeated doubling-back process > >> evoked by the Vygotskian sense of the concept would seem to be at odds > with > >> a single, discrete act of "smashing" that is immediate, forceful and > even > >> violent. It would suggest that part of what perezhivanie means is > wrapped > >> up in the symbolic marking of its end - and that this end, when it > comes, > >> can be forceful. Certainly, the image could not be more unified and > >> embodying of a particular set of meaningful experiences. But is that how > >> perezhivanie works? This leads me to ask: > >> > >> 1) what are the problems and contradictions encountered in using > particular > >> metaphors to depict perezhivanie, where perezhivanie is itself so > defined > >> by imagination and narrativity? Part of this might also be a question of > >> what it means to describe and represent one's own perezhivanie > >> figuratively/narratively (whether to others, or to oneself), as opposed > to > >> living that perezhivanie. Especially if the attempt to capture/represent > >> one's own perezhivanie is, perhaps, also central to the living of it? > >> > >> 2) What is the nature of the relationship between perezhivanie and > force, > >> either in terms of the internal process or in terms of how it finally > >> "ends"? (Not to mention, how it begins). It would seem that in both > >> conceptions discussed in the article there is a certain intensity > required. > >> But does this in some cases require something more explosive - and does > >> Vasilyuk's conception of perezhivanie as activity speak more to this > >> possibility? And how do we reconcile this with the less "forceful" > notion > >> of enduring, revisiting, and working through? > >> > >> On Monday, January 2, 2017, mike cole wrote: > >> > >>> The pieces of brick thrown up by this political hammering have not yet > >>> fallen and made the devastation personally experienced by the > nation/world. > >>> > >>> Still, genuinely, we can wish all of us 7.3 billion well in the new > year. > >>> > >>> So what do you think chuck, is this a good representation of > perezhivanie? > >>> :-) > >>> Mike > >>> > >>> On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 11:24 AM Charles Bazerman < > >>> bazerman@education.ucsb.edu> wrote: > >>> > >>>> So you think 2017 has any hope of being any better? > >>>> > >>>> Chuck > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> ----- Original Message ----- > >>>> > >>>> From: mike cole > >>>> > >>>> Date: Monday, January 2, 2017 11:01 am > >>>> > >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] New Year's Perezhivanie > >>>> > >>>> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> With the New Year, as our Russian colleagues put it! > >>>>> This image forwarded from a friend more or less sums up my experience > >>>>> of > >>>>> the past year. Thought you might find it interesting too. > >>>>> Vis a vis the discussion of perezhivanie: Does this image provide us > >>> with > >>>>> used (re-presented) behavioral evidence of a person undergoing > >>>> perezhivanie? > >>>> > >>>>> Looking forward to the discussion. > >>>>> Feliz a?o nuevo! > >>>>> Mike > >>>> > >>>> > > From marc.clara@gmail.com Fri Jan 6 11:36:31 2017 From: marc.clara@gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Marc_Clar=C3=A0?=) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2017 20:36:31 +0100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: References: <586ae645.475a620a.84afb.9951@mx.google.com> <25cde5c9-9e15-b7f4-6f4c-18f763423cbc@open.ac.uk> Message-ID: Hi, all, Just to complement Mike's last comment (and also in relation with the issue of cultural mediation), let me cite a fragment of Vasilyuk's "The Psychology of Experiencing" (1984, p.175): "But merely to state that experiencing processes have a historical basis is hardly the end of the matter. A psychological, properly speaking, approach to the problem would be to apply to the analysis of experiencing the general schema for all socio-historical determination of human psychology which L.S. Vygotsky and his pupils have already tried to produce, using a variety of psychological materials (139; 142: 158; 246; 250 etc.); that is, to understand experiencing as a process mediated by "psychological tools" (246) which are artificial formations, social in nature (ibid.), taken up and internalised by the subject in the course of communication with other people." Best regards, Marc. 2017-01-06 20:02 GMT+01:00 mike cole : > All- > > I suggest that those following the perezhivanie discussion check out the > materials from the special issue that Alfredo just posted. This material > provides an explanation of why we went to all of the trouble we did in > creating the special issue and some rough guide posts, such as a dictionary > definition from an appropriate Russian dictionary and other relevant > context for Marc's article. > > I was composing the following message when I got the links from > Alfredo. I hope this adds to the coherence of the conversation that Larry > mentions as a problem. It IS a problem. This is a really difficult issue > for distinguishing between disagreements and misunderstandings. !! > > **** > Rob-- Thanks for all of that. Regarding your second question: > > 2) What is the nature of the relationship between perezhivanie and force, > > either in terms of the internal process or in terms of how it finally > > "ends"? (Not to mention, how it begins). It would seem that in both > > conceptions discussed in the article there is a certain intensity > required. > > But does this in some cases require something more explosive - and does > > Vasilyuk's conception of perezhivanie as activity speak more to this > > possibility? And how do we reconcile this with the less "forceful" notion > > of enduring, revisiting, and working through? > > One of the ways in which one can use pererzhivanie in Russian is > illustrated by the following sentence I heard often as a post-doc in the > dorm out on what was then Lenin Hills. "I just perezhil the 111 bus ride" > > The 111 bus from the Department of Psychology to the dorm was incredibly > crowded at its first stop near the Kremlin all the way to the University. > Think of the Tokyo subway at rush hour but everyone wearing heavy fur and > wool against the cold in a rickety bus. It required a LOT of force to get > from the Department to the dorm without freezing to death. Everyone was > plenty warm when the bus pulled up to the building. > > In *that* context, where people know/have themselves experience, the > conditions being referred to, I think perezhil (past tense verb form) meant > "I survived the 111 bus." That may be a low level example in your terms, > and it is certainly not like the discovery that your wife and children have > been murdered and you have to live through, survive. THAT sort of a > discontinuity in your life/experience (perezhivanie) may indeed require a > good deal of activity, which of course ensues in Macbeth. Its a struggle > called war. > *** > A general comment about reading the Vasiliuk of the 1980's as the > contemporary Vasiliuk. David makes the comment that Vasiliuk does not talk > about Vygotsky. The 1980's were a period in which a number of the Russian > Vygotskians were under great (political) pressure and Leontiev's version of > his writings was taking as authoritative. Reference to LSV was > circumscribed in a lot of public settings, like books and journal articles > and access to people. > > Pentti- Are there recent articles in English by Fedor Vasiliuk you could > recommend form JREEP? > > mike > > On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 6:49 AM, R.J.S.Parsons > wrote: > > > And this machine thinks I'm a fraud. Hmmm. Perhaps it knows more than I > > do !?!?!? > > > > Rob > > > > On 06/01/2017 14:41, R.J.S.Parsons wrote: > > > [This sender failed our fraud detection checks and may not be who they > > appear to be. Learn about spoofing at http://aka.ms/LearnAboutSpoofing] > > > > > > In thinking about "experience as struggle", I found myself considering > > > Nozick's thought experiment of the experience machine, which he uses to > > > explore the issue of ethical hedonism.* Consider a machine which could > > > stimulate a person's brain to induce pleasurable experiences that the > > > subject could not distinguish from those he would have apart from the > > > machine. Nozick then asks, if given the choice, would we prefer the > > > machine to real life? (this description from Wikipedia). It strikes me > > > that the experience delivered by the machine is experience without > > > struggle. There is no activity from the subject, meaning making is not > > > necessary, and therefore there is no development. > > > > > > Clara quotes Vygotsky "A perezhivanie is a unit where, on the one hand, > > > in an indivisible state, the environment is represented, i.e. that > which > > > is being experienced?a perezhivanie is always related to something > which > > > is found outside the person?and on the other hand, what is represented > > > is how I, myself, am experiencing this," - the thought experiment > breaks > > > the unit, and in doing so, I think, demonstrates how important its > > > existence as a unit is. > > > > > > *Also brilliantly explored in the "Total Immersion Video game" in Red > > > Dwarf Season 5 episode 6 Back To Reality. > > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2IzX6b1YJHI > > > > > > Rob > > > > > > On 03/01/2017 17:37, Christopher Schuck wrote: > > >> It's an interesting question (about the brick and perezhivanie), > partly > > >> because that extended, "living-through", repeated doubling-back > process > > >> evoked by the Vygotskian sense of the concept would seem to be at odds > > with > > >> a single, discrete act of "smashing" that is immediate, forceful and > > even > > >> violent. It would suggest that part of what perezhivanie means is > > wrapped > > >> up in the symbolic marking of its end - and that this end, when it > > comes, > > >> can be forceful. Certainly, the image could not be more unified and > > >> embodying of a particular set of meaningful experiences. But is that > how > > >> perezhivanie works? This leads me to ask: > > >> > > >> 1) what are the problems and contradictions encountered in using > > particular > > >> metaphors to depict perezhivanie, where perezhivanie is itself so > > defined > > >> by imagination and narrativity? Part of this might also be a question > of > > >> what it means to describe and represent one's own perezhivanie > > >> figuratively/narratively (whether to others, or to oneself), as > opposed > > to > > >> living that perezhivanie. Especially if the attempt to > capture/represent > > >> one's own perezhivanie is, perhaps, also central to the living of it? > > >> > > >> 2) What is the nature of the relationship between perezhivanie and > > force, > > >> either in terms of the internal process or in terms of how it finally > > >> "ends"? (Not to mention, how it begins). It would seem that in both > > >> conceptions discussed in the article there is a certain intensity > > required. > > >> But does this in some cases require something more explosive - and > does > > >> Vasilyuk's conception of perezhivanie as activity speak more to this > > >> possibility? And how do we reconcile this with the less "forceful" > > notion > > >> of enduring, revisiting, and working through? > > >> > > >> On Monday, January 2, 2017, mike cole wrote: > > >> > > >>> The pieces of brick thrown up by this political hammering have not > yet > > >>> fallen and made the devastation personally experienced by the > > nation/world. > > >>> > > >>> Still, genuinely, we can wish all of us 7.3 billion well in the new > > year. > > >>> > > >>> So what do you think chuck, is this a good representation of > > perezhivanie? > > >>> :-) > > >>> Mike > > >>> > > >>> On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 11:24 AM Charles Bazerman < > > >>> bazerman@education.ucsb.edu> wrote: > > >>> > > >>>> So you think 2017 has any hope of being any better? > > >>>> > > >>>> Chuck > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> ----- Original Message ----- > > >>>> > > >>>> From: mike cole > > >>>> > > >>>> Date: Monday, January 2, 2017 11:01 am > > >>>> > > >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] New Year's Perezhivanie > > >>>> > > >>>> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>>> With the New Year, as our Russian colleagues put it! > > >>>>> This image forwarded from a friend more or less sums up my > experience > > >>>>> of > > >>>>> the past year. Thought you might find it interesting too. > > >>>>> Vis a vis the discussion of perezhivanie: Does this image provide > us > > >>> with > > >>>>> used (re-presented) behavioral evidence of a person undergoing > > >>>> perezhivanie? > > >>>> > > >>>>> Looking forward to the discussion. > > >>>>> Feliz a?o nuevo! > > >>>>> Mike > > >>>> > > >>>> > > > > > From lpscholar2@gmail.com Fri Jan 6 11:34:53 2017 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2017 11:34:53 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: <1483724630007.83825@iped.uio.no> References: <586ae645.475a620a.84afb.9951@mx.google.com> , <25cde5c9-9e15-b7f4-6f4c-18f763423cbc@open.ac.uk> <1483715539761.38866@iped.uio.no>, <586fd3be.45da620a.2a730.8da3@mx.google.com> <1483724630007.83825@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <586ff180.d440620a.53966.b21e@mx.google.com> Alfredo, My reasons were to generate just this sort of response. You are very clear and have worked through the nuances of this term. I was still vague. With this addition which i will print out as TRANS/ lation i no longer need to stay with trans/hivanie. It was my way of creating a TRANSitional object to guide me on my journey or path through this topic. Thanks for this clarification ;- ) Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Alfredo Jornet Gil Sent: January 6, 2017 9:43 AM To: lpscholar2@gmail.com; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: Re: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie Larry, great?additions,?but why writing "trans/hivanie" when we have a number of resources to be aware of the etymological roots of perezhivanie? One such resource is in Andy Blunden's article in the special issue. Another is an earlier paper Michael and myself co-authored?a few years ago and which?you can find attached. I quote from the paper:? "Experience (perezhivanie) in its?original sense?in English and Russian as well as in the French exp?er ience or the German?equivalent Erfahr ung?suggests that in contrast to the repetition of something, experience?is related to travel, traversal, peril, risk, and change. The Proto-Indo-European root per(e) -denotes the verbs to try, dare, and risk, put oneself in danger; as such, it also made it into?suchwords as exper iment (Greek pe??rama,? experiment) and perilous." Alfredo ? From: lpscholar2@gmail.com Sent: 06 January 2017 18:27 To: Alfredo Jornet Gil; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: RE: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie ? Rob, and Christopher, and Alfreda, and Marc, This is an interesting reference to Nozick and achieving an experience without struggle. I want to refocus us on how this insight is an extension to Christopher?s posting. In particular the opening paragraph. The image of smashing to bits the bricks is wrapped up in the end moment of trans/hivanie. SO the focus on what occurs before this end point central to Christopher?s question?: ?but is this how trans/hivanie works?? AND Christopher answers by focusing on the?: ?extended back and forth, the REPEATED back and forth, the (living-through) that seems to be exemplary of trans/hivanie. ? Marc says it is ?this? phenomena that brought him to trans/hivanie and not the other way around. What is occurring within the ?repetition? being lived through. As an aside Nozick turned to eastern philosophy from the ?Indian subcontinent for deeper inspiration. I could add more if interest warrants (possibly another thread). ? ALSO, i recommend going to page 27 of Bella?s article (that Peter posted) to get a sense of Vygotsky?s extended repeated (living through) of the Jewish question that he was writing extensively about in 1916. On that page Bella refers to two articles Vygotsky wrote on this theme. One was in a (literary) mode while the other was written in a (psychological) mode. Trans/hivanie at work implicitly as formative of the later Vygotsky. This topic, as Bella images as spaghetti tangles. In Vygotsky?s own words from 1916?on the incomprehensible riddle-like companion of Jewish history?as?: ? ?riddle-like, inexplicability, the MYSTERY of Isreal ....?? eternal fellow traveler of the eternal people, the SECRET of the eternity of the Jewish people? ? To further this strand we should possibly keep distinct from this month?s article. However the theme of ?repetition? that had the mood of profound struggle or at a deeper level a mood of no movement and closed off, is the process occuring which maybat some point in time erupt as smashing 2016 to bits and bricks scattering as an act of ?deconstruction? that i believe can loose the reality of what came before, starting with Bella?s zero stage that is ?(existential). A time when the person traversing the zero stage should be ?recognized? through moral/ethical care and concern. Not a journey of (mineness) through Heidegger which is a protesting protestant approach, but through mitsein as living-through. I hope my referencing multiple speakers but trying to stay within strands is clear? Perezhivanie as trans/hivanie as Marc says is approached through multiple pluaristic traditions that are psychological, literary, and philosophical and extend through historical consciousness as the living-through repetitive back and forth traversal that INCLUDES as central the PAUSE or MA or INTERVAL or GAP. ? ? ? ? ? Sent from my Windows 10 phone ? From: Alfredo Jornet Gil Sent: January 6, 2017 7:17 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie ? Rob, how appropriate the thought experiment! Alfredo ? ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of R.J.S.Parsons Sent: 06 January 2017 15:41 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie ? In thinking about "experience as struggle", I found myself considering Nozick's thought experiment of the experience machine, which he uses to explore the issue of ethical hedonism.* Consider a machine which could stimulate a person's brain to induce pleasurable experiences that the subject could not distinguish from those he would have apart from the machine. Nozick then asks, if given the choice, would we prefer the machine to real life? (this description from Wikipedia). It strikes me that the experience delivered by the machine is experience without struggle. There is no activity from the subject, meaning making is not necessary, and therefore there is no development. ? Clara quotes Vygotsky "A perezhivanie is a unit where, on the one hand, in an indivisible state, the environment is represented, i.e. that which is being experienced?a perezhivanie is always related to something which is found outside the person?and on the other hand, what is represented is how I, myself, am experiencing this," - the thought experiment breaks the unit, and in doing so, I think, demonstrates how important its existence as a unit is. ? *Also brilliantly explored in the "Total Immersion Video game" in Red Dwarf Season 5 episode 6 Back To Reality. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2IzX6b1YJHI ? Rob ? On 03/01/2017 17:37, Christopher Schuck wrote: > It's an interesting question (about the brick and perezhivanie), partly > because that extended, "living-through", repeated doubling-back process > evoked by the Vygotskian sense of the concept would seem to be at odds with > a single, discrete act of "smashing" that is immediate, forceful and even > violent. It would suggest that part of what perezhivanie means is wrapped > up in the symbolic marking of its end - and that this end, when it comes, > can be forceful. Certainly, the image could not be more unified and > embodying of a particular set of meaningful experiences. But is that how > perezhivanie works? This leads me to ask: >? > 1) what are the problems and contradictions encountered in using particular > metaphors to depict perezhivanie, where perezhivanie is itself so defined > by imagination and narrativity? Part of this might also be a question of > what it means to describe and represent one's own perezhivanie > figuratively/narratively (whether to others, or to oneself), as opposed to > living that perezhivanie. Especially if the attempt to capture/represent > one's own perezhivanie is, perhaps, also central to the living of it? >? >?? 2) What is the nature of the relationship between perezhivanie and force, > either in terms of the internal process or in terms of how it finally > "ends"?? (Not to mention, how it begins). It would seem that in both > conceptions discussed in the article there is a certain intensity required. > But does this in some cases require something more explosive - and does > Vasilyuk's conception of perezhivanie as activity speak more to this > possibility? And how do we reconcile this with the less "forceful" notion > of enduring, revisiting, and working through? >? > On Monday, January 2, 2017, mike cole wrote: >? >> The pieces of brick thrown up by this political hammering have not yet >> fallen and made the devastation personally experienced by the nation/world. >>? >> Still, genuinely, we can wish all of us 7.3 billion well in the new year. >>? >> So what do you think chuck, is this a good representation of perezhivanie? >> :-) >> Mike >>? >> On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 11:24 AM Charles Bazerman < >> bazerman@education.ucsb.edu> wrote: >>? >>> So you think 2017 has any hope of being any better? >>>? >>> Chuck >>>? >>>? >>>? >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>? >>> From: mike cole >>>? >>> Date: Monday, January 2, 2017 11:01 am >>>? >>> Subject: [Xmca-l]? New Year's Perezhivanie >>>? >>> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >>>? >>>? >>>? >>>> With the New Year, as our Russian colleagues put it! >>>> This image forwarded from a friend more or less sums up my experience >>>> of >>>> the past year. Thought you might find it interesting too. >>>> Vis a vis the discussion of perezhivanie: Does this image provide us >> with >>>> used (re-presented) behavioral evidence of a person undergoing >>> perezhivanie? >>>? >>>> Looking forward to the discussion. >>>> Feliz a?o nuevo! >>>> Mike >>>? >>>? >>>? ? ? ? -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: D0D8FA6C0F5142C087204F2B169853C2.png Type: image/png Size: 234 bytes Desc: not available Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20170106/2a6defb7/attachment.png From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Fri Jan 6 11:44:32 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2017 19:44:32 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: <586ff180.d440620a.53966.b21e@mx.google.com> References: <586ae645.475a620a.84afb.9951@mx.google.com> , <25cde5c9-9e15-b7f4-6f4c-18f763423cbc@open.ac.uk> <1483715539761.38866@iped.uio.no>, <586fd3be.45da620a.2a730.8da3@mx.google.com> <1483724630007.83825@iped.uio.no>, <586ff180.d440620a.53966.b21e@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <1483731896800.62654@iped.uio.no> ?Great, thanks for that Larry! A ________________________________ From: lpscholar2@gmail.com Sent: 06 January 2017 20:34 To: Alfredo Jornet Gil; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: RE: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie Alfredo, My reasons were to generate just this sort of response. You are very clear and have worked through the nuances of this term. I was still vague. With this addition which i will print out as TRANS/ lation i no longer need to stay with trans/hivanie. It was my way of creating a TRANSitional object to guide me on my journey or path through this topic. Thanks for this clarification ;- ) Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Alfredo Jornet Gil Sent: January 6, 2017 9:43 AM To: lpscholar2@gmail.com; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: Re: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie Larry, great additions, but why writing "trans/hivanie" when we have a number of resources to be aware of the etymological roots of perezhivanie? One such resource is in Andy Blunden's article in the special issue. Another is an earlier paper Michael and myself co-authored a few years ago and which you can find attached. I quote from the paper: "Experience (perezhivanie) in its original sense?in English and Russian as well as in the French exp?er ience or the German equivalent Erfahr ung?suggests that in contrast to the repetition of something, experience is related to travel, traversal, peril, risk, and change. The Proto-Indo-European root per(e) -denotes the verbs to try, dare, and risk, put oneself in danger; as such, it also made it into suchwords as exper iment (Greek pe??rama, experiment) and perilous." Alfredo From: lpscholar2@gmail.com Sent: 06 January 2017 18:27 To: Alfredo Jornet Gil; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: RE: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie Rob, and Christopher, and Alfreda, and Marc, This is an interesting reference to Nozick and achieving an experience without struggle. I want to refocus us on how this insight is an extension to Christopher?s posting. In particular the opening paragraph. The image of smashing to bits the bricks is wrapped up in the end moment of trans/hivanie. SO the focus on what occurs before this end point central to Christopher?s question : ?but is this how trans/hivanie works?? AND Christopher answers by focusing on the : ?extended back and forth, the REPEATED back and forth, the (living-through) that seems to be exemplary of trans/hivanie. Marc says it is ?this? phenomena that brought him to trans/hivanie and not the other way around. What is occurring within the ?repetition? being lived through. As an aside Nozick turned to eastern philosophy from the Indian subcontinent for deeper inspiration. I could add more if interest warrants (possibly another thread). ALSO, i recommend going to page 27 of Bella?s article (that Peter posted) to get a sense of Vygotsky?s extended repeated (living through) of the Jewish question that he was writing extensively about in 1916. On that page Bella refers to two articles Vygotsky wrote on this theme. One was in a (literary) mode while the other was written in a (psychological) mode. Trans/hivanie at work implicitly as formative of the later Vygotsky. This topic, as Bella images as spaghetti tangles. In Vygotsky?s own words from 1916 on the incomprehensible riddle-like companion of Jewish history as : ?riddle-like, inexplicability, the MYSTERY of Isreal .... eternal fellow traveler of the eternal people, the SECRET of the eternity of the Jewish people? To further this strand we should possibly keep distinct from this month?s article. However the theme of ?repetition? that had the mood of profound struggle or at a deeper level a mood of no movement and closed off, is the process occuring which maybat some point in time erupt as smashing 2016 to bits and bricks scattering as an act of ?deconstruction? that i believe can loose the reality of what came before, starting with Bella?s zero stage that is (existential). A time when the person traversing the zero stage should be ?recognized? through moral/ethical care and concern. Not a journey of (mineness) through Heidegger which is a protesting protestant approach, but through mitsein as living-through. I hope my referencing multiple speakers but trying to stay within strands is clear? Perezhivanie as trans/hivanie as Marc says is approached through multiple pluaristic traditions that are psychological, literary, and philosophical and extend through historical consciousness as the living-through repetitive back and forth traversal that INCLUDES as central the PAUSE or MA or INTERVAL or GAP. Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Alfredo Jornet Gil Sent: January 6, 2017 7:17 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie Rob, how appropriate the thought experiment! Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of R.J.S.Parsons Sent: 06 January 2017 15:41 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie In thinking about "experience as struggle", I found myself considering Nozick's thought experiment of the experience machine, which he uses to explore the issue of ethical hedonism.* Consider a machine which could stimulate a person's brain to induce pleasurable experiences that the subject could not distinguish from those he would have apart from the machine. Nozick then asks, if given the choice, would we prefer the machine to real life? (this description from Wikipedia). It strikes me that the experience delivered by the machine is experience without struggle. There is no activity from the subject, meaning making is not necessary, and therefore there is no development. Clara quotes Vygotsky "A perezhivanie is a unit where, on the one hand, in an indivisible state, the environment is represented, i.e. that which is being experienced?a perezhivanie is always related to something which is found outside the person?and on the other hand, what is represented is how I, myself, am experiencing this," - the thought experiment breaks the unit, and in doing so, I think, demonstrates how important its existence as a unit is. *Also brilliantly explored in the "Total Immersion Video game" in Red Dwarf Season 5 episode 6 Back To Reality. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2IzX6b1YJHI Rob On 03/01/2017 17:37, Christopher Schuck wrote: > It's an interesting question (about the brick and perezhivanie), partly > because that extended, "living-through", repeated doubling-back process > evoked by the Vygotskian sense of the concept would seem to be at odds with > a single, discrete act of "smashing" that is immediate, forceful and even > violent. It would suggest that part of what perezhivanie means is wrapped > up in the symbolic marking of its end - and that this end, when it comes, > can be forceful. Certainly, the image could not be more unified and > embodying of a particular set of meaningful experiences. But is that how > perezhivanie works? This leads me to ask: > > 1) what are the problems and contradictions encountered in using particular > metaphors to depict perezhivanie, where perezhivanie is itself so defined > by imagination and narrativity? Part of this might also be a question of > what it means to describe and represent one's own perezhivanie > figuratively/narratively (whether to others, or to oneself), as opposed to > living that perezhivanie. Especially if the attempt to capture/represent > one's own perezhivanie is, perhaps, also central to the living of it? > > 2) What is the nature of the relationship between perezhivanie and force, > either in terms of the internal process or in terms of how it finally > "ends"? (Not to mention, how it begins). It would seem that in both > conceptions discussed in the article there is a certain intensity required. > But does this in some cases require something more explosive - and does > Vasilyuk's conception of perezhivanie as activity speak more to this > possibility? And how do we reconcile this with the less "forceful" notion > of enduring, revisiting, and working through? > > On Monday, January 2, 2017, mike cole wrote: > >> The pieces of brick thrown up by this political hammering have not yet >> fallen and made the devastation personally experienced by the nation/world. >> >> Still, genuinely, we can wish all of us 7.3 billion well in the new year. >> >> So what do you think chuck, is this a good representation of perezhivanie? >> :-) >> Mike >> >> On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 11:24 AM Charles Bazerman < >> bazerman@education.ucsb.edu> wrote: >> >>> So you think 2017 has any hope of being any better? >>> >>> Chuck >>> >>> >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> >>> From: mike cole >>> >>> Date: Monday, January 2, 2017 11:01 am >>> >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] New Year's Perezhivanie >>> >>> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >>> >>> >>> >>>> With the New Year, as our Russian colleagues put it! >>>> This image forwarded from a friend more or less sums up my experience >>>> of >>>> the past year. Thought you might find it interesting too. >>>> Vis a vis the discussion of perezhivanie: Does this image provide us >> with >>>> used (re-presented) behavioral evidence of a person undergoing >>> perezhivanie? >>> >>>> Looking forward to the discussion. >>>> Feliz a?o nuevo! >>>> Mike >>> >>> >>> -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: D0D8FA6C0F5142C087204F2B169853C2.png Type: image/png Size: 234 bytes Desc: D0D8FA6C0F5142C087204F2B169853C2.png Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20170106/f3dcbdee/attachment.png From lpscholar2@gmail.com Fri Jan 6 16:57:36 2017 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2017 16:57:36 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: <1483724630007.83825@iped.uio.no> References: <586ae645.475a620a.84afb.9951@mx.google.com> , <25cde5c9-9e15-b7f4-6f4c-18f763423cbc@open.ac.uk> <1483715539761.38866@iped.uio.no>, <586fd3be.45da620a.2a730.8da3@mx.google.com> <1483724630007.83825@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <58703d02.8bc2620a.7ee11.cf9b@mx.google.com> Alfredo, I have started reading through the article you have attached that you and Wolf-Michael Roth wrote together. I noticed an article referenced by J. Garrison [An Introduction to Dewey?s Theory of Functional ?trans-action?: An alternative paradigm for Activity Theory] in Mind Culture and Activity 2001. Is this article archived as open access? I believe Garrison may also contribute to my growing understanding of [experience and learning]. You reference this at a point in your paper [page 108] where you are discussing experience is in EXCESS of cognitive construction. [a tremendous excess of experience over intellectual subject matter]. This is a path worth travrlling along. Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From: Alfredo Jornet Gilthat experience is always in Sent: January 6, 2017 9:43 AM To: lpscholar2@gmail.com; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: Re: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie Larry, great?additions,?but why writing "trans/hivanie" when we have a number of resources to be aware of the etymological roots of perezhivanie? One such resource is in Andy Blunden's article in the special issue. Another is an earlier paper Michael and myself co-authored?a few years ago and which?you can find attached. I quote from the paper:? "Experience (perezhivanie) in its?original sense?in English and Russian as well as in the French exp?er ience or the German?equivalent Erfahr ung?suggests that in contrast to the repetition of something, experience?is related to travel, traversal, peril, risk, and change. The Proto-Indo-European root per(e) -denotes the verbs to try, dare, and risk, put oneself in danger; as such, it also made it into?suchwords as exper iment (Greek pe??rama,? experiment) and perilous." Alfredo ? From: lpscholar2@gmail.com Sent: 06 January 2017 18:27 To: Alfredo Jornet Gil; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: RE: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie ? Rob, and Christopher, and Alfreda, and Marc, This is an interesting reference to Nozick and achieving an experience without struggle. I want to refocus us on how this insight is an extension to Christopher?s posting. In particular the opening paragraph. The image of smashing to bits the bricks is wrapped up in the end moment of trans/hivanie. SO the focus on what occurs before this end point central to Christopher?s question?: ?but is this how trans/hivanie works?? AND Christopher answers by focusing on the?: ?extended back and forth, the REPEATED back and forth, the (living-through) that seems to be exemplary of trans/hivanie. ? Marc says it is ?this? phenomena that brought him to trans/hivanie and not the other way around. What is occurring within the ?repetition? being lived through. As an aside Nozick turned to eastern philosophy from the ?Indian subcontinent for deeper inspiration. I could add more if interest warrants (possibly another thread). ? ALSO, i recommend going to page 27 of Bella?s article (that Peter posted) to get a sense of Vygotsky?s extended repeated (living through) of the Jewish question that he was writing extensively about in 1916. On that page Bella refers to two articles Vygotsky wrote on this theme. One was in a (literary) mode while the other was written in a (psychological) mode. Trans/hivanie at work implicitly as formative of the later Vygotsky. This topic, as Bella images as spaghetti tangles. In Vygotsky?s own words from 1916?on the incomprehensible riddle-like companion of Jewish history?as?: ? ?riddle-like, inexplicability, the MYSTERY of Isreal ....?? eternal fellow traveler of the eternal people, the SECRET of the eternity of the Jewish people? ? To further this strand we should possibly keep distinct from this month?s article. However the theme of ?repetition? that had the mood of profound struggle or at a deeper level a mood of no movement and closed off, is the process occuring which maybat some point in time erupt as smashing 2016 to bits and bricks scattering as an act of ?deconstruction? that i believe can loose the reality of what came before, starting with Bella?s zero stage that is ?(existential). A time when the person traversing the zero stage should be ?recognized? through moral/ethical care and concern. Not a journey of (mineness) through Heidegger which is a protesting protestant approach, but through mitsein as living-through. I hope my referencing multiple speakers but trying to stay within strands is clear? Perezhivanie as trans/hivanie as Marc says is approached through multiple pluaristic traditions that are psychological, literary, and philosophical and extend through historical consciousness as the living-through repetitive back and forth traversal that INCLUDES as central the PAUSE or MA or INTERVAL or GAP. ? ? ? ? ? Sent from my Windows 10 phone ? From: Alfredo Jornet Gil Sent: January 6, 2017 7:17 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie ? Rob, how appropriate the thought experiment! Alfredo ? ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of R.J.S.Parsons Sent: 06 January 2017 15:41 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie ? In thinking about "experience as struggle", I found myself considering Nozick's thought experiment of the experience machine, which he uses to explore the issue of ethical hedonism.* Consider a machine which could stimulate a person's brain to induce pleasurable experiences that the subject could not distinguish from those he would have apart from the machine. Nozick then asks, if given the choice, would we prefer the machine to real life? (this description from Wikipedia). It strikes me that the experience delivered by the machine is experience without struggle. There is no activity from the subject, meaning making is not necessary, and therefore there is no development. ? Clara quotes Vygotsky "A perezhivanie is a unit where, on the one hand, in an indivisible state, the environment is represented, i.e. that which is being experienced?a perezhivanie is always related to something which is found outside the person?and on the other hand, what is represented is how I, myself, am experiencing this," - the thought experiment breaks the unit, and in doing so, I think, demonstrates how important its existence as a unit is. ? *Also brilliantly explored in the "Total Immersion Video game" in Red Dwarf Season 5 episode 6 Back To Reality. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2IzX6b1YJHI ? Rob ? On 03/01/2017 17:37, Christopher Schuck wrote: > It's an interesting question (about the brick and perezhivanie), partly > because that extended, "living-through", repeated doubling-back process > evoked by the Vygotskian sense of the concept would seem to be at odds with > a single, discrete act of "smashing" that is immediate, forceful and even > violent. It would suggest that part of what perezhivanie means is wrapped > up in the symbolic marking of its end - and that this end, when it comes, > can be forceful. Certainly, the image could not be more unified and > embodying of a particular set of meaningful experiences. But is that how > perezhivanie works? This leads me to ask: >? > 1) what are the problems and contradictions encountered in using particular > metaphors to depict perezhivanie, where perezhivanie is itself so defined > by imagination and narrativity? Part of this might also be a question of > what it means to describe and represent one's own perezhivanie > figuratively/narratively (whether to others, or to oneself), as opposed to > living that perezhivanie. Especially if the attempt to capture/represent > one's own perezhivanie is, perhaps, also central to the living of it? >? >?? 2) What is the nature of the relationship between perezhivanie and force, > either in terms of the internal process or in terms of how it finally > "ends"?? (Not to mention, how it begins). It would seem that in both > conceptions discussed in the article there is a certain intensity required. > But does this in some cases require something more explosive - and does > Vasilyuk's conception of perezhivanie as activity speak more to this > possibility? And how do we reconcile this with the less "forceful" notion > of enduring, revisiting, and working through? >? > On Monday, January 2, 2017, mike cole wrote: >? >> The pieces of brick thrown up by this political hammering have not yet >> fallen and made the devastation personally experienced by the nation/world. >>? >> Still, genuinely, we can wish all of us 7.3 billion well in the new year. >>? >> So what do you think chuck, is this a good representation of perezhivanie? >> :-) >> Mike >>? >> On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 11:24 AM Charles Bazerman < >> bazerman@education.ucsb.edu> wrote: >>? >>> So you think 2017 has any hope of being any better? >>>? >>> Chuck >>>? >>>? >>>? >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>? >>> From: mike cole >>>? >>> Date: Monday, January 2, 2017 11:01 am >>>? >>> Subject: [Xmca-l]? New Year's Perezhivanie >>>? >>> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >>>? >>>? >>>? >>>> With the New Year, as our Russian colleagues put it! >>>> This image forwarded from a friend more or less sums up my experience >>>> of >>>> the past year. Thought you might find it interesting too. >>>> Vis a vis the discussion of perezhivanie: Does this image provide us >> with >>>> used (re-presented) behavioral evidence of a person undergoing >>> perezhivanie? >>>? >>>> Looking forward to the discussion. >>>> Feliz a?o nuevo! >>>> Mike >>>? >>>? >>>? ? ? ? -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 9F4255AF8578478F8722202EA88A7378.png Type: image/png Size: 161 bytes Desc: not available Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20170106/bc96633d/attachment.png From ablunden@mira.net Fri Jan 6 17:12:06 2017 From: ablunden@mira.net (Andy Blunden) Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2017 12:12:06 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! In-Reply-To: <1483601196884.31418@iped.uio.no> References: <1483344752182.40904@iped.uio.no> <1483467423798.57819@iped.uio.no> <1483601196884.31418@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <5df5e870-3ef8-70d6-0c17-f8647ba17e62@mira.net> I have never understood this supposed distinction, Alfredo, between "mediated activity" and "mediating activity" given that all activity is mediated and all activity mediates. Also, could you spell out what you mean by the "tension" between perezhivanie as meaning and perezhivanie as struggle. Andy ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making On 5/01/2017 6:26 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > Thanks Marc for your careful response. > > I am familiar to Vygotsky's notion of cultural mediation and I am aware and acknowledge that it was elaborated as a means to overcome dualism, and that it is not analog to a computational approach. > > When I brought the computing analogy, I did so with regard not to the concept of cultural mediation in general, but to the way it can be (and is) deployed analytically. I react to what it seems to me a dichotomy between a "meaning" as something that is static (thereby a form of "representation" or reflection of the relation with the environment instead of ?refraction)?? and the experiencing-as-struggling, which is described as ?transformation or change. If so, mediation here would seem to be part of a methodological device that first dissects "a type of meaning" from "a type of activity" (or a given state from the process that changes that state), and then unites it by adding the term "mediation." And this may be my misreading, but in that (mis)reading (which perhaps is mostly due to the fact that in your empirical illustration only the initial and end product, i.e., perezhivanie, are described, but not the experiencing-as-struggle, that is, the moving between the two), mediation here seems to do as analytical concept precisely what you were afraid our monism was doing: explaining nothing. Only the end products but not the process of producing perezhivanie are revealed. This may be problematic if one attends to what Veresov argues in the paper I shared yesterday, where he defends the notion of mediation but also specifies that Vygotsky speaks of *mediating activity* (as opposed to *mediated* activity). That is, not mediation by signs as products, but mediating activity as the activity of producing signs (which again is an activity of producing social relations, perhaps what you refer as "holistic meanings"?). What do you think? > > I did not think you were trying to deny the influence of Spinoza, and I do not think we ever said that Perezhivanie was primarily a move from Cartesian Dualism to Monism, as you suggest in your post. I copy and paste from my prior post: "The fact is that Vygotsky was building a theory on the unity of the affect and the intellect that was to be grounded on Spinoza, and what we try to do is to explore how perezhivanie, as a concept being developed during the same period (but not finalised or totally settled!), could be seen from the perspective of the Spinozist Vygotsky." > > I totally believe that bringing the distinction between perezhivanie as meaning, and perezhivanie as struggle, is totally relevant, and Beth Ferholt's vignettes of Where the Wild Things Are do indeed illustrate this. We really need to address this tension, which as Beth's examples and as our own everyday experience shows, is a tension that matters not just to books and to theories but to living persons (children, teachers), a tension that moreover is present and mentioned in all the articles of the symposium. The papers offer different proposals, and I think is so great we have the chance to discuss them! I too, as you, am very interesting in hearing others about the questions you had concerning sense and meaning. > > Alfredo > > > > > > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Marc Clar? > Sent: 04 January 2017 22:31 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > Thank you very much, Alfredo, for sharing this excellent paper by Veresov, > and thanks also for your responses, which really helped me to better > understand your points. My main doubt about your proposal was/is caused by > the statement that the idea of cultural mediation/mediator implies a > cartesian dualism. This shocks me because, to me, the idea of cultural > mediation is absolutely crucial (in fact, the keystone) for the > construction of a monist (and scientific) psychology that does not forget > mind ?that is, a cultural psychology. From your response, however, I > realized that we may be approaching the idea of mediation in different > ways. I talk of mediation and mediators in a quite restricted way. The > starting point of my understanding of mediation is a dialectical > relationship (organic, transactional) between the subject and the world > (Vygotsky departs from the scheme stimulus-response, from reflexology). > This relationship, that Vygotsky calls primitive psychological functions, > would be basically biological. However, in human beings this relationship > is mediated by cultural means: signs and tools; or primary, secondary and > terciary artifacts. These cultural means reorganize the primitive functions > (dialectic S-O relationship), which become then higher psychological > functions (S-M-O) (see for example, The problem of the cultural development > of the child, in The Vygotsky Reader). Now, the subject, the cultural > mediators, and the object form an inseparable dialectical unit, so that the > subject acts on (transforms) the object through the prism of the cultural > mediators, the object acts on (transforms) the subject also through the > prism of the cultural mediators, and the cultural means are themselves also > transformed as a consequence of their mediation in this continuous dynamic > dialectical tension. Here, for me, it is important the idea that the > cultural means are as material (if we assume a materialist monism) as all > the rest of the world; in fact, are parts of the material world which > become signs or tools (and can be therefore socially distributed). This > permits the introduction of the scientific study of mind-consciousness (as > mediating systems of signs), because mind is not anymore something > immaterial and unobservable, but it is as material and observable as the > rest of the natural world. It is from this view that, for me, the idea of > cultural mediation is the keystone of a monist psychology that includes > mind. Thus, when I speak of mediators, I refer to the cultural means which > mediate in the S-O dialectics; I am especially interested in > signs/secondary artifacts. Here, it is perhaps necessary to insist that > when I talk of studying mediators (and their semantic structure), this > doesn't mean that they are taken out from the activity (the flux of live) > in which they mediate (since out of activity they are not signs anymore); > here, I think Vygotsky tries again to overcome another old dichotomy, the > functionalism-structuralism one. I hope that all this makes also clear the > difference between this view and that of computational psychologies (which > in general are profoundly and explicitly dualist and not dialectic). > > Back to perezhivanie, I'm not obviously trying to deny the influence of > Spinoza on Vygotsky's thinking (this is explicit in Vygotsky's writings, > especially in ?The teaching about emotions?, in the Vol.6 of the Collected > Works). But I have doubts that Vygotsky's introduction of the concept of > perezhivanie is to be regarded primarily as a movement towards monism (from > a previous cartesian dualism), and that this movement questions the concept > of cultural mediation. Instead, and I think that this is in line with some > of Gonz?lez-Rey observations in his paper, my impression is that the > introduction of the concept of perezhivanie responds more to a movement (a > further step) towards holism (something that, in my understanding, can also > be found in Spinoza). Thus, I think that the word meaning is still the unit > of analysis in the last Vygotsky -and therefore, the idea of cultural > mediation is still crucial (in fact, in The problem of the environment, he > connects the concept of perezhivanie, which has just introduced, to the > development of word meaning [p.345-346, also cited in my paper]). However, > in my view, in the last Vygotsky the focus is not anymore primarily on the > word-meaning as formed for things (or collections of things, as in the > ontogenetic research with Sakharov), but the focus is now in the formation > of meaning for holistic situations. > > Best regards, > > Marc. > > 2017-01-03 19:16 GMT+01:00 Alfredo Jornet Gil : > >> Hi Marc, all, >> >> thanks for joining and for your interesting work, which I follow since I >> became aware of it. I appreciate the way in your paper you show careful and >> honest attention to the texts of the authors involved, but perhaps most of >> all I appreciate that the paper makes the transformational dimension >> related to struggle and change salient, a dimension all papers deemed >> central to perezhivanie. And I have learned more about Vasilyuk by reading >> your paper. But I also see that we have approached the question of >> perezhivanie differently and I think that addressing the questions that you >> raise concerning our article may be a good way to both respond and discuss >> your paper. >> >> I am aware that our use of the term monism may be problematic to some, and >> N. Veresov, who has recently written about this (see attached article), >> warns against the dangers of simply moving from dualism into an >> undifferentiating monism that relativizes everything, making development >> un-studiable. This seems to be the way in which you have understood our >> argument, and of course this is not what we are or want to be doing. >> Probably many will think that *dialectical materialism* rather than monism >> is the proper term, and I could agree with them; we do in fact use >> dialectical materialism there and elsewhere. Yet, we wanted to emphasise >> the Spinozist influence (an influence that also runs through Marx) and so >> we found it appropriate to use the term monism, a term that Vygotsky uses >> before arguing that Spinoza "develops an essentially materialistic view" >> (Collected Works, Vol. 6, p. 124). For us, the aim is working out ways to >> empirically examine and formulate problems in ways that do not reify a >> mind-body dualism. >> >> Although overcoming dualism is foundational to the CHAT paradigm, I would >> however not say that Vygotsky did get to solve all of the problems that >> Cartesian dualism had created for psychology, even though he recognised >> those problems brilliantly as early as in the "Crisis". It should suffice >> to cite Vygotsky's own remarks, which we quote in the paper (and which A.N. >> Leont'ev mentions in the introduction to the collected works), where >> Vygotsky explicitly critiques some of his own prior ideas for failing to >> overcome dualism. We agree with those who, like F. G. Rey, see Vygotsky's >> project as a developing rather than as a finalised one. The fact is that >> Vygotsky was building a theory on the unity of the affect and the intellect >> that was to be grounded on Spinoza, and what we try to do is to explore how >> perezhivanie, as a concept being developed during the same period (but not >> finalised or totally settled!), could be seen from the perspective of the >> Spinozist Vygotsky. >> >> As you note, in our article we argue that, if one takes the Spinozist >> one-substance approach, classical concepts used in non-classical >> psychology, at least in the way they are commonly used in the current >> literature, should be revised. One such concept is mediation. And I >> personally do not have much of a problem when mediation is used to denote >> the fundamental fact that every thing exists always through *another*, >> never in and of itself. But I do think that it is problematic to identify >> MEDIATORS, such as "a meaning", as a means to account for or explain >> developmental processes and learning events, precisely because it is there, >> at least in my view, that dualism creeps in. >> >> For example, I find it paradoxical that you are concerned that our monist >> approach risks turning perezhivanie into a useless category because it may >> be used to explain everything and nothing, and yet you do not seem to have >> a problem using the term mediation to account for the transformation of >> perezhivanie without clearly elaborating on how mediation does change >> anything or what it looks like as a real process. How is it different >> saying that a perezhivanie mediates the experiencing-as-struggle from >> simply saying that it "affects" or "determines" it? Indeed, if perezhivanie >> mediates experiencing-as-struggle, does not experiencing-as-struglgle too >> mediate perezhivanie? And do not both may be said to mediate development, >> or development mediate them? Is not this explaining everything and nothing? >> >> I do believe you can argue that there is a difference between mediation >> and classical psychology's cause-effect relations, but to show this you >> need to dig into the dialectical underpinnings of the theory. In your >> paper, you offer a nice analysis of a lovely case of a teacher who, in >> dealing with a challenge with one of her students, changes her >> perezhivanie. I think you can rightly argue that there is a semiotic >> transformation, and I fully support your statement that by studying >> discourse we can empirically approach questions of psychological >> development. The contradictions you show as being involved and resolved >> resonate really well with what I experience as a parent or as a teacher in >> the classroom. Yet, without unpacking what this "mediation" taking place >> between one perezhivanie and the next one means as a concrete and real, the >> same analysis could be done taking an information processing approach: >> there is an situation that is processed (represented?) in one way, which >> then leads to a (cognitive) dissonance, and then there is a cognitive >> resolution by means of which the situation is presented differently in >> consciousness (indeed, when seen in this way, the term perezhivanie and the >> term "representation" become almost indistinguishable). How is mediation, >> as an analytical concept, helping here? And most importantly to the >> question of perezhivanie, how is this analysis going to show the internal >> connection between intellect and affect that Vygotsky formulates as >> constitutive of the notion of perezhivanie? >> >> I believe that the key lies in understanding what Vygotsky means when he >> says that perezhivanie is a unit of analysis. I will not repeat here what >> already is written in at least a couple of the articles in the special >> issue (Blunden, ours), that is the difference between analysis by elements >> and unit analysis (Vygotsky 1987). A unit analysis approach is consistent >> with Spinoza, for whom cause-effect explanations were not adequate, >> requiring instead an understanding of self-development, perezhivanie as a >> kernel cell for the development of personality. And I think you may be >> after this in your article in suggesting a form of continuous movement from >> perezhivanie to experiencing-as-struggle. But perhaps the major difficulty >> I find is that, in positing Vygotsky's perezhivanie as "a type of meaning" >> and Vasilyuk's perezhivanie (or experiencing-as-struggle) as a "type of >> activity," it is difficult not to see here a division between product and >> process, a division that then is analytically bridged by the addition of a >> third term, mediation, that should bring back the real movement between the >> product and the process. >> >> A different approach involves considering the concrete extension of actual >> living and lived social relations, and look at them as generative >> phenomena. What is there in the encounter between Carla and the child that >> leads to change? For it is not inside the mind, but in real life, in >> consciousness as the real relation between people, that Carla is changed. >> How is the semantic structure that you nicely present and attribute to >> Carla a product of the social relation between her and the child? I think >> that to rightfully situate perezhivanie as a concept in a Vygotskian >> framework, we ought to address its relation to the genetic law of >> development. >> >> There is much more to disentangle, but this is long enough. I hope I have >> succeeded in making clear these ideas. Thanks so much for engaging in the >> discussion! >> Alfredo >> >> >> >> ________________________________________ >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> on behalf of Marc Clar? >> Sent: 02 January 2017 22:14 >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! >> >> Hi, all, and thank you so much, Alfredo, for your kind invitation to >> participate in this discussion. My paper in the MCA special issue focuses >> on a distinction between a type of activity, which I argue that is what >> Vasilyuk called *perezhivanie* (experiencing) and a type of semiotic >> mediator, which I argue that is what Vygotsky, in The Problem of the >> Environment, called *perezhivanie.* I argue, following Vasilyuk, that in >> experiencing activities (Vasilyuk's perezhivanie), this type of mediator is >> profoundly transformed ? in fact, that experiencing activities consist of >> the semiotic transformation of this type of mediator. >> >> As Veresov and Fleer argue in their commentary, perezhivanie (as a type of >> mediator) is for me a psychological phenomenon, one which is of course >> conceptualized from a specific theoretical framework. But the phenomenon is >> also visible from other theoretical frameworks as well, as I mention in the >> paper. This phenomenon is my main interest, and it is from this interest >> that I arrived at the concept of perezhivanie (not the other way around). >> Now, the phenomenon is that at least emotion, reasoning, and volition >> (formation of conscious purposes) seem to be decisively mediated by >> holistic situational meaning. My current research concern is trying to find >> ways to study and understand how this mediation occurs and how these >> semiotic mediators are transformed and distributed. From this view, I think >> that experiencing activities (Vasilyuk's perezhivanie) may provide a good >> terrain to study these issues (especially regarding the mediation of >> emotion), as I tried to exemplify in the paper. >> >> Studying semiotic mediation, however, is of course not easy. Following >> Vygotsky, I assume that extended discourse is the manifestation of thinking >> within certain psychological conditions (Vygotsky's Thinking and Speech, >> chapter 7), and I also assume the Vygotsky's law of the unity of the >> structure and function of thinking (Vygotsky's Thinking and Speech, chapter >> 6). From these two assumptions, I propose that meaning (and its functions >> in human activity) can be scientifically studied by structurally analyzing >> the narratives generated by subjects, considering that the discourse >> produced in the narrative is the point of departure of this study, but that >> considerable analytical work must be done to move from this discourse to >> the full characterization of meaning. It is in that point where I find >> useful the work developed by Greimas, the usefulness of which I only >> suggest in the paper. >> >> >From this background, I found many interesting ideas and questions in the >> other papers of the special issue. In this first post I will propose two of >> them for possible discussion. The first one was raised by Gonz?lez-Rey, >> when he introduces, in connection with perezhivanie, the concepts of >> personality, and especially, of sense. So, which is the conceptual (and-or >> phenomenal) relation between perezhivanie and sense? Gonz?lez-Rey suggests >> that both concepts are somewhat similar (and overcome by the concept of >> ?subjective sense?); my opinion, partly expressed in my commentary, is that >> perezhivanie is a type of meaning, which includes different levels of >> depth, and that sense corresponds to the deepest level of meaning (which >> can be characterized as a system of semic oppositions). Therefore, sense >> wouldn't be in opposition to meaning (as ?a microcosm of human >> consciousness?, as Kozulin remembers in his commentary), although it would >> be in opposition to manifested meaning (the surface level of meaning). >> >> The second issue was raised by Roth and Jornet, and I think it goes beyond >> the issue of perezhivanie itself. If I understand them well, they argue >> that Vygotsky's core proposal of cultural mediation is influenced by the >> Cartesian dualism (mind-matter), and that a promising approach to Cultural >> Psychology would be a Spinozist monism. I am actually very interested on >> the issue of which epistemological position can best substantiate the >> construction of a cultural psychology, and that's why I feel inclined to >> take the opportunity to ask for your opinions about that. About the >> proposal of Roth and Jornet, I have some doubts. First, I don't see why >> Vygotsky's proposals can be seen as dualist (in the Cartesian sense) -I >> suspect that it is because of the analytical distinctions?. Anyway, in my >> understanding, Vygotsky explicitly assumes a materialist monism (for >> example in The Crisis), and in fact he constructs his proposal on mediation >> upon reflexology, which also explicitly assumed a materialist monism (e.g. >> Sechenov). Would a Spinozist monism be a better point of departure? I don't >> know, in my understanding it is a more idealist monism, and I don't clearly >> see what could be gained. In my opinion, a scientific psychology which >> includes the study of mind is only possible if any type of monism is >> assumed. However, in my view, for a scientific psychology, the ontological >> nature of the world is perhaps less important (it is an issue for >> metaphysics?), and I am inclined to assume a neutral monism (e.g. Russell). >> So from this view, a materialist monism and a Spinozist monism wouldn't be >> so different, so from both views it could be assumed that all is of the >> same nature and all is similarly knowable (including mind) [which is the >> ontological nature of the world and to what degree it is knowable are >> issues that can be left to philosophy]. However, in my opinion, this does >> not mean that, while assuming a monism, analytical distinctions cannot be >> done when studying the world. In that sense, I had the impression that Roth >> and Jornet tended to dilute analytical distinctions in the name of monism; >> I repeat that I don't know if I understood them well, but if this was the >> case, in my opinion, analysis would be impossible within the new psychology >> suggested by Roth and Jornet, and, regarding perezhivanie, there would be >> the danger, noted by Vygotsky in The Crisis and cautioned by Kozulin in his >> commentary, that by meaning everything, perezhivanie ends by meaning >> nothing. >> >> Best regards and happy new year, >> >> Marc. >> >> 2017-01-02 9:12 GMT+01:00 Alfredo Jornet Gil : >> >>> Dear all, >>> >>> >>> I would like to join David, Luisa, Ana, Henry and the others to wish you >>> all a Happy New Year! May it be full of joy, peace, and opportunity. >>> >>> >>> I also would like to begin the year announcing our first ?MCA article >>> discussion, ?although in fact corresponds to the last issue of the year >> we >>> just passed, Issue 4 on Perezhivanie. This is a very special *special* >>> issue, not only because its topic has raised lots of interest lately in >> the >>> CHAT community but also because, greatly coordinated by Andy Blunden and >>> the rest of the editorial team, the issue takes the form of a symposium >>> where authors get the chance to present and respond to each others' ideas >>> on the subject. In my view, this allows having a rich and >> multidimensional >>> approach to a subject as important as perezhivanie. >>> >>> >>> Following with the dialogical spirit in which the special issue was >>> assembled, we will focus on one lead article, but hoping to also engage >>> ideas and insights present in or relevant to other contributions in the >>> issue. ?Marc Clar?'s "Vygotsky and Vasilyuk on Perezhivanie: Two Notions >>> and One Word" will be our focus. The article very nicely engages the lead >>> work of Vygotsky, but also the less known ??(?in educational literature) >>> but totally relevant works of psychologist ?F. Vasilyuk and semiotician >> A. >>> J. Greimas, mobilising a number of key concepts including those of >> semiotic >>> mediation and transformation. >>> >>> ?In addition to Marc, who will soon join us, I have encouraged some of >> the >>> other authors in the special issue to also join as "relevant others," if >>> time and circumstances allow them. Let's hope that this will help keeping >>> the symposium spirit up. >>> >>> >>> Marc's article is attached to this e-mail and will be made open access at >>> the T&F pages as soon as people is back from the holidays. The T&F link >> is >>> this: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039.2016.1186194 >>> >>> The link to the MCA Forum pages, where we announce our discussions and >>> other xmca things, is here: http://lchc.ucsd.edu/MCA/ >>> >>> >>> I wish us all a very productive and interesting discussion. >>> >>> Alfredo >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> From mcole@ucsd.edu Fri Jan 6 17:26:28 2017 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2017 17:26:28 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: <58703d02.8bc2620a.7ee11.cf9b@mx.google.com> References: <586ae645.475a620a.84afb.9951@mx.google.com> <25cde5c9-9e15-b7f4-6f4c-18f763423cbc@open.ac.uk> <1483715539761.38866@iped.uio.no> <586fd3be.45da620a.2a730.8da3@mx.google.com> <1483724630007.83825@iped.uio.no> <58703d02.8bc2620a.7ee11.cf9b@mx.google.com> Message-ID: Here is the Garrison article. A search of the lchc site turned up a discussion of his work in 2007. And earlier, with an interruption for Garrison Keiler. :-) mike On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 4:57 PM, wrote: > Alfredo, > I have started reading through the article you have attached that you and > Wolf-Michael Roth wrote together. I noticed an article referenced by J. > Garrison [An Introduction to Dewey?s Theory of Functional ?trans-action?: > An alternative paradigm for Activity Theory] in Mind Culture and Activity > 2001. Is this article archived as open access? > I believe Garrison may also contribute to my growing understanding of > [experience and learning]. You reference this at a point in your paper > [page 108] where you are discussing experience is in EXCESS of cognitive > construction. [a tremendous excess of experience over intellectual subject > matter]. This is a path worth travrlling along. > > Sent from Mail for Windows 10 > > From: Alfredo Jornet Gilthat experience is always in > Sent: January 6, 2017 9:43 AM > To: lpscholar2@gmail.com; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: Re: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie > > Larry, great additions, but why writing "trans/hivanie" when we have a > number of resources to be aware of the etymological roots of perezhivanie? > One such resource is in Andy Blunden's article in the special issue. > Another is an earlier paper Michael and myself co-authored a few years ago > and which you can find attached. I quote from the paper: > > "Experience (perezhivanie) in its original sense?in English and Russian as > well as in the French exp?er ience or the German equivalent Erfahr > ung?suggests that in contrast to the repetition of something, experience is > related to travel, traversal, peril, risk, and change. The > Proto-Indo-European root per(e) -denotes the verbs to try, dare, and risk, > put oneself in danger; as such, it also made it into suchwords as exper > iment (Greek pe??rama, experiment) and perilous." > > Alfredo > > > > > > From: lpscholar2@gmail.com > Sent: 06 January 2017 18:27 > To: Alfredo Jornet Gil; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: RE: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie > > Rob, and Christopher, and Alfreda, and Marc, > This is an interesting reference to Nozick and achieving an experience > without struggle. I want to refocus us on how this insight is an extension > to Christopher?s posting. In particular the opening paragraph. The image of > smashing to bits the bricks is wrapped up in the end moment of > trans/hivanie. > SO the focus on what occurs before this end point central to Christopher?s > question : > ?but is this how trans/hivanie works?? > AND Christopher answers by focusing on the : > ?extended back and forth, the REPEATED back and forth, the > (living-through) that seems to be exemplary of trans/hivanie. > > Marc says it is ?this? phenomena that brought him to trans/hivanie and not > the other way around. > What is occurring within the ?repetition? being lived through. > As an aside Nozick turned to eastern philosophy from the Indian > subcontinent for deeper inspiration. I could add more if interest warrants > (possibly another thread). > > ALSO, i recommend going to page 27 of Bella?s article (that Peter posted) > to get a sense of Vygotsky?s extended repeated (living through) of the > Jewish question that he was writing extensively about in 1916. On that page > Bella refers to two articles Vygotsky wrote on this theme. One was in a > (literary) mode while the other was written in a (psychological) mode. > Trans/hivanie at work implicitly as formative of the later Vygotsky. > This topic, as Bella images as spaghetti tangles. In Vygotsky?s own words > from 1916 on the incomprehensible riddle-like companion of Jewish > history as : > > ?riddle-like, inexplicability, the MYSTERY of Isreal .... eternal fellow > traveler of the eternal people, the SECRET of the eternity of the Jewish > people? > > To further this strand we should possibly keep distinct from this month?s > article. However the theme of ?repetition? that had the mood of profound > struggle or at a deeper level a mood of no movement and closed off, is the > process occuring which maybat some point in time erupt as smashing 2016 to > bits and bricks scattering as an act of ?deconstruction? that i believe can > loose the reality of what came before, starting with Bella?s zero stage > that is (existential). A time when the person traversing the zero stage > should be ?recognized? through moral/ethical care and concern. Not a > journey of (mineness) through Heidegger which is a protesting protestant > approach, but through mitsein as living-through. > I hope my referencing multiple speakers but trying to stay within strands > is clear? > Perezhivanie as trans/hivanie as Marc says is approached through multiple > pluaristic traditions that are psychological, literary, and philosophical > and extend through historical consciousness as the living-through > repetitive back and forth traversal that INCLUDES as central the PAUSE or > MA or INTERVAL or GAP. > > > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > From: Alfredo Jornet Gil > Sent: January 6, 2017 7:17 AM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie > > Rob, how appropriate the thought experiment! > Alfredo > > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of R.J.S.Parsons > Sent: 06 January 2017 15:41 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie > > In thinking about "experience as struggle", I found myself considering > Nozick's thought experiment of the experience machine, which he uses to > explore the issue of ethical hedonism.* Consider a machine which could > stimulate a person's brain to induce pleasurable experiences that the > subject could not distinguish from those he would have apart from the > machine. Nozick then asks, if given the choice, would we prefer the > machine to real life? (this description from Wikipedia). It strikes me > that the experience delivered by the machine is experience without > struggle. There is no activity from the subject, meaning making is not > necessary, and therefore there is no development. > > Clara quotes Vygotsky "A perezhivanie is a unit where, on the one hand, > in an indivisible state, the environment is represented, i.e. that which > is being experienced?a perezhivanie is always related to something which > is found outside the person?and on the other hand, what is represented > is how I, myself, am experiencing this," - the thought experiment breaks > the unit, and in doing so, I think, demonstrates how important its > existence as a unit is. > > *Also brilliantly explored in the "Total Immersion Video game" in Red > Dwarf Season 5 episode 6 Back To Reality. > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2IzX6b1YJHI > > Rob > > On 03/01/2017 17:37, Christopher Schuck wrote: > > It's an interesting question (about the brick and perezhivanie), partly > > because that extended, "living-through", repeated doubling-back process > > evoked by the Vygotskian sense of the concept would seem to be at odds > with > > a single, discrete act of "smashing" that is immediate, forceful and even > > violent. It would suggest that part of what perezhivanie means is wrapped > > up in the symbolic marking of its end - and that this end, when it comes, > > can be forceful. Certainly, the image could not be more unified and > > embodying of a particular set of meaningful experiences. But is that how > > perezhivanie works? This leads me to ask: > > > > 1) what are the problems and contradictions encountered in using > particular > > metaphors to depict perezhivanie, where perezhivanie is itself so defined > > by imagination and narrativity? Part of this might also be a question of > > what it means to describe and represent one's own perezhivanie > > figuratively/narratively (whether to others, or to oneself), as opposed > to > > living that perezhivanie. Especially if the attempt to capture/represent > > one's own perezhivanie is, perhaps, also central to the living of it? > > > > 2) What is the nature of the relationship between perezhivanie and > force, > > either in terms of the internal process or in terms of how it finally > > "ends"? (Not to mention, how it begins). It would seem that in both > > conceptions discussed in the article there is a certain intensity > required. > > But does this in some cases require something more explosive - and does > > Vasilyuk's conception of perezhivanie as activity speak more to this > > possibility? And how do we reconcile this with the less "forceful" notion > > of enduring, revisiting, and working through? > > > > On Monday, January 2, 2017, mike cole wrote: > > > >> The pieces of brick thrown up by this political hammering have not yet > >> fallen and made the devastation personally experienced by the > nation/world. > >> > >> Still, genuinely, we can wish all of us 7.3 billion well in the new > year. > >> > >> So what do you think chuck, is this a good representation of > perezhivanie? > >> :-) > >> Mike > >> > >> On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 11:24 AM Charles Bazerman < > >> bazerman@education.ucsb.edu> wrote: > >> > >>> So you think 2017 has any hope of being any better? > >>> > >>> Chuck > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> ----- Original Message ----- > >>> > >>> From: mike cole > >>> > >>> Date: Monday, January 2, 2017 11:01 am > >>> > >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] New Year's Perezhivanie > >>> > >>> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>> With the New Year, as our Russian colleagues put it! > >>>> This image forwarded from a friend more or less sums up my experience > >>>> of > >>>> the past year. Thought you might find it interesting too. > >>>> Vis a vis the discussion of perezhivanie: Does this image provide us > >> with > >>>> used (re-presented) behavioral evidence of a person undergoing > >>> perezhivanie? > >>> > >>>> Looking forward to the discussion. > >>>> Feliz a?o nuevo! > >>>> Mike > >>> > >>> > >>> > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Garrison (1).pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 194708 bytes Desc: not available Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20170106/92468b00/attachment.pdf From bferholt@gmail.com Fri Jan 6 19:18:48 2017 From: bferholt@gmail.com (Beth Ferholt) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2017 22:18:48 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: References: <586ae645.475a620a.84afb.9951@mx.google.com> <25cde5c9-9e15-b7f4-6f4c-18f763423cbc@open.ac.uk> <1483715539761.38866@iped.uio.no> <586fd3be.45da620a.2a730.8da3@mx.google.com> <1483724630007.83825@iped.uio.no> <58703d02.8bc2620a.7ee11.cf9b@mx.google.com> Message-ID: I have not caught up yet but think I am being confused with Bella -- My paper in the issue did relate to redemption but I am Beth ; ) . Beth On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 8:26 PM, mike cole wrote: > Here is the Garrison article. A search of the lchc site turned up a > discussion of his work in 2007. And earlier, with an interruption for > Garrison Keiler. :-) > mike > > On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 4:57 PM, wrote: > > > Alfredo, > > I have started reading through the article you have attached that you > and > > Wolf-Michael Roth wrote together. I noticed an article referenced by J. > > Garrison [An Introduction to Dewey?s Theory of Functional ?trans-action?: > > An alternative paradigm for Activity Theory] in Mind Culture and Activity > > 2001. Is this article archived as open access? > > I believe Garrison may also contribute to my growing understanding of > > [experience and learning]. You reference this at a point in your paper > > [page 108] where you are discussing experience is in EXCESS of cognitive > > construction. [a tremendous excess of experience over intellectual > subject > > matter]. This is a path worth travrlling along. > > > > Sent from Mail for Windows 10 > > > > From: Alfredo Jornet Gilthat experience is always in > > Sent: January 6, 2017 9:43 AM > > To: lpscholar2@gmail.com; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: Re: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie > > > > Larry, great additions, but why writing "trans/hivanie" when we have a > > number of resources to be aware of the etymological roots of > perezhivanie? > > One such resource is in Andy Blunden's article in the special issue. > > Another is an earlier paper Michael and myself co-authored a few years > ago > > and which you can find attached. I quote from the paper: > > > > "Experience (perezhivanie) in its original sense?in English and Russian > as > > well as in the French exp?er ience or the German equivalent Erfahr > > ung?suggests that in contrast to the repetition of something, experience > is > > related to travel, traversal, peril, risk, and change. The > > Proto-Indo-European root per(e) -denotes the verbs to try, dare, and > risk, > > put oneself in danger; as such, it also made it into suchwords as exper > > iment (Greek pe??rama, experiment) and perilous." > > > > Alfredo > > > > > > > > > > > > From: lpscholar2@gmail.com > > Sent: 06 January 2017 18:27 > > To: Alfredo Jornet Gil; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: RE: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie > > > > Rob, and Christopher, and Alfreda, and Marc, > > This is an interesting reference to Nozick and achieving an experience > > without struggle. I want to refocus us on how this insight is an > extension > > to Christopher?s posting. In particular the opening paragraph. The image > of > > smashing to bits the bricks is wrapped up in the end moment of > > trans/hivanie. > > SO the focus on what occurs before this end point central to > Christopher?s > > question : > > ?but is this how trans/hivanie works?? > > AND Christopher answers by focusing on the : > > ?extended back and forth, the REPEATED back and forth, the > > (living-through) that seems to be exemplary of trans/hivanie. > > > > Marc says it is ?this? phenomena that brought him to trans/hivanie and > not > > the other way around. > > What is occurring within the ?repetition? being lived through. > > As an aside Nozick turned to eastern philosophy from the Indian > > subcontinent for deeper inspiration. I could add more if interest > warrants > > (possibly another thread). > > > > ALSO, i recommend going to page 27 of Bella?s article (that Peter posted) > > to get a sense of Vygotsky?s extended repeated (living through) of the > > Jewish question that he was writing extensively about in 1916. On that > page > > Bella refers to two articles Vygotsky wrote on this theme. One was in a > > (literary) mode while the other was written in a (psychological) mode. > > Trans/hivanie at work implicitly as formative of the later Vygotsky. > > This topic, as Bella images as spaghetti tangles. In Vygotsky?s own words > > from 1916 on the incomprehensible riddle-like companion of Jewish > > history as : > > > > ?riddle-like, inexplicability, the MYSTERY of Isreal .... eternal > fellow > > traveler of the eternal people, the SECRET of the eternity of the Jewish > > people? > > > > To further this strand we should possibly keep distinct from this month?s > > article. However the theme of ?repetition? that had the mood of profound > > struggle or at a deeper level a mood of no movement and closed off, is > the > > process occuring which maybat some point in time erupt as smashing 2016 > to > > bits and bricks scattering as an act of ?deconstruction? that i believe > can > > loose the reality of what came before, starting with Bella?s zero stage > > that is (existential). A time when the person traversing the zero stage > > should be ?recognized? through moral/ethical care and concern. Not a > > journey of (mineness) through Heidegger which is a protesting protestant > > approach, but through mitsein as living-through. > > I hope my referencing multiple speakers but trying to stay within strands > > is clear? > > Perezhivanie as trans/hivanie as Marc says is approached through multiple > > pluaristic traditions that are psychological, literary, and philosophical > > and extend through historical consciousness as the living-through > > repetitive back and forth traversal that INCLUDES as central the PAUSE or > > MA or INTERVAL or GAP. > > > > > > > > > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > From: Alfredo Jornet Gil > > Sent: January 6, 2017 7:17 AM > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie > > > > Rob, how appropriate the thought experiment! > > Alfredo > > > > ________________________________________ > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > on behalf of R.J.S.Parsons > > Sent: 06 January 2017 15:41 > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie > > > > In thinking about "experience as struggle", I found myself considering > > Nozick's thought experiment of the experience machine, which he uses to > > explore the issue of ethical hedonism.* Consider a machine which could > > stimulate a person's brain to induce pleasurable experiences that the > > subject could not distinguish from those he would have apart from the > > machine. Nozick then asks, if given the choice, would we prefer the > > machine to real life? (this description from Wikipedia). It strikes me > > that the experience delivered by the machine is experience without > > struggle. There is no activity from the subject, meaning making is not > > necessary, and therefore there is no development. > > > > Clara quotes Vygotsky "A perezhivanie is a unit where, on the one hand, > > in an indivisible state, the environment is represented, i.e. that which > > is being experienced?a perezhivanie is always related to something which > > is found outside the person?and on the other hand, what is represented > > is how I, myself, am experiencing this," - the thought experiment breaks > > the unit, and in doing so, I think, demonstrates how important its > > existence as a unit is. > > > > *Also brilliantly explored in the "Total Immersion Video game" in Red > > Dwarf Season 5 episode 6 Back To Reality. > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2IzX6b1YJHI > > > > Rob > > > > On 03/01/2017 17:37, Christopher Schuck wrote: > > > It's an interesting question (about the brick and perezhivanie), partly > > > because that extended, "living-through", repeated doubling-back process > > > evoked by the Vygotskian sense of the concept would seem to be at odds > > with > > > a single, discrete act of "smashing" that is immediate, forceful and > even > > > violent. It would suggest that part of what perezhivanie means is > wrapped > > > up in the symbolic marking of its end - and that this end, when it > comes, > > > can be forceful. Certainly, the image could not be more unified and > > > embodying of a particular set of meaningful experiences. But is that > how > > > perezhivanie works? This leads me to ask: > > > > > > 1) what are the problems and contradictions encountered in using > > particular > > > metaphors to depict perezhivanie, where perezhivanie is itself so > defined > > > by imagination and narrativity? Part of this might also be a question > of > > > what it means to describe and represent one's own perezhivanie > > > figuratively/narratively (whether to others, or to oneself), as opposed > > to > > > living that perezhivanie. Especially if the attempt to > capture/represent > > > one's own perezhivanie is, perhaps, also central to the living of it? > > > > > > 2) What is the nature of the relationship between perezhivanie and > > force, > > > either in terms of the internal process or in terms of how it finally > > > "ends"? (Not to mention, how it begins). It would seem that in both > > > conceptions discussed in the article there is a certain intensity > > required. > > > But does this in some cases require something more explosive - and does > > > Vasilyuk's conception of perezhivanie as activity speak more to this > > > possibility? And how do we reconcile this with the less "forceful" > notion > > > of enduring, revisiting, and working through? > > > > > > On Monday, January 2, 2017, mike cole wrote: > > > > > >> The pieces of brick thrown up by this political hammering have not yet > > >> fallen and made the devastation personally experienced by the > > nation/world. > > >> > > >> Still, genuinely, we can wish all of us 7.3 billion well in the new > > year. > > >> > > >> So what do you think chuck, is this a good representation of > > perezhivanie? > > >> :-) > > >> Mike > > >> > > >> On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 11:24 AM Charles Bazerman < > > >> bazerman@education.ucsb.edu> wrote: > > >> > > >>> So you think 2017 has any hope of being any better? > > >>> > > >>> Chuck > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> ----- Original Message ----- > > >>> > > >>> From: mike cole > > >>> > > >>> Date: Monday, January 2, 2017 11:01 am > > >>> > > >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] New Year's Perezhivanie > > >>> > > >>> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>>> With the New Year, as our Russian colleagues put it! > > >>>> This image forwarded from a friend more or less sums up my > experience > > >>>> of > > >>>> the past year. Thought you might find it interesting too. > > >>>> Vis a vis the discussion of perezhivanie: Does this image provide us > > >> with > > >>>> used (re-presented) behavioral evidence of a person undergoing > > >>> perezhivanie? > > >>> > > >>>> Looking forward to the discussion. > > >>>> Feliz a?o nuevo! > > >>>> Mike > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > -- Beth Ferholt Assistant Professor Department of Early Childhood and Art Education Brooklyn College, City University of New York 2900 Bedford Avenue Brooklyn, NY 11210-2889 Email: bferholt@brooklyn.cuny.edu Phone: (718) 951-5205 Fax: (718) 951-4816 From lpscholar2@gmail.com Fri Jan 6 20:10:12 2017 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2017 20:10:12 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: References: <586ae645.475a620a.84afb.9951@mx.google.com> <25cde5c9-9e15-b7f4-6f4c-18f763423cbc@open.ac.uk> <1483715539761.38866@iped.uio.no> <586fd3be.45da620a.2a730.8da3@mx.google.com> <1483724630007.83825@iped.uio.no> <58703d02.8bc2620a.7ee11.cf9b@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <58706a47.5ba0620a.a5c6a.1799@mx.google.com> Thanks Mike, Will take some time to digest these mutiple documents that are now circulating around the topics of experience & learning & development and their relations to perezhivanie. A vital topic to open the new year. Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: mike cole Sent: January 6, 2017 5:29 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Cc: Alfredo Jornet Gil Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie Here is the Garrison article. A search of the lchc site turned up a discussion of his work in 2007. And earlier, with an interruption for Garrison Keiler. :-) mike On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 4:57 PM, wrote: > Alfredo, > I have started reading through the article you have attached that you and > Wolf-Michael Roth wrote together. I noticed an article referenced by J. > Garrison [An Introduction to Dewey?s Theory of Functional ?trans-action?: > An alternative paradigm for Activity Theory] in Mind Culture and Activity > 2001. Is this article archived as open access? > I believe Garrison may also contribute to my growing understanding of > [experience and learning]. You reference this at a point in your paper > [page 108] where you are discussing experience is in EXCESS of cognitive > construction. [a tremendous excess of experience over intellectual subject > matter]. This is a path worth travrlling along. > > Sent from Mail for Windows 10 > > From: Alfredo Jornet Gilthat experience is always in > Sent: January 6, 2017 9:43 AM > To: lpscholar2@gmail.com; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: Re: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie > > Larry, great additions, but why writing "trans/hivanie" when we have a > number of resources to be aware of the etymological roots of perezhivanie? > One such resource is in Andy Blunden's article in the special issue. > Another is an earlier paper Michael and myself co-authored a few years ago > and which you can find attached. I quote from the paper: > > "Experience (perezhivanie) in its original sense?in English and Russian as > well as in the French exp?er ience or the German equivalent Erfahr > ung?suggests that in contrast to the repetition of something, experience is > related to travel, traversal, peril, risk, and change. The > Proto-Indo-European root per(e) -denotes the verbs to try, dare, and risk, > put oneself in danger; as such, it also made it into suchwords as exper > iment (Greek pe??rama, experiment) and perilous." > > Alfredo > > > > > > From: lpscholar2@gmail.com > Sent: 06 January 2017 18:27 > To: Alfredo Jornet Gil; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: RE: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie > > Rob, and Christopher, and Alfreda, and Marc, > This is an interesting reference to Nozick and achieving an experience > without struggle. I want to refocus us on how this insight is an extension > to Christopher?s posting. In particular the opening paragraph. The image of > smashing to bits the bricks is wrapped up in the end moment of > trans/hivanie. > SO the focus on what occurs before this end point central to Christopher?s > question : > ?but is this how trans/hivanie works?? > AND Christopher answers by focusing on the : > ?extended back and forth, the REPEATED back and forth, the > (living-through) that seems to be exemplary of trans/hivanie. > > Marc says it is ?this? phenomena that brought him to trans/hivanie and not > the other way around. > What is occurring within the ?repetition? being lived through. > As an aside Nozick turned to eastern philosophy from the Indian > subcontinent for deeper inspiration. I could add more if interest warrants > (possibly another thread). > > ALSO, i recommend going to page 27 of Bella?s article (that Peter posted) > to get a sense of Vygotsky?s extended repeated (living through) of the > Jewish question that he was writing extensively about in 1916. On that page > Bella refers to two articles Vygotsky wrote on this theme. One was in a > (literary) mode while the other was written in a (psychological) mode. > Trans/hivanie at work implicitly as formative of the later Vygotsky. > This topic, as Bella images as spaghetti tangles. In Vygotsky?s own words > from 1916 on the incomprehensible riddle-like companion of Jewish > history as : > > ?riddle-like, inexplicability, the MYSTERY of Isreal .... eternal fellow > traveler of the eternal people, the SECRET of the eternity of the Jewish > people? > > To further this strand we should possibly keep distinct from this month?s > article. However the theme of ?repetition? that had the mood of profound > struggle or at a deeper level a mood of no movement and closed off, is the > process occuring which maybat some point in time erupt as smashing 2016 to > bits and bricks scattering as an act of ?deconstruction? that i believe can > loose the reality of what came before, starting with Bella?s zero stage > that is (existential). A time when the person traversing the zero stage > should be ?recognized? through moral/ethical care and concern. Not a > journey of (mineness) through Heidegger which is a protesting protestant > approach, but through mitsein as living-through. > I hope my referencing multiple speakers but trying to stay within strands > is clear? > Perezhivanie as trans/hivanie as Marc says is approached through multiple > pluaristic traditions that are psychological, literary, and philosophical > and extend through historical consciousness as the living-through > repetitive back and forth traversal that INCLUDES as central the PAUSE or > MA or INTERVAL or GAP. > > > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > From: Alfredo Jornet Gil > Sent: January 6, 2017 7:17 AM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie > > Rob, how appropriate the thought experiment! > Alfredo > > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of R.J.S.Parsons > Sent: 06 January 2017 15:41 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie > > In thinking about "experience as struggle", I found myself considering > Nozick's thought experiment of the experience machine, which he uses to > explore the issue of ethical hedonism.* Consider a machine which could > stimulate a person's brain to induce pleasurable experiences that the > subject could not distinguish from those he would have apart from the > machine. Nozick then asks, if given the choice, would we prefer the > machine to real life? (this description from Wikipedia). It strikes me > that the experience delivered by the machine is experience without > struggle. There is no activity from the subject, meaning making is not > necessary, and therefore there is no development. > > Clara quotes Vygotsky "A perezhivanie is a unit where, on the one hand, > in an indivisible state, the environment is represented, i.e. that which > is being experienced?a perezhivanie is always related to something which > is found outside the person?and on the other hand, what is represented > is how I, myself, am experiencing this," - the thought experiment breaks > the unit, and in doing so, I think, demonstrates how important its > existence as a unit is. > > *Also brilliantly explored in the "Total Immersion Video game" in Red > Dwarf Season 5 episode 6 Back To Reality. > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2IzX6b1YJHI > > Rob > > On 03/01/2017 17:37, Christopher Schuck wrote: > > It's an interesting question (about the brick and perezhivanie), partly > > because that extended, "living-through", repeated doubling-back process > > evoked by the Vygotskian sense of the concept would seem to be at odds > with > > a single, discrete act of "smashing" that is immediate, forceful and even > > violent. It would suggest that part of what perezhivanie means is wrapped > > up in the symbolic marking of its end - and that this end, when it comes, > > can be forceful. Certainly, the image could not be more unified and > > embodying of a particular set of meaningful experiences. But is that how > > perezhivanie works? This leads me to ask: > > > > 1) what are the problems and contradictions encountered in using > particular > > metaphors to depict perezhivanie, where perezhivanie is itself so defined > > by imagination and narrativity? Part of this might also be a question of > > what it means to describe and represent one's own perezhivanie > > figuratively/narratively (whether to others, or to oneself), as opposed > to > > living that perezhivanie. Especially if the attempt to capture/represent > > one's own perezhivanie is, perhaps, also central to the living of it? > > > > 2) What is the nature of the relationship between perezhivanie and > force, > > either in terms of the internal process or in terms of how it finally > > "ends"? (Not to mention, how it begins). It would seem that in both > > conceptions discussed in the article there is a certain intensity > required. > > But does this in some cases require something more explosive - and does > > Vasilyuk's conception of perezhivanie as activity speak more to this > > possibility? And how do we reconcile this with the less "forceful" notion > > of enduring, revisiting, and working through? > > > > On Monday, January 2, 2017, mike cole wrote: > > > >> The pieces of brick thrown up by this political hammering have not yet > >> fallen and made the devastation personally experienced by the > nation/world. > >> > >> Still, genuinely, we can wish all of us 7.3 billion well in the new > year. > >> > >> So what do you think chuck, is this a good representation of > perezhivanie? > >> :-) > >> Mike > >> > >> On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 11:24 AM Charles Bazerman < > >> bazerman@education.ucsb.edu> wrote: > >> > >>> So you think 2017 has any hope of being any better? > >>> > >>> Chuck > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> ----- Original Message ----- > >>> > >>> From: mike cole > >>> > >>> Date: Monday, January 2, 2017 11:01 am > >>> > >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] New Year's Perezhivanie > >>> > >>> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>> With the New Year, as our Russian colleagues put it! > >>>> This image forwarded from a friend more or less sums up my experience > >>>> of > >>>> the past year. Thought you might find it interesting too. > >>>> Vis a vis the discussion of perezhivanie: Does this image provide us > >> with > >>>> used (re-presented) behavioral evidence of a person undergoing > >>> perezhivanie? > >>> > >>>> Looking forward to the discussion. > >>>> Feliz a?o nuevo! > >>>> Mike > >>> > >>> > >>> > > > > > From lpscholar2@gmail.com Fri Jan 6 20:15:44 2017 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2017 20:15:44 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: References: <586ae645.475a620a.84afb.9951@mx.google.com> <25cde5c9-9e15-b7f4-6f4c-18f763423cbc@open.ac.uk> <1483715539761.38866@iped.uio.no> <586fd3be.45da620a.2a730.8da3@mx.google.com> <1483724630007.83825@iped.uio.no> <58703d02.8bc2620a.7ee11.cf9b@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <58706b94.03a3620a.ce027.1a81@mx.google.com> My sincere apology Beth. Will try to slow down. This topic multiplies quickly ; - ) Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Beth Ferholt Sent: January 6, 2017 7:21 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Cc: Alfredo Jornet Gil Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie I have not caught up yet but think I am being confused with Bella -- My paper in the issue did relate to redemption but I am Beth ; ) . Beth On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 8:26 PM, mike cole wrote: > Here is the Garrison article. A search of the lchc site turned up a > discussion of his work in 2007. And earlier, with an interruption for > Garrison Keiler. :-) > mike > > On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 4:57 PM, wrote: > > > Alfredo, > > I have started reading through the article you have attached that you > and > > Wolf-Michael Roth wrote together. I noticed an article referenced by J. > > Garrison [An Introduction to Dewey?s Theory of Functional ?trans-action?: > > An alternative paradigm for Activity Theory] in Mind Culture and Activity > > 2001. Is this article archived as open access? > > I believe Garrison may also contribute to my growing understanding of > > [experience and learning]. You reference this at a point in your paper > > [page 108] where you are discussing experience is in EXCESS of cognitive > > construction. [a tremendous excess of experience over intellectual > subject > > matter]. This is a path worth travrlling along. > > > > Sent from Mail for Windows 10 > > > > From: Alfredo Jornet Gilthat experience is always in > > Sent: January 6, 2017 9:43 AM > > To: lpscholar2@gmail.com; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: Re: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie > > > > Larry, great additions, but why writing "trans/hivanie" when we have a > > number of resources to be aware of the etymological roots of > perezhivanie? > > One such resource is in Andy Blunden's article in the special issue. > > Another is an earlier paper Michael and myself co-authored a few years > ago > > and which you can find attached. I quote from the paper: > > > > "Experience (perezhivanie) in its original sense?in English and Russian > as > > well as in the French exp?er ience or the German equivalent Erfahr > > ung?suggests that in contrast to the repetition of something, experience > is > > related to travel, traversal, peril, risk, and change. The > > Proto-Indo-European root per(e) -denotes the verbs to try, dare, and > risk, > > put oneself in danger; as such, it also made it into suchwords as exper > > iment (Greek pe??rama, experiment) and perilous." > > > > Alfredo > > > > > > > > > > > > From: lpscholar2@gmail.com > > Sent: 06 January 2017 18:27 > > To: Alfredo Jornet Gil; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: RE: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie > > > > Rob, and Christopher, and Alfreda, and Marc, > > This is an interesting reference to Nozick and achieving an experience > > without struggle. I want to refocus us on how this insight is an > extension > > to Christopher?s posting. In particular the opening paragraph. The image > of > > smashing to bits the bricks is wrapped up in the end moment of > > trans/hivanie. > > SO the focus on what occurs before this end point central to > Christopher?s > > question : > > ?but is this how trans/hivanie works?? > > AND Christopher answers by focusing on the : > > ?extended back and forth, the REPEATED back and forth, the > > (living-through) that seems to be exemplary of trans/hivanie. > > > > Marc says it is ?this? phenomena that brought him to trans/hivanie and > not > > the other way around. > > What is occurring within the ?repetition? being lived through. > > As an aside Nozick turned to eastern philosophy from the Indian > > subcontinent for deeper inspiration. I could add more if interest > warrants > > (possibly another thread). > > > > ALSO, i recommend going to page 27 of Bella?s article (that Peter posted) > > to get a sense of Vygotsky?s extended repeated (living through) of the > > Jewish question that he was writing extensively about in 1916. On that > page > > Bella refers to two articles Vygotsky wrote on this theme. One was in a > > (literary) mode while the other was written in a (psychological) mode. > > Trans/hivanie at work implicitly as formative of the later Vygotsky. > > This topic, as Bella images as spaghetti tangles. In Vygotsky?s own words > > from 1916 on the incomprehensible riddle-like companion of Jewish > > history as : > > > > ?riddle-like, inexplicability, the MYSTERY of Isreal .... eternal > fellow > > traveler of the eternal people, the SECRET of the eternity of the Jewish > > people? > > > > To further this strand we should possibly keep distinct from this month?s > > article. However the theme of ?repetition? that had the mood of profound > > struggle or at a deeper level a mood of no movement and closed off, is > the > > process occuring which maybat some point in time erupt as smashing 2016 > to > > bits and bricks scattering as an act of ?deconstruction? that i believe > can > > loose the reality of what came before, starting with Bella?s zero stage > > that is (existential). A time when the person traversing the zero stage > > should be ?recognized? through moral/ethical care and concern. Not a > > journey of (mineness) through Heidegger which is a protesting protestant > > approach, but through mitsein as living-through. > > I hope my referencing multiple speakers but trying to stay within strands > > is clear? > > Perezhivanie as trans/hivanie as Marc says is approached through multiple > > pluaristic traditions that are psychological, literary, and philosophical > > and extend through historical consciousness as the living-through > > repetitive back and forth traversal that INCLUDES as central the PAUSE or > > MA or INTERVAL or GAP. > > > > > > > > > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > From: Alfredo Jornet Gil > > Sent: January 6, 2017 7:17 AM > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie > > > > Rob, how appropriate the thought experiment! > > Alfredo > > > > ________________________________________ > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > on behalf of R.J.S.Parsons > > Sent: 06 January 2017 15:41 > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie > > > > In thinking about "experience as struggle", I found myself considering > > Nozick's thought experiment of the experience machine, which he uses to > > explore the issue of ethical hedonism.* Consider a machine which could > > stimulate a person's brain to induce pleasurable experiences that the > > subject could not distinguish from those he would have apart from the > > machine. Nozick then asks, if given the choice, would we prefer the > > machine to real life? (this description from Wikipedia). It strikes me > > that the experience delivered by the machine is experience without > > struggle. There is no activity from the subject, meaning making is not > > necessary, and therefore there is no development. > > > > Clara quotes Vygotsky "A perezhivanie is a unit where, on the one hand, > > in an indivisible state, the environment is represented, i.e. that which > > is being experienced?a perezhivanie is always related to something which > > is found outside the person?and on the other hand, what is represented > > is how I, myself, am experiencing this," - the thought experiment breaks > > the unit, and in doing so, I think, demonstrates how important its > > existence as a unit is. > > > > *Also brilliantly explored in the "Total Immersion Video game" in Red > > Dwarf Season 5 episode 6 Back To Reality. > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2IzX6b1YJHI > > > > Rob > > > > On 03/01/2017 17:37, Christopher Schuck wrote: > > > It's an interesting question (about the brick and perezhivanie), partly > > > because that extended, "living-through", repeated doubling-back process > > > evoked by the Vygotskian sense of the concept would seem to be at odds > > with > > > a single, discrete act of "smashing" that is immediate, forceful and > even > > > violent. It would suggest that part of what perezhivanie means is > wrapped > > > up in the symbolic marking of its end - and that this end, when it > comes, > > > can be forceful. Certainly, the image could not be more unified and > > > embodying of a particular set of meaningful experiences. But is that > how > > > perezhivanie works? This leads me to ask: > > > > > > 1) what are the problems and contradictions encountered in using > > particular > > > metaphors to depict perezhivanie, where perezhivanie is itself so > defined > > > by imagination and narrativity? Part of this might also be a question > of > > > what it means to describe and represent one's own perezhivanie > > > figuratively/narratively (whether to others, or to oneself), as opposed > > to > > > living that perezhivanie. Especially if the attempt to > capture/represent > > > one's own perezhivanie is, perhaps, also central to the living of it? > > > > > > 2) What is the nature of the relationship between perezhivanie and > > force, > > > either in terms of the internal process or in terms of how it finally > > > "ends"? (Not to mention, how it begins). It would seem that in both > > > conceptions discussed in the article there is a certain intensity > > required. > > > But does this in some cases require something more explosive - and does > > > Vasilyuk's conception of perezhivanie as activity speak more to this > > > possibility? And how do we reconcile this with the less "forceful" > notion > > > of enduring, revisiting, and working through? > > > > > > On Monday, January 2, 2017, mike cole wrote: > > > > > >> The pieces of brick thrown up by this political hammering have not yet > > >> fallen and made the devastation personally experienced by the > > nation/world. > > >> > > >> Still, genuinely, we can wish all of us 7.3 billion well in the new > > year. > > >> > > >> So what do you think chuck, is this a good representation of > > perezhivanie? > > >> :-) > > >> Mike > > >> > > >> On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 11:24 AM Charles Bazerman < > > >> bazerman@education.ucsb.edu> wrote: > > >> > > >>> So you think 2017 has any hope of being any better? > > >>> > > >>> Chuck > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> ----- Original Message ----- > > >>> > > >>> From: mike cole > > >>> > > >>> Date: Monday, January 2, 2017 11:01 am > > >>> > > >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] New Year's Perezhivanie > > >>> > > >>> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>>> With the New Year, as our Russian colleagues put it! > > >>>> This image forwarded from a friend more or less sums up my > experience > > >>>> of > > >>>> the past year. Thought you might find it interesting too. > > >>>> Vis a vis the discussion of perezhivanie: Does this image provide us > > >> with > > >>>> used (re-presented) behavioral evidence of a person undergoing > > >>> perezhivanie? > > >>> > > >>>> Looking forward to the discussion. > > >>>> Feliz a?o nuevo! > > >>>> Mike > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > -- Beth Ferholt Assistant Professor Department of Early Childhood and Art Education Brooklyn College, City University of New York 2900 Bedford Avenue Brooklyn, NY 11210-2889 Email: bferholt@brooklyn.cuny.edu Phone: (718) 951-5205 Fax: (718) 951-4816 From bferholt@gmail.com Fri Jan 6 20:34:13 2017 From: bferholt@gmail.com (Beth Ferholt) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2017 23:34:13 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: <58706b94.03a3620a.ce027.1a81@mx.google.com> References: <586ae645.475a620a.84afb.9951@mx.google.com> <25cde5c9-9e15-b7f4-6f4c-18f763423cbc@open.ac.uk> <1483715539761.38866@iped.uio.no> <586fd3be.45da620a.2a730.8da3@mx.google.com> <1483724630007.83825@iped.uio.no> <58703d02.8bc2620a.7ee11.cf9b@mx.google.com> <58706b94.03a3620a.ce027.1a81@mx.google.com> Message-ID: No apology needed, I just did not want to take credit for Bella's paper! Beth On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 11:15 PM, wrote: > My sincere apology Beth. > > Will try to slow down. This topic multiplies quickly ; - ) > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > *From: *Beth Ferholt > *Sent: *January 6, 2017 7:21 PM > *To: *eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > *Cc: *Alfredo Jornet Gil > > *Subject: *[Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie > > > > I have not caught up yet but think I am being confused with Bella -- My > > paper in the issue did relate to redemption but I am Beth ; ) . Beth > > > > On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 8:26 PM, mike cole wrote: > > > > > Here is the Garrison article. A search of the lchc site turned up a > > > discussion of his work in 2007. And earlier, with an interruption for > > > Garrison Keiler. :-) > > > mike > > > > > > On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 4:57 PM, wrote: > > > > > > > Alfredo, > > > > I have started reading through the article you have attached that you > > > and > > > > Wolf-Michael Roth wrote together. I noticed an article referenced by > J. > > > > Garrison [An Introduction to Dewey?s Theory of Functional > ?trans-action?: > > > > An alternative paradigm for Activity Theory] in Mind Culture and > Activity > > > > 2001. Is this article archived as open access? > > > > I believe Garrison may also contribute to my growing understanding of > > > > [experience and learning]. You reference this at a point in your paper > > > > [page 108] where you are discussing experience is in EXCESS of > cognitive > > > > construction. [a tremendous excess of experience over intellectual > > > subject > > > > matter]. This is a path worth travrlling along. > > > > > > > > Sent from Mail for Windows 10 > > > > > > > > From: Alfredo Jornet Gilthat experience is always in > > > > Sent: January 6, 2017 9:43 AM > > > > To: lpscholar2@gmail.com; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > Subject: Re: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie > > > > > > > > Larry, great additions, but why writing "trans/hivanie" when we have a > > > > number of resources to be aware of the etymological roots of > > > perezhivanie? > > > > One such resource is in Andy Blunden's article in the special issue. > > > > Another is an earlier paper Michael and myself co-authored a few years > > > ago > > > > and which you can find attached. I quote from the paper: > > > > > > > > "Experience (perezhivanie) in its original sense?in English and Russian > > > as > > > > well as in the French exp?er ience or the German equivalent Erfahr > > > > ung?suggests that in contrast to the repetition of something, > experience > > > is > > > > related to travel, traversal, peril, risk, and change. The > > > > Proto-Indo-European root per(e) -denotes the verbs to try, dare, and > > > risk, > > > > put oneself in danger; as such, it also made it into suchwords as exper > > > > iment (Greek pe??rama, experiment) and perilous." > > > > > > > > Alfredo > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: lpscholar2@gmail.com > > > > Sent: 06 January 2017 18:27 > > > > To: Alfredo Jornet Gil; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > Subject: RE: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie > > > > > > > > Rob, and Christopher, and Alfreda, and Marc, > > > > This is an interesting reference to Nozick and achieving an experience > > > > without struggle. I want to refocus us on how this insight is an > > > extension > > > > to Christopher?s posting. In particular the opening paragraph. The > image > > > of > > > > smashing to bits the bricks is wrapped up in the end moment of > > > > trans/hivanie. > > > > SO the focus on what occurs before this end point central to > > > Christopher?s > > > > question : > > > > ?but is this how trans/hivanie works?? > > > > AND Christopher answers by focusing on the : > > > > ?extended back and forth, the REPEATED back and forth, the > > > > (living-through) that seems to be exemplary of trans/hivanie. > > > > > > > > Marc says it is ?this? phenomena that brought him to trans/hivanie and > > > not > > > > the other way around. > > > > What is occurring within the ?repetition? being lived through. > > > > As an aside Nozick turned to eastern philosophy from the Indian > > > > subcontinent for deeper inspiration. I could add more if interest > > > warrants > > > > (possibly another thread). > > > > > > > > ALSO, i recommend going to page 27 of Bella?s article (that Peter > posted) > > > > to get a sense of Vygotsky?s extended repeated (living through) of the > > > > Jewish question that he was writing extensively about in 1916. On that > > > page > > > > Bella refers to two articles Vygotsky wrote on this theme. One was in a > > > > (literary) mode while the other was written in a (psychological) mode. > > > > Trans/hivanie at work implicitly as formative of the later Vygotsky. > > > > This topic, as Bella images as spaghetti tangles. In Vygotsky?s own > words > > > > from 1916 on the incomprehensible riddle-like companion of Jewish > > > > history as : > > > > > > > > ?riddle-like, inexplicability, the MYSTERY of Isreal .... eternal > > > fellow > > > > traveler of the eternal people, the SECRET of the eternity of the > Jewish > > > > people? > > > > > > > > To further this strand we should possibly keep distinct from this > month?s > > > > article. However the theme of ?repetition? that had the mood of > profound > > > > struggle or at a deeper level a mood of no movement and closed off, is > > > the > > > > process occuring which maybat some point in time erupt as smashing 2016 > > > to > > > > bits and bricks scattering as an act of ?deconstruction? that i believe > > > can > > > > loose the reality of what came before, starting with Bella?s zero stage > > > > that is (existential). A time when the person traversing the zero > stage > > > > should be ?recognized? through moral/ethical care and concern. Not a > > > > journey of (mineness) through Heidegger which is a protesting > protestant > > > > approach, but through mitsein as living-through. > > > > I hope my referencing multiple speakers but trying to stay within > strands > > > > is clear? > > > > Perezhivanie as trans/hivanie as Marc says is approached through > multiple > > > > pluaristic traditions that are psychological, literary, and > philosophical > > > > and extend through historical consciousness as the living-through > > > > repetitive back and forth traversal that INCLUDES as central the PAUSE > or > > > > MA or INTERVAL or GAP. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > > > > > From: Alfredo Jornet Gil > > > > Sent: January 6, 2017 7:17 AM > > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie > > > > > > > > Rob, how appropriate the thought experiment! > > > > Alfredo > > > > > > > > ________________________________________ > > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > on behalf of R.J.S.Parsons > > > > Sent: 06 January 2017 15:41 > > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie > > > > > > > > In thinking about "experience as struggle", I found myself considering > > > > Nozick's thought experiment of the experience machine, which he uses to > > > > explore the issue of ethical hedonism.* Consider a machine which could > > > > stimulate a person's brain to induce pleasurable experiences that the > > > > subject could not distinguish from those he would have apart from the > > > > machine. Nozick then asks, if given the choice, would we prefer the > > > > machine to real life? (this description from Wikipedia). It strikes me > > > > that the experience delivered by the machine is experience without > > > > struggle. There is no activity from the subject, meaning making is not > > > > necessary, and therefore there is no development. > > > > > > > > Clara quotes Vygotsky "A perezhivanie is a unit where, on the one hand, > > > > in an indivisible state, the environment is represented, i.e. that > which > > > > is being experienced?a perezhivanie is always related to something > which > > > > is found outside the person?and on the other hand, what is represented > > > > is how I, myself, am experiencing this," - the thought experiment > breaks > > > > the unit, and in doing so, I think, demonstrates how important its > > > > existence as a unit is. > > > > > > > > *Also brilliantly explored in the "Total Immersion Video game" in Red > > > > Dwarf Season 5 episode 6 Back To Reality. > > > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2IzX6b1YJHI > > > > > > > > Rob > > > > > > > > On 03/01/2017 17:37, Christopher Schuck wrote: > > > > > It's an interesting question (about the brick and perezhivanie), > partly > > > > > because that extended, "living-through", repeated doubling-back > process > > > > > evoked by the Vygotskian sense of the concept would seem to be at > odds > > > > with > > > > > a single, discrete act of "smashing" that is immediate, forceful and > > > even > > > > > violent. It would suggest that part of what perezhivanie means is > > > wrapped > > > > > up in the symbolic marking of its end - and that this end, when it > > > comes, > > > > > can be forceful. Certainly, the image could not be more unified and > > > > > embodying of a particular set of meaningful experiences. But is that > > > how > > > > > perezhivanie works? This leads me to ask: > > > > > > > > > > 1) what are the problems and contradictions encountered in using > > > > particular > > > > > metaphors to depict perezhivanie, where perezhivanie is itself so > > > defined > > > > > by imagination and narrativity? Part of this might also be a question > > > of > > > > > what it means to describe and represent one's own perezhivanie > > > > > figuratively/narratively (whether to others, or to oneself), as > opposed > > > > to > > > > > living that perezhivanie. Especially if the attempt to > > > capture/represent > > > > > one's own perezhivanie is, perhaps, also central to the living of it? > > > > > > > > > > 2) What is the nature of the relationship between perezhivanie and > > > > force, > > > > > either in terms of the internal process or in terms of how it finally > > > > > "ends"? (Not to mention, how it begins). It would seem that in both > > > > > conceptions discussed in the article there is a certain intensity > > > > required. > > > > > But does this in some cases require something more explosive - and > does > > > > > Vasilyuk's conception of perezhivanie as activity speak more to this > > > > > possibility? And how do we reconcile this with the less "forceful" > > > notion > > > > > of enduring, revisiting, and working through? > > > > > > > > > > On Monday, January 2, 2017, mike cole wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> The pieces of brick thrown up by this political hammering have not > yet > > > > >> fallen and made the devastation personally experienced by the > > > > nation/world. > > > > >> > > > > >> Still, genuinely, we can wish all of us 7.3 billion well in the new > > > > year. > > > > >> > > > > >> So what do you think chuck, is this a good representation of > > > > perezhivanie? > > > > >> :-) > > > > >> Mike > > > > >> > > > > >> On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 11:24 AM Charles Bazerman < > > > > >> bazerman@education.ucsb.edu> wrote: > > > > >> > > > > >>> So you think 2017 has any hope of being any better? > > > > >>> > > > > >>> Chuck > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> ----- Original Message ----- > > > > >>> > > > > >>> From: mike cole > > > > >>> > > > > >>> Date: Monday, January 2, 2017 11:01 am > > > > >>> > > > > >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] New Year's Perezhivanie > > > > >>> > > > > >>> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> With the New Year, as our Russian colleagues put it! > > > > >>>> This image forwarded from a friend more or less sums up my > > > experience > > > > >>>> of > > > > >>>> the past year. Thought you might find it interesting too. > > > > >>>> Vis a vis the discussion of perezhivanie: Does this image provide > us > > > > >> with > > > > >>>> used (re-presented) behavioral evidence of a person undergoing > > > > >>> perezhivanie? > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> Looking forward to the discussion. > > > > >>>> Feliz a?o nuevo! > > > > >>>> Mike > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Beth Ferholt > > Assistant Professor > > Department of Early Childhood and Art Education > > Brooklyn College, City University of New York > > 2900 Bedford Avenue > > Brooklyn, NY 11210-2889 > > > > Email: bferholt@brooklyn.cuny.edu > > Phone: (718) 951-5205 > > Fax: (718) 951-4816 > > > -- Beth Ferholt Assistant Professor Department of Early Childhood and Art Education Brooklyn College, City University of New York 2900 Bedford Avenue Brooklyn, NY 11210-2889 Email: bferholt@brooklyn.cuny.edu Phone: (718) 951-5205 Fax: (718) 951-4816 From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Fri Jan 6 21:11:41 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2017 05:11:41 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: <58706a47.5ba0620a.a5c6a.1799@mx.google.com> References: <586ae645.475a620a.84afb.9951@mx.google.com> <25cde5c9-9e15-b7f4-6f4c-18f763423cbc@open.ac.uk> <1483715539761.38866@iped.uio.no> <586fd3be.45da620a.2a730.8da3@mx.google.com> <1483724630007.83825@iped.uio.no> <58703d02.8bc2620a.7ee11.cf9b@mx.google.com> , <58706a47.5ba0620a.a5c6a.1799@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <1483765928130.37293@iped.uio.no> ?The Garrison paper reads best in company of its commentary by Miettinem, who defends CHAT's dialectical premises. Alfredo ________________________________ From: lpscholar2@gmail.com Sent: 07 January 2017 05:10 To: mike cole; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Cc: Alfredo Jornet Gil Subject: RE: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie Thanks Mike, Will take some time to digest these mutiple documents that are now circulating around the topics of experience & learning & development and their relations to perezhivanie. A vital topic to open the new year. Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: mike cole Sent: January 6, 2017 5:29 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Cc: Alfredo Jornet Gil Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie Here is the Garrison article. A search of the lchc site turned up a discussion of his work in 2007. And earlier, with an interruption for Garrison Keiler. :-) mike On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 4:57 PM, wrote: > Alfredo, > I have started reading through the article you have attached that you and > Wolf-Michael Roth wrote together. I noticed an article referenced by J. > Garrison [An Introduction to Dewey?s Theory of Functional ?trans-action?: > An alternative paradigm for Activity Theory] in Mind Culture and Activity > 2001. Is this article archived as open access? > I believe Garrison may also contribute to my growing understanding of > [experience and learning]. You reference this at a point in your paper > [page 108] where you are discussing experience is in EXCESS of cognitive > construction. [a tremendous excess of experience over intellectual subject > matter]. This is a path worth travrlling along. > > Sent from Mail for Windows 10 > > From: Alfredo Jornet Gilthat experience is always in > Sent: January 6, 2017 9:43 AM > To: lpscholar2@gmail.com; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: Re: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie > > Larry, great additions, but why writing "trans/hivanie" when we have a > number of resources to be aware of the etymological roots of perezhivanie? > One such resource is in Andy Blunden's article in the special issue. > Another is an earlier paper Michael and myself co-authored a few years ago > and which you can find attached. I quote from the paper: > > "Experience (perezhivanie) in its original sense?in English and Russian as > well as in the French exp?er ience or the German equivalent Erfahr > ung?suggests that in contrast to the repetition of something, experience is > related to travel, traversal, peril, risk, and change. The > Proto-Indo-European root per(e) -denotes the verbs to try, dare, and risk, > put oneself in danger; as such, it also made it into suchwords as exper > iment (Greek pe??rama, experiment) and perilous." > > Alfredo > > > > > > From: lpscholar2@gmail.com > Sent: 06 January 2017 18:27 > To: Alfredo Jornet Gil; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: RE: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie > > Rob, and Christopher, and Alfreda, and Marc, > This is an interesting reference to Nozick and achieving an experience > without struggle. I want to refocus us on how this insight is an extension > to Christopher?s posting. In particular the opening paragraph. The image of > smashing to bits the bricks is wrapped up in the end moment of > trans/hivanie. > SO the focus on what occurs before this end point central to Christopher?s > question : > ?but is this how trans/hivanie works?? > AND Christopher answers by focusing on the : > ?extended back and forth, the REPEATED back and forth, the > (living-through) that seems to be exemplary of trans/hivanie. > > Marc says it is ?this? phenomena that brought him to trans/hivanie and not > the other way around. > What is occurring within the ?repetition? being lived through. > As an aside Nozick turned to eastern philosophy from the Indian > subcontinent for deeper inspiration. I could add more if interest warrants > (possibly another thread). > > ALSO, i recommend going to page 27 of Bella?s article (that Peter posted) > to get a sense of Vygotsky?s extended repeated (living through) of the > Jewish question that he was writing extensively about in 1916. On that page > Bella refers to two articles Vygotsky wrote on this theme. One was in a > (literary) mode while the other was written in a (psychological) mode. > Trans/hivanie at work implicitly as formative of the later Vygotsky. > This topic, as Bella images as spaghetti tangles. In Vygotsky?s own words > from 1916 on the incomprehensible riddle-like companion of Jewish > history as : > > ?riddle-like, inexplicability, the MYSTERY of Isreal .... eternal fellow > traveler of the eternal people, the SECRET of the eternity of the Jewish > people? > > To further this strand we should possibly keep distinct from this month?s > article. However the theme of ?repetition? that had the mood of profound > struggle or at a deeper level a mood of no movement and closed off, is the > process occuring which maybat some point in time erupt as smashing 2016 to > bits and bricks scattering as an act of ?deconstruction? that i believe can > loose the reality of what came before, starting with Bella?s zero stage > that is (existential). A time when the person traversing the zero stage > should be ?recognized? through moral/ethical care and concern. Not a > journey of (mineness) through Heidegger which is a protesting protestant > approach, but through mitsein as living-through. > I hope my referencing multiple speakers but trying to stay within strands > is clear? > Perezhivanie as trans/hivanie as Marc says is approached through multiple > pluaristic traditions that are psychological, literary, and philosophical > and extend through historical consciousness as the living-through > repetitive back and forth traversal that INCLUDES as central the PAUSE or > MA or INTERVAL or GAP. > > > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > From: Alfredo Jornet Gil > Sent: January 6, 2017 7:17 AM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie > > Rob, how appropriate the thought experiment! > Alfredo > > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of R.J.S.Parsons > Sent: 06 January 2017 15:41 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie > > In thinking about "experience as struggle", I found myself considering > Nozick's thought experiment of the experience machine, which he uses to > explore the issue of ethical hedonism.* Consider a machine which could > stimulate a person's brain to induce pleasurable experiences that the > subject could not distinguish from those he would have apart from the > machine. Nozick then asks, if given the choice, would we prefer the > machine to real life? (this description from Wikipedia). It strikes me > that the experience delivered by the machine is experience without > struggle. There is no activity from the subject, meaning making is not > necessary, and therefore there is no development. > > Clara quotes Vygotsky "A perezhivanie is a unit where, on the one hand, > in an indivisible state, the environment is represented, i.e. that which > is being experienced?a perezhivanie is always related to something which > is found outside the person?and on the other hand, what is represented > is how I, myself, am experiencing this," - the thought experiment breaks > the unit, and in doing so, I think, demonstrates how important its > existence as a unit is. > > *Also brilliantly explored in the "Total Immersion Video game" in Red > Dwarf Season 5 episode 6 Back To Reality. > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2IzX6b1YJHI > > Rob > > On 03/01/2017 17:37, Christopher Schuck wrote: > > It's an interesting question (about the brick and perezhivanie), partly > > because that extended, "living-through", repeated doubling-back process > > evoked by the Vygotskian sense of the concept would seem to be at odds > with > > a single, discrete act of "smashing" that is immediate, forceful and even > > violent. It would suggest that part of what perezhivanie means is wrapped > > up in the symbolic marking of its end - and that this end, when it comes, > > can be forceful. Certainly, the image could not be more unified and > > embodying of a particular set of meaningful experiences. But is that how > > perezhivanie works? This leads me to ask: > > > > 1) what are the problems and contradictions encountered in using > particular > > metaphors to depict perezhivanie, where perezhivanie is itself so defined > > by imagination and narrativity? Part of this might also be a question of > > what it means to describe and represent one's own perezhivanie > > figuratively/narratively (whether to others, or to oneself), as opposed > to > > living that perezhivanie. Especially if the attempt to capture/represent > > one's own perezhivanie is, perhaps, also central to the living of it? > > > > 2) What is the nature of the relationship between perezhivanie and > force, > > either in terms of the internal process or in terms of how it finally > > "ends"? (Not to mention, how it begins). It would seem that in both > > conceptions discussed in the article there is a certain intensity > required. > > But does this in some cases require something more explosive - and does > > Vasilyuk's conception of perezhivanie as activity speak more to this > > possibility? And how do we reconcile this with the less "forceful" notion > > of enduring, revisiting, and working through? > > > > On Monday, January 2, 2017, mike cole wrote: > > > >> The pieces of brick thrown up by this political hammering have not yet > >> fallen and made the devastation personally experienced by the > nation/world. > >> > >> Still, genuinely, we can wish all of us 7.3 billion well in the new > year. > >> > >> So what do you think chuck, is this a good representation of > perezhivanie? > >> :-) > >> Mike > >> > >> On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 11:24 AM Charles Bazerman < > >> bazerman@education.ucsb.edu> wrote: > >> > >>> So you think 2017 has any hope of being any better? > >>> > >>> Chuck > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> ----- Original Message ----- > >>> > >>> From: mike cole > >>> > >>> Date: Monday, January 2, 2017 11:01 am > >>> > >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] New Year's Perezhivanie > >>> > >>> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>> With the New Year, as our Russian colleagues put it! > >>>> This image forwarded from a friend more or less sums up my experience > >>>> of > >>>> the past year. Thought you might find it interesting too. > >>>> Vis a vis the discussion of perezhivanie: Does this image provide us > >> with > >>>> used (re-presented) behavioral evidence of a person undergoing > >>> perezhivanie? > >>> > >>>> Looking forward to the discussion. > >>>> Feliz a?o nuevo! > >>>> Mike > >>> > >>> > >>> > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Artifact Mediation in Dewey and in Cultural Historical Activity Theory.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 158488 bytes Desc: Artifact Mediation in Dewey and in Cultural Historical Activity Theory.pdf Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20170107/246ec42c/attachment-0001.pdf From lpscholar2@gmail.com Fri Jan 6 22:10:47 2017 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2017 22:10:47 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: <1483765928130.37293@iped.uio.no> References: <586ae645.475a620a.84afb.9951@mx.google.com> <25cde5c9-9e15-b7f4-6f4c-18f763423cbc@open.ac.uk> <1483715539761.38866@iped.uio.no> <586fd3be.45da620a.2a730.8da3@mx.google.com> <1483724630007.83825@iped.uio.no> <58703d02.8bc2620a.7ee11.cf9b@mx.google.com> , <58706a47.5ba0620a.a5c6a.1799@mx.google.com> <1483765928130.37293@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <58708669.1b98620a.28943.36d1@mx.google.com> Thanks Alfredo, Yes articles do read better with companions. I have now printed out all these articles and will meander through as I try to follow and understand the conversation ongoing between you and Marc around the keystone notion, motion, and emotion of mediation in relation to perezhivanie. Moving from vague understanding towards hopefully more shared understanding. I believe these companion pieces may support this traversal as I pick up the multiple strands of this months topic. Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From: Alfredo Jornet Gil Sent: January 6, 2017 9:11 PM To: lpscholar2@gmail.com; mike cole; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: Re: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie ?The Garrison paper reads best in company of its commentary by Miettinem, who defends CHAT's dialectical premises. Alfredo From: lpscholar2@gmail.com Sent: 07 January 2017 05:10 To: mike cole; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Cc: Alfredo Jornet Gil Subject: RE: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie ? Thanks Mike, Will take some time to digest these mutiple documents that are now circulating around the topics of experience & learning & development and their relations to perezhivanie. A vital topic to open the new year. ? ? ? Sent from my Windows 10 phone ? From: mike cole Sent: January 6, 2017 5:29 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Cc: Alfredo Jornet Gil Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie ? Here is the Garrison article. A search of the lchc site turned up a discussion of his work in 2007. And earlier, with an interruption for Garrison Keiler. :-) mike ? On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 4:57 PM, wrote: ? > Alfredo, > I have started reading through the article you have attached that you? and > Wolf-Michael Roth wrote together. I noticed an article referenced? by J. > Garrison [An Introduction to Dewey?s Theory of Functional ?trans-action?: > An alternative paradigm for Activity Theory] in Mind Culture and Activity > 2001.? Is this article archived as open access? > I believe Garrison may also contribute to my growing understanding of > [experience and learning].? You reference this at a point in your paper > [page 108] where you are discussing experience is in EXCESS of cognitive > construction. [a tremendous excess of experience over intellectual subject > matter]. This is a path worth travrlling along. >? > Sent from Mail for Windows 10 >? > From: Alfredo Jornet Gilthat experience is always in > Sent: January 6, 2017 9:43 AM > To: lpscholar2@gmail.com; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: Re: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie >? > Larry, great additions, but why writing "trans/hivanie" when we have a > number of resources to be aware of the etymological roots of perezhivanie? > One such resource is in Andy Blunden's article in the special issue. > Another is an earlier paper Michael and myself co-authored a few years ago > and which you can find attached. I quote from the paper: >? > "Experience (perezhivanie) in its original sense?in English and Russian as > well as in the French exp?er ience or the German equivalent Erfahr > ung?suggests that in contrast to the repetition of something, experience is > related to travel, traversal, peril, risk, and change. The > Proto-Indo-European root per(e) -denotes the verbs to try, dare, and risk, > put oneself in danger; as such, it also made it into suchwords as exper > iment (Greek pe??rama,? experiment) and perilous." >? > Alfredo >? >? >? >? >? > From: lpscholar2@gmail.com > Sent: 06 January 2017 18:27 > To: Alfredo Jornet Gil; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: RE: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie >? > Rob, and Christopher, and Alfreda, and Marc, > This is an interesting reference to Nozick and achieving an experience > without struggle. I want to refocus us on how this insight is an extension > to Christopher?s posting. In particular the opening paragraph. The image of > smashing to bits the bricks is wrapped up in the end moment of > trans/hivanie. > SO the focus on what occurs before this end point central to Christopher?s > question : > ?but is this how trans/hivanie works?? > AND Christopher answers by focusing on the : > ?extended back and forth, the REPEATED back and forth, the > (living-through) that seems to be exemplary of trans/hivanie. >? > Marc says it is ?this? phenomena that brought him to trans/hivanie and not > the other way around. > What is occurring within the ?repetition? being lived through. > As an aside Nozick turned to eastern philosophy from the? Indian > subcontinent for deeper inspiration. I could add more if interest warrants > (possibly another thread). >? > ALSO, i recommend going to page 27 of Bella?s article (that Peter posted) > to get a sense of Vygotsky?s extended repeated (living through) of the > Jewish question that he was writing extensively about in 1916. On that page > Bella refers to two articles Vygotsky wrote on this theme. One was in a > (literary) mode while the other was written in a (psychological) mode. > Trans/hivanie at work implicitly as formative of the later Vygotsky. > This topic, as Bella images as spaghetti tangles. In Vygotsky?s own words > from 1916 on the incomprehensible riddle-like companion of Jewish > history as : >? > ?riddle-like, inexplicability, the MYSTERY of Isreal ....?? eternal fellow > traveler of the eternal people, the SECRET of the eternity of the Jewish > people? >? > To further this strand we should possibly keep distinct from this month?s > article. However the theme of ?repetition? that had the mood of profound > struggle or at a deeper level a mood of no movement and closed off, is the > process occuring which maybat some point in time erupt as smashing 2016 to > bits and bricks scattering as an act of ?deconstruction? that i believe can > loose the reality of what came before, starting with Bella?s zero stage > that is? (existential). A time when the person traversing the zero stage > should be ?recognized? through moral/ethical care and concern. Not a > journey of (mineness) through Heidegger which is a protesting protestant > approach, but through mitsein as living-through. > I hope my referencing multiple speakers but trying to stay within strands > is clear? > Perezhivanie as trans/hivanie as Marc says is approached through multiple > pluaristic traditions that are psychological, literary, and philosophical > and extend through historical consciousness as the living-through > repetitive back and forth traversal that INCLUDES as central the PAUSE or > MA or INTERVAL or GAP. >? >? >? >? >? > Sent from my Windows 10 phone >? > From: Alfredo Jornet Gil > Sent: January 6, 2017 7:17 AM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie >? > Rob, how appropriate the thought experiment! > Alfredo >? > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of R.J.S.Parsons > Sent: 06 January 2017 15:41 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie >? > In thinking about "experience as struggle", I found myself considering > Nozick's thought experiment of the experience machine, which he uses to > explore the issue of ethical hedonism.* Consider a machine which could > stimulate a person's brain to induce pleasurable experiences that the > subject could not distinguish from those he would have apart from the > machine. Nozick then asks, if given the choice, would we prefer the > machine to real life? (this description from Wikipedia). It strikes me > that the experience delivered by the machine is experience without > struggle. There is no activity from the subject, meaning making is not > necessary, and therefore there is no development. >? > Clara quotes Vygotsky "A perezhivanie is a unit where, on the one hand, > in an indivisible state, the environment is represented, i.e. that which > is being experienced?a perezhivanie is always related to something which > is found outside the person?and on the other hand, what is represented > is how I, myself, am experiencing this," - the thought experiment breaks > the unit, and in doing so, I think, demonstrates how important its > existence as a unit is. >? > *Also brilliantly explored in the "Total Immersion Video game" in Red > Dwarf Season 5 episode 6 Back To Reality. > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2IzX6b1YJHI >? > Rob >? > On 03/01/2017 17:37, Christopher Schuck wrote: > > It's an interesting question (about the brick and perezhivanie), partly > > because that extended, "living-through", repeated doubling-back process > > evoked by the Vygotskian sense of the concept would seem to be at odds > with > > a single, discrete act of "smashing" that is immediate, forceful and even > > violent. It would suggest that part of what perezhivanie means is wrapped > > up in the symbolic marking of its end - and that this end, when it comes, > > can be forceful. Certainly, the image could not be more unified and > > embodying of a particular set of meaningful experiences. But is that how > > perezhivanie works? This leads me to ask: > > > > 1) what are the problems and contradictions encountered in using > particular > > metaphors to depict perezhivanie, where perezhivanie is itself so defined > > by imagination and narrativity? Part of this might also be a question of > > what it means to describe and represent one's own perezhivanie > > figuratively/narratively (whether to others, or to oneself), as opposed > to > > living that perezhivanie. Especially if the attempt to capture/represent > > one's own perezhivanie is, perhaps, also central to the living of it? > > > >?? 2) What is the nature of the relationship between perezhivanie and > force, > > either in terms of the internal process or in terms of how it finally > > "ends"?? (Not to mention, how it begins). It would seem that in both > > conceptions discussed in the article there is a certain intensity > required. > > But does this in some cases require something more explosive - and does > > Vasilyuk's conception of perezhivanie as activity speak more to this > > possibility? And how do we reconcile this with the less "forceful" notion > > of enduring, revisiting, and working through? > > > > On Monday, January 2, 2017, mike cole wrote: > > > >> The pieces of brick thrown up by this political hammering have not yet > >> fallen and made the devastation personally experienced by the > nation/world. > >> > >> Still, genuinely, we can wish all of us 7.3 billion well in the new > year. > >> > >> So what do you think chuck, is this a good representation of > perezhivanie? > >> :-) > >> Mike > >> > >> On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 11:24 AM Charles Bazerman < > >> bazerman@education.ucsb.edu> wrote: > >> > >>> So you think 2017 has any hope of being any better? > >>> > >>> Chuck > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> ----- Original Message ----- > >>> > >>> From: mike cole > >>> > >>> Date: Monday, January 2, 2017 11:01 am > >>> > >>> Subject: [Xmca-l]? New Year's Perezhivanie > >>> > >>> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>> With the New Year, as our Russian colleagues put it! > >>>> This image forwarded from a friend more or less sums up my experience > >>>> of > >>>> the past year. Thought you might find it interesting too. > >>>> Vis a vis the discussion of perezhivanie: Does this image provide us > >> with > >>>> used (re-presented) behavioral evidence of a person undergoing > >>> perezhivanie? > >>> > >>>> Looking forward to the discussion. > >>>> Feliz a?o nuevo! > >>>> Mike > >>> > >>> > >>> >? >? >? >? >? ? -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: D49655E203164FC1B7C9FBFBEF741EBE.png Type: image/png Size: 161 bytes Desc: not available Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20170106/49cf9166/attachment.png From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Fri Jan 6 22:29:48 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2017 06:29:48 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! In-Reply-To: <5df5e870-3ef8-70d6-0c17-f8647ba17e62@mira.net> References: <1483344752182.40904@iped.uio.no> <1483467423798.57819@iped.uio.no> <1483601196884.31418@iped.uio.no>, <5df5e870-3ef8-70d6-0c17-f8647ba17e62@mira.net> Message-ID: <1483770614134.193@iped.uio.no> Veresov (in his paper on "duality of categories or dialectical concepts") makes that distinction between mediated activity and mediating activity; and, to me, it seems to contrast mediated as something that already has been done (hence past participle; he mentions "the triangle of activity"), something that can be said of any activity even if one is not focusing on its sign formation dimensions; versus mediating as something that is ongoing, and that is very specific (yet diverse): the activities (plural) of producing sign relations. I think that if you study how people change (learn or develop) as they relate to other people in actual practices or projects using the "mediated activity" perspective (as per the above distinction), then the verb "to mediate" adds very little to what you already knew before you began your inquiry: that all activity was mediated. But if you consider mediating as that particular class of activities in which sign relations are produced, then you can find different forms, where the relations you observe could not be known with certainty before the study begun, because different societal (universal) forms of relation lead to very different forms of perezhivanija/word meaning/etc. Hence, the need of unit analysis (and this latter point I partly learned from you, if I did not mis-learned it). Of course, you can still, if you wish, say that mediating activity is mediated and that it mediates, but then again, mediation would explain everything and nothing, probably because its function is not analytic in the same sense that a unit of analysis is. But all this may be my own confusion, so please, help! I did not use the word "tension" in any technical or well defined way, but perhaps to mark the fact that in most conversations on perezhivanie, there is no just one straightforward way to address the fact that, as you clearly state in your article, "perezhivanie is both an experience ... and the working over of it". I think that all papers have this statement in one form or another, but also differ in the way they approach this fact as an empirical question. ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Andy Blunden Sent: 07 January 2017 02:12 To: xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! I have never understood this supposed distinction, Alfredo, between "mediated activity" and "mediating activity" given that all activity is mediated and all activity mediates. Also, could you spell out what you mean by the "tension" between perezhivanie as meaning and perezhivanie as struggle. Andy ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making On 5/01/2017 6:26 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > Thanks Marc for your careful response. > > I am familiar to Vygotsky's notion of cultural mediation and I am aware and acknowledge that it was elaborated as a means to overcome dualism, and that it is not analog to a computational approach. > > When I brought the computing analogy, I did so with regard not to the concept of cultural mediation in general, but to the way it can be (and is) deployed analytically. I react to what it seems to me a dichotomy between a "meaning" as something that is static (thereby a form of "representation" or reflection of the relation with the environment instead of ?refraction)?? and the experiencing-as-struggling, which is described as ?transformation or change. If so, mediation here would seem to be part of a methodological device that first dissects "a type of meaning" from "a type of activity" (or a given state from the process that changes that state), and then unites it by adding the term "mediation." And this may be my misreading, but in that (mis)reading (which perhaps is mostly due to the fact that in your empirical illustration only the initial and end product, i.e., perezhivanie, are described, but not the experiencing-as-struggle, that is, the moving between the two), mediation here seems to do as analytical concept precisely what you were afraid our monism was doing: explaining nothing. Only the end products but not the process of producing perezhivanie are revealed. This may be problematic if one attends to what Veresov argues in the paper I shared yesterday, where he defends the notion of mediation but also specifies that Vygotsky speaks of *mediating activity* (as opposed to *mediated* activity). That is, not mediation by signs as products, but mediating activity as the activity of producing signs (which again is an activity of producing social relations, perhaps what you refer as "holistic meanings"?). What do you think? > > I did not think you were trying to deny the influence of Spinoza, and I do not think we ever said that Perezhivanie was primarily a move from Cartesian Dualism to Monism, as you suggest in your post. I copy and paste from my prior post: "The fact is that Vygotsky was building a theory on the unity of the affect and the intellect that was to be grounded on Spinoza, and what we try to do is to explore how perezhivanie, as a concept being developed during the same period (but not finalised or totally settled!), could be seen from the perspective of the Spinozist Vygotsky." > > I totally believe that bringing the distinction between perezhivanie as meaning, and perezhivanie as struggle, is totally relevant, and Beth Ferholt's vignettes of Where the Wild Things Are do indeed illustrate this. We really need to address this tension, which as Beth's examples and as our own everyday experience shows, is a tension that matters not just to books and to theories but to living persons (children, teachers), a tension that moreover is present and mentioned in all the articles of the symposium. The papers offer different proposals, and I think is so great we have the chance to discuss them! I too, as you, am very interesting in hearing others about the questions you had concerning sense and meaning. > > Alfredo > > > > > > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Marc Clar? > Sent: 04 January 2017 22:31 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > Thank you very much, Alfredo, for sharing this excellent paper by Veresov, > and thanks also for your responses, which really helped me to better > understand your points. My main doubt about your proposal was/is caused by > the statement that the idea of cultural mediation/mediator implies a > cartesian dualism. This shocks me because, to me, the idea of cultural > mediation is absolutely crucial (in fact, the keystone) for the > construction of a monist (and scientific) psychology that does not forget > mind ?that is, a cultural psychology. From your response, however, I > realized that we may be approaching the idea of mediation in different > ways. I talk of mediation and mediators in a quite restricted way. The > starting point of my understanding of mediation is a dialectical > relationship (organic, transactional) between the subject and the world > (Vygotsky departs from the scheme stimulus-response, from reflexology). > This relationship, that Vygotsky calls primitive psychological functions, > would be basically biological. However, in human beings this relationship > is mediated by cultural means: signs and tools; or primary, secondary and > terciary artifacts. These cultural means reorganize the primitive functions > (dialectic S-O relationship), which become then higher psychological > functions (S-M-O) (see for example, The problem of the cultural development > of the child, in The Vygotsky Reader). Now, the subject, the cultural > mediators, and the object form an inseparable dialectical unit, so that the > subject acts on (transforms) the object through the prism of the cultural > mediators, the object acts on (transforms) the subject also through the > prism of the cultural mediators, and the cultural means are themselves also > transformed as a consequence of their mediation in this continuous dynamic > dialectical tension. Here, for me, it is important the idea that the > cultural means are as material (if we assume a materialist monism) as all > the rest of the world; in fact, are parts of the material world which > become signs or tools (and can be therefore socially distributed). This > permits the introduction of the scientific study of mind-consciousness (as > mediating systems of signs), because mind is not anymore something > immaterial and unobservable, but it is as material and observable as the > rest of the natural world. It is from this view that, for me, the idea of > cultural mediation is the keystone of a monist psychology that includes > mind. Thus, when I speak of mediators, I refer to the cultural means which > mediate in the S-O dialectics; I am especially interested in > signs/secondary artifacts. Here, it is perhaps necessary to insist that > when I talk of studying mediators (and their semantic structure), this > doesn't mean that they are taken out from the activity (the flux of live) > in which they mediate (since out of activity they are not signs anymore); > here, I think Vygotsky tries again to overcome another old dichotomy, the > functionalism-structuralism one. I hope that all this makes also clear the > difference between this view and that of computational psychologies (which > in general are profoundly and explicitly dualist and not dialectic). > > Back to perezhivanie, I'm not obviously trying to deny the influence of > Spinoza on Vygotsky's thinking (this is explicit in Vygotsky's writings, > especially in ?The teaching about emotions?, in the Vol.6 of the Collected > Works). But I have doubts that Vygotsky's introduction of the concept of > perezhivanie is to be regarded primarily as a movement towards monism (from > a previous cartesian dualism), and that this movement questions the concept > of cultural mediation. Instead, and I think that this is in line with some > of Gonz?lez-Rey observations in his paper, my impression is that the > introduction of the concept of perezhivanie responds more to a movement (a > further step) towards holism (something that, in my understanding, can also > be found in Spinoza). Thus, I think that the word meaning is still the unit > of analysis in the last Vygotsky -and therefore, the idea of cultural > mediation is still crucial (in fact, in The problem of the environment, he > connects the concept of perezhivanie, which has just introduced, to the > development of word meaning [p.345-346, also cited in my paper]). However, > in my view, in the last Vygotsky the focus is not anymore primarily on the > word-meaning as formed for things (or collections of things, as in the > ontogenetic research with Sakharov), but the focus is now in the formation > of meaning for holistic situations. > > Best regards, > > Marc. > > 2017-01-03 19:16 GMT+01:00 Alfredo Jornet Gil : > >> Hi Marc, all, >> >> thanks for joining and for your interesting work, which I follow since I >> became aware of it. I appreciate the way in your paper you show careful and >> honest attention to the texts of the authors involved, but perhaps most of >> all I appreciate that the paper makes the transformational dimension >> related to struggle and change salient, a dimension all papers deemed >> central to perezhivanie. And I have learned more about Vasilyuk by reading >> your paper. But I also see that we have approached the question of >> perezhivanie differently and I think that addressing the questions that you >> raise concerning our article may be a good way to both respond and discuss >> your paper. >> >> I am aware that our use of the term monism may be problematic to some, and >> N. Veresov, who has recently written about this (see attached article), >> warns against the dangers of simply moving from dualism into an >> undifferentiating monism that relativizes everything, making development >> un-studiable. This seems to be the way in which you have understood our >> argument, and of course this is not what we are or want to be doing. >> Probably many will think that *dialectical materialism* rather than monism >> is the proper term, and I could agree with them; we do in fact use >> dialectical materialism there and elsewhere. Yet, we wanted to emphasise >> the Spinozist influence (an influence that also runs through Marx) and so >> we found it appropriate to use the term monism, a term that Vygotsky uses >> before arguing that Spinoza "develops an essentially materialistic view" >> (Collected Works, Vol. 6, p. 124). For us, the aim is working out ways to >> empirically examine and formulate problems in ways that do not reify a >> mind-body dualism. >> >> Although overcoming dualism is foundational to the CHAT paradigm, I would >> however not say that Vygotsky did get to solve all of the problems that >> Cartesian dualism had created for psychology, even though he recognised >> those problems brilliantly as early as in the "Crisis". It should suffice >> to cite Vygotsky's own remarks, which we quote in the paper (and which A.N. >> Leont'ev mentions in the introduction to the collected works), where >> Vygotsky explicitly critiques some of his own prior ideas for failing to >> overcome dualism. We agree with those who, like F. G. Rey, see Vygotsky's >> project as a developing rather than as a finalised one. The fact is that >> Vygotsky was building a theory on the unity of the affect and the intellect >> that was to be grounded on Spinoza, and what we try to do is to explore how >> perezhivanie, as a concept being developed during the same period (but not >> finalised or totally settled!), could be seen from the perspective of the >> Spinozist Vygotsky. >> >> As you note, in our article we argue that, if one takes the Spinozist >> one-substance approach, classical concepts used in non-classical >> psychology, at least in the way they are commonly used in the current >> literature, should be revised. One such concept is mediation. And I >> personally do not have much of a problem when mediation is used to denote >> the fundamental fact that every thing exists always through *another*, >> never in and of itself. But I do think that it is problematic to identify >> MEDIATORS, such as "a meaning", as a means to account for or explain >> developmental processes and learning events, precisely because it is there, >> at least in my view, that dualism creeps in. >> >> For example, I find it paradoxical that you are concerned that our monist >> approach risks turning perezhivanie into a useless category because it may >> be used to explain everything and nothing, and yet you do not seem to have >> a problem using the term mediation to account for the transformation of >> perezhivanie without clearly elaborating on how mediation does change >> anything or what it looks like as a real process. How is it different >> saying that a perezhivanie mediates the experiencing-as-struggle from >> simply saying that it "affects" or "determines" it? Indeed, if perezhivanie >> mediates experiencing-as-struggle, does not experiencing-as-struglgle too >> mediate perezhivanie? And do not both may be said to mediate development, >> or development mediate them? Is not this explaining everything and nothing? >> >> I do believe you can argue that there is a difference between mediation >> and classical psychology's cause-effect relations, but to show this you >> need to dig into the dialectical underpinnings of the theory. In your >> paper, you offer a nice analysis of a lovely case of a teacher who, in >> dealing with a challenge with one of her students, changes her >> perezhivanie. I think you can rightly argue that there is a semiotic >> transformation, and I fully support your statement that by studying >> discourse we can empirically approach questions of psychological >> development. The contradictions you show as being involved and resolved >> resonate really well with what I experience as a parent or as a teacher in >> the classroom. Yet, without unpacking what this "mediation" taking place >> between one perezhivanie and the next one means as a concrete and real, the >> same analysis could be done taking an information processing approach: >> there is an situation that is processed (represented?) in one way, which >> then leads to a (cognitive) dissonance, and then there is a cognitive >> resolution by means of which the situation is presented differently in >> consciousness (indeed, when seen in this way, the term perezhivanie and the >> term "representation" become almost indistinguishable). How is mediation, >> as an analytical concept, helping here? And most importantly to the >> question of perezhivanie, how is this analysis going to show the internal >> connection between intellect and affect that Vygotsky formulates as >> constitutive of the notion of perezhivanie? >> >> I believe that the key lies in understanding what Vygotsky means when he >> says that perezhivanie is a unit of analysis. I will not repeat here what >> already is written in at least a couple of the articles in the special >> issue (Blunden, ours), that is the difference between analysis by elements >> and unit analysis (Vygotsky 1987). A unit analysis approach is consistent >> with Spinoza, for whom cause-effect explanations were not adequate, >> requiring instead an understanding of self-development, perezhivanie as a >> kernel cell for the development of personality. And I think you may be >> after this in your article in suggesting a form of continuous movement from >> perezhivanie to experiencing-as-struggle. But perhaps the major difficulty >> I find is that, in positing Vygotsky's perezhivanie as "a type of meaning" >> and Vasilyuk's perezhivanie (or experiencing-as-struggle) as a "type of >> activity," it is difficult not to see here a division between product and >> process, a division that then is analytically bridged by the addition of a >> third term, mediation, that should bring back the real movement between the >> product and the process. >> >> A different approach involves considering the concrete extension of actual >> living and lived social relations, and look at them as generative >> phenomena. What is there in the encounter between Carla and the child that >> leads to change? For it is not inside the mind, but in real life, in >> consciousness as the real relation between people, that Carla is changed. >> How is the semantic structure that you nicely present and attribute to >> Carla a product of the social relation between her and the child? I think >> that to rightfully situate perezhivanie as a concept in a Vygotskian >> framework, we ought to address its relation to the genetic law of >> development. >> >> There is much more to disentangle, but this is long enough. I hope I have >> succeeded in making clear these ideas. Thanks so much for engaging in the >> discussion! >> Alfredo >> >> >> >> ________________________________________ >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> on behalf of Marc Clar? >> Sent: 02 January 2017 22:14 >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! >> >> Hi, all, and thank you so much, Alfredo, for your kind invitation to >> participate in this discussion. My paper in the MCA special issue focuses >> on a distinction between a type of activity, which I argue that is what >> Vasilyuk called *perezhivanie* (experiencing) and a type of semiotic >> mediator, which I argue that is what Vygotsky, in The Problem of the >> Environment, called *perezhivanie.* I argue, following Vasilyuk, that in >> experiencing activities (Vasilyuk's perezhivanie), this type of mediator is >> profoundly transformed ? in fact, that experiencing activities consist of >> the semiotic transformation of this type of mediator. >> >> As Veresov and Fleer argue in their commentary, perezhivanie (as a type of >> mediator) is for me a psychological phenomenon, one which is of course >> conceptualized from a specific theoretical framework. But the phenomenon is >> also visible from other theoretical frameworks as well, as I mention in the >> paper. This phenomenon is my main interest, and it is from this interest >> that I arrived at the concept of perezhivanie (not the other way around). >> Now, the phenomenon is that at least emotion, reasoning, and volition >> (formation of conscious purposes) seem to be decisively mediated by >> holistic situational meaning. My current research concern is trying to find >> ways to study and understand how this mediation occurs and how these >> semiotic mediators are transformed and distributed. From this view, I think >> that experiencing activities (Vasilyuk's perezhivanie) may provide a good >> terrain to study these issues (especially regarding the mediation of >> emotion), as I tried to exemplify in the paper. >> >> Studying semiotic mediation, however, is of course not easy. Following >> Vygotsky, I assume that extended discourse is the manifestation of thinking >> within certain psychological conditions (Vygotsky's Thinking and Speech, >> chapter 7), and I also assume the Vygotsky's law of the unity of the >> structure and function of thinking (Vygotsky's Thinking and Speech, chapter >> 6). From these two assumptions, I propose that meaning (and its functions >> in human activity) can be scientifically studied by structurally analyzing >> the narratives generated by subjects, considering that the discourse >> produced in the narrative is the point of departure of this study, but that >> considerable analytical work must be done to move from this discourse to >> the full characterization of meaning. It is in that point where I find >> useful the work developed by Greimas, the usefulness of which I only >> suggest in the paper. >> >> >From this background, I found many interesting ideas and questions in the >> other papers of the special issue. In this first post I will propose two of >> them for possible discussion. The first one was raised by Gonz?lez-Rey, >> when he introduces, in connection with perezhivanie, the concepts of >> personality, and especially, of sense. So, which is the conceptual (and-or >> phenomenal) relation between perezhivanie and sense? Gonz?lez-Rey suggests >> that both concepts are somewhat similar (and overcome by the concept of >> ?subjective sense?); my opinion, partly expressed in my commentary, is that >> perezhivanie is a type of meaning, which includes different levels of >> depth, and that sense corresponds to the deepest level of meaning (which >> can be characterized as a system of semic oppositions). Therefore, sense >> wouldn't be in opposition to meaning (as ?a microcosm of human >> consciousness?, as Kozulin remembers in his commentary), although it would >> be in opposition to manifested meaning (the surface level of meaning). >> >> The second issue was raised by Roth and Jornet, and I think it goes beyond >> the issue of perezhivanie itself. If I understand them well, they argue >> that Vygotsky's core proposal of cultural mediation is influenced by the >> Cartesian dualism (mind-matter), and that a promising approach to Cultural >> Psychology would be a Spinozist monism. I am actually very interested on >> the issue of which epistemological position can best substantiate the >> construction of a cultural psychology, and that's why I feel inclined to >> take the opportunity to ask for your opinions about that. About the >> proposal of Roth and Jornet, I have some doubts. First, I don't see why >> Vygotsky's proposals can be seen as dualist (in the Cartesian sense) -I >> suspect that it is because of the analytical distinctions?. Anyway, in my >> understanding, Vygotsky explicitly assumes a materialist monism (for >> example in The Crisis), and in fact he constructs his proposal on mediation >> upon reflexology, which also explicitly assumed a materialist monism (e.g. >> Sechenov). Would a Spinozist monism be a better point of departure? I don't >> know, in my understanding it is a more idealist monism, and I don't clearly >> see what could be gained. In my opinion, a scientific psychology which >> includes the study of mind is only possible if any type of monism is >> assumed. However, in my view, for a scientific psychology, the ontological >> nature of the world is perhaps less important (it is an issue for >> metaphysics?), and I am inclined to assume a neutral monism (e.g. Russell). >> So from this view, a materialist monism and a Spinozist monism wouldn't be >> so different, so from both views it could be assumed that all is of the >> same nature and all is similarly knowable (including mind) [which is the >> ontological nature of the world and to what degree it is knowable are >> issues that can be left to philosophy]. However, in my opinion, this does >> not mean that, while assuming a monism, analytical distinctions cannot be >> done when studying the world. In that sense, I had the impression that Roth >> and Jornet tended to dilute analytical distinctions in the name of monism; >> I repeat that I don't know if I understood them well, but if this was the >> case, in my opinion, analysis would be impossible within the new psychology >> suggested by Roth and Jornet, and, regarding perezhivanie, there would be >> the danger, noted by Vygotsky in The Crisis and cautioned by Kozulin in his >> commentary, that by meaning everything, perezhivanie ends by meaning >> nothing. >> >> Best regards and happy new year, >> >> Marc. >> >> 2017-01-02 9:12 GMT+01:00 Alfredo Jornet Gil : >> >>> Dear all, >>> >>> >>> I would like to join David, Luisa, Ana, Henry and the others to wish you >>> all a Happy New Year! May it be full of joy, peace, and opportunity. >>> >>> >>> I also would like to begin the year announcing our first ?MCA article >>> discussion, ?although in fact corresponds to the last issue of the year >> we >>> just passed, Issue 4 on Perezhivanie. This is a very special *special* >>> issue, not only because its topic has raised lots of interest lately in >> the >>> CHAT community but also because, greatly coordinated by Andy Blunden and >>> the rest of the editorial team, the issue takes the form of a symposium >>> where authors get the chance to present and respond to each others' ideas >>> on the subject. In my view, this allows having a rich and >> multidimensional >>> approach to a subject as important as perezhivanie. >>> >>> >>> Following with the dialogical spirit in which the special issue was >>> assembled, we will focus on one lead article, but hoping to also engage >>> ideas and insights present in or relevant to other contributions in the >>> issue. ?Marc Clar?'s "Vygotsky and Vasilyuk on Perezhivanie: Two Notions >>> and One Word" will be our focus. The article very nicely engages the lead >>> work of Vygotsky, but also the less known ??(?in educational literature) >>> but totally relevant works of psychologist ?F. Vasilyuk and semiotician >> A. >>> J. Greimas, mobilising a number of key concepts including those of >> semiotic >>> mediation and transformation. >>> >>> ?In addition to Marc, who will soon join us, I have encouraged some of >> the >>> other authors in the special issue to also join as "relevant others," if >>> time and circumstances allow them. Let's hope that this will help keeping >>> the symposium spirit up. >>> >>> >>> Marc's article is attached to this e-mail and will be made open access at >>> the T&F pages as soon as people is back from the holidays. The T&F link >> is >>> this: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039.2016.1186194 >>> >>> The link to the MCA Forum pages, where we announce our discussions and >>> other xmca things, is here: http://lchc.ucsd.edu/MCA/ >>> >>> >>> I wish us all a very productive and interesting discussion. >>> >>> Alfredo >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Fri Jan 6 22:31:33 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2017 06:31:33 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! In-Reply-To: <1483770614134.193@iped.uio.no> References: <1483344752182.40904@iped.uio.no> <1483467423798.57819@iped.uio.no> <1483601196884.31418@iped.uio.no>, <5df5e870-3ef8-70d6-0c17-f8647ba17e62@mira.net>, <1483770614134.193@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <1483770719475.71020@iped.uio.no> Ups, the e-mail went out too fast, I meant to say also that I was so happy to read you after a while, Andy! Alfredo ________________________________________ From: Alfredo Jornet Gil Sent: 07 January 2017 07:29 To: xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu; ablunden@mira.net Subject: Re: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! Veresov (in his paper on "duality of categories or dialectical concepts") makes that distinction between mediated activity and mediating activity; and, to me, it seems to contrast mediated as something that already has been done (hence past participle; he mentions "the triangle of activity"), something that can be said of any activity even if one is not focusing on its sign formation dimensions; versus mediating as something that is ongoing, and that is very specific (yet diverse): the activities (plural) of producing sign relations. I think that if you study how people change (learn or develop) as they relate to other people in actual practices or projects using the "mediated activity" perspective (as per the above distinction), then the verb "to mediate" adds very little to what you already knew before you began your inquiry: that all activity was mediated. But if you consider mediating as that particular class of activities in which sign relations are produced, then you can find different forms, where the relations you observe could not be known with certainty before the study begun, because different societal (universal) forms of relation lead to very different forms of perezhivanija/word meaning/etc. Hence, the need of unit analysis (and this latter point I partly learned from you, if I did not mis-learned it). Of course, you can still, if you wish, say that mediating activity is mediated and that it mediates, but then again, mediation would explain everything and nothing, probably because its function is not analytic in the same sense that a unit of analysis is. But all this may be my own confusion, so please, help! I did not use the word "tension" in any technical or well defined way, but perhaps to mark the fact that in most conversations on perezhivanie, there is no just one straightforward way to address the fact that, as you clearly state in your article, "perezhivanie is both an experience ... and the working over of it". I think that all papers have this statement in one form or another, but also differ in the way they approach this fact as an empirical question. ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Andy Blunden Sent: 07 January 2017 02:12 To: xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! I have never understood this supposed distinction, Alfredo, between "mediated activity" and "mediating activity" given that all activity is mediated and all activity mediates. Also, could you spell out what you mean by the "tension" between perezhivanie as meaning and perezhivanie as struggle. Andy ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making On 5/01/2017 6:26 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > Thanks Marc for your careful response. > > I am familiar to Vygotsky's notion of cultural mediation and I am aware and acknowledge that it was elaborated as a means to overcome dualism, and that it is not analog to a computational approach. > > When I brought the computing analogy, I did so with regard not to the concept of cultural mediation in general, but to the way it can be (and is) deployed analytically. I react to what it seems to me a dichotomy between a "meaning" as something that is static (thereby a form of "representation" or reflection of the relation with the environment instead of ?refraction)?? and the experiencing-as-struggling, which is described as ?transformation or change. If so, mediation here would seem to be part of a methodological device that first dissects "a type of meaning" from "a type of activity" (or a given state from the process that changes that state), and then unites it by adding the term "mediation." And this may be my misreading, but in that (mis)reading (which perhaps is mostly due to the fact that in your empirical illustration only the initial and end product, i.e., perezhivanie, are described, but not the experiencing-as-struggle, that is, the moving between the two), mediation here seems to do as analytical concept precisely what you were afraid our monism was doing: explaining nothing. Only the end products but not the process of producing perezhivanie are revealed. This may be problematic if one attends to what Veresov argues in the paper I shared yesterday, where he defends the notion of mediation but also specifies that Vygotsky speaks of *mediating activity* (as opposed to *mediated* activity). That is, not mediation by signs as products, but mediating activity as the activity of producing signs (which again is an activity of producing social relations, perhaps what you refer as "holistic meanings"?). What do you think? > > I did not think you were trying to deny the influence of Spinoza, and I do not think we ever said that Perezhivanie was primarily a move from Cartesian Dualism to Monism, as you suggest in your post. I copy and paste from my prior post: "The fact is that Vygotsky was building a theory on the unity of the affect and the intellect that was to be grounded on Spinoza, and what we try to do is to explore how perezhivanie, as a concept being developed during the same period (but not finalised or totally settled!), could be seen from the perspective of the Spinozist Vygotsky." > > I totally believe that bringing the distinction between perezhivanie as meaning, and perezhivanie as struggle, is totally relevant, and Beth Ferholt's vignettes of Where the Wild Things Are do indeed illustrate this. We really need to address this tension, which as Beth's examples and as our own everyday experience shows, is a tension that matters not just to books and to theories but to living persons (children, teachers), a tension that moreover is present and mentioned in all the articles of the symposium. The papers offer different proposals, and I think is so great we have the chance to discuss them! I too, as you, am very interesting in hearing others about the questions you had concerning sense and meaning. > > Alfredo > > > > > > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Marc Clar? > Sent: 04 January 2017 22:31 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > Thank you very much, Alfredo, for sharing this excellent paper by Veresov, > and thanks also for your responses, which really helped me to better > understand your points. My main doubt about your proposal was/is caused by > the statement that the idea of cultural mediation/mediator implies a > cartesian dualism. This shocks me because, to me, the idea of cultural > mediation is absolutely crucial (in fact, the keystone) for the > construction of a monist (and scientific) psychology that does not forget > mind ?that is, a cultural psychology. From your response, however, I > realized that we may be approaching the idea of mediation in different > ways. I talk of mediation and mediators in a quite restricted way. The > starting point of my understanding of mediation is a dialectical > relationship (organic, transactional) between the subject and the world > (Vygotsky departs from the scheme stimulus-response, from reflexology). > This relationship, that Vygotsky calls primitive psychological functions, > would be basically biological. However, in human beings this relationship > is mediated by cultural means: signs and tools; or primary, secondary and > terciary artifacts. These cultural means reorganize the primitive functions > (dialectic S-O relationship), which become then higher psychological > functions (S-M-O) (see for example, The problem of the cultural development > of the child, in The Vygotsky Reader). Now, the subject, the cultural > mediators, and the object form an inseparable dialectical unit, so that the > subject acts on (transforms) the object through the prism of the cultural > mediators, the object acts on (transforms) the subject also through the > prism of the cultural mediators, and the cultural means are themselves also > transformed as a consequence of their mediation in this continuous dynamic > dialectical tension. Here, for me, it is important the idea that the > cultural means are as material (if we assume a materialist monism) as all > the rest of the world; in fact, are parts of the material world which > become signs or tools (and can be therefore socially distributed). This > permits the introduction of the scientific study of mind-consciousness (as > mediating systems of signs), because mind is not anymore something > immaterial and unobservable, but it is as material and observable as the > rest of the natural world. It is from this view that, for me, the idea of > cultural mediation is the keystone of a monist psychology that includes > mind. Thus, when I speak of mediators, I refer to the cultural means which > mediate in the S-O dialectics; I am especially interested in > signs/secondary artifacts. Here, it is perhaps necessary to insist that > when I talk of studying mediators (and their semantic structure), this > doesn't mean that they are taken out from the activity (the flux of live) > in which they mediate (since out of activity they are not signs anymore); > here, I think Vygotsky tries again to overcome another old dichotomy, the > functionalism-structuralism one. I hope that all this makes also clear the > difference between this view and that of computational psychologies (which > in general are profoundly and explicitly dualist and not dialectic). > > Back to perezhivanie, I'm not obviously trying to deny the influence of > Spinoza on Vygotsky's thinking (this is explicit in Vygotsky's writings, > especially in ?The teaching about emotions?, in the Vol.6 of the Collected > Works). But I have doubts that Vygotsky's introduction of the concept of > perezhivanie is to be regarded primarily as a movement towards monism (from > a previous cartesian dualism), and that this movement questions the concept > of cultural mediation. Instead, and I think that this is in line with some > of Gonz?lez-Rey observations in his paper, my impression is that the > introduction of the concept of perezhivanie responds more to a movement (a > further step) towards holism (something that, in my understanding, can also > be found in Spinoza). Thus, I think that the word meaning is still the unit > of analysis in the last Vygotsky -and therefore, the idea of cultural > mediation is still crucial (in fact, in The problem of the environment, he > connects the concept of perezhivanie, which has just introduced, to the > development of word meaning [p.345-346, also cited in my paper]). However, > in my view, in the last Vygotsky the focus is not anymore primarily on the > word-meaning as formed for things (or collections of things, as in the > ontogenetic research with Sakharov), but the focus is now in the formation > of meaning for holistic situations. > > Best regards, > > Marc. > > 2017-01-03 19:16 GMT+01:00 Alfredo Jornet Gil : > >> Hi Marc, all, >> >> thanks for joining and for your interesting work, which I follow since I >> became aware of it. I appreciate the way in your paper you show careful and >> honest attention to the texts of the authors involved, but perhaps most of >> all I appreciate that the paper makes the transformational dimension >> related to struggle and change salient, a dimension all papers deemed >> central to perezhivanie. And I have learned more about Vasilyuk by reading >> your paper. But I also see that we have approached the question of >> perezhivanie differently and I think that addressing the questions that you >> raise concerning our article may be a good way to both respond and discuss >> your paper. >> >> I am aware that our use of the term monism may be problematic to some, and >> N. Veresov, who has recently written about this (see attached article), >> warns against the dangers of simply moving from dualism into an >> undifferentiating monism that relativizes everything, making development >> un-studiable. This seems to be the way in which you have understood our >> argument, and of course this is not what we are or want to be doing. >> Probably many will think that *dialectical materialism* rather than monism >> is the proper term, and I could agree with them; we do in fact use >> dialectical materialism there and elsewhere. Yet, we wanted to emphasise >> the Spinozist influence (an influence that also runs through Marx) and so >> we found it appropriate to use the term monism, a term that Vygotsky uses >> before arguing that Spinoza "develops an essentially materialistic view" >> (Collected Works, Vol. 6, p. 124). For us, the aim is working out ways to >> empirically examine and formulate problems in ways that do not reify a >> mind-body dualism. >> >> Although overcoming dualism is foundational to the CHAT paradigm, I would >> however not say that Vygotsky did get to solve all of the problems that >> Cartesian dualism had created for psychology, even though he recognised >> those problems brilliantly as early as in the "Crisis". It should suffice >> to cite Vygotsky's own remarks, which we quote in the paper (and which A.N. >> Leont'ev mentions in the introduction to the collected works), where >> Vygotsky explicitly critiques some of his own prior ideas for failing to >> overcome dualism. We agree with those who, like F. G. Rey, see Vygotsky's >> project as a developing rather than as a finalised one. The fact is that >> Vygotsky was building a theory on the unity of the affect and the intellect >> that was to be grounded on Spinoza, and what we try to do is to explore how >> perezhivanie, as a concept being developed during the same period (but not >> finalised or totally settled!), could be seen from the perspective of the >> Spinozist Vygotsky. >> >> As you note, in our article we argue that, if one takes the Spinozist >> one-substance approach, classical concepts used in non-classical >> psychology, at least in the way they are commonly used in the current >> literature, should be revised. One such concept is mediation. And I >> personally do not have much of a problem when mediation is used to denote >> the fundamental fact that every thing exists always through *another*, >> never in and of itself. But I do think that it is problematic to identify >> MEDIATORS, such as "a meaning", as a means to account for or explain >> developmental processes and learning events, precisely because it is there, >> at least in my view, that dualism creeps in. >> >> For example, I find it paradoxical that you are concerned that our monist >> approach risks turning perezhivanie into a useless category because it may >> be used to explain everything and nothing, and yet you do not seem to have >> a problem using the term mediation to account for the transformation of >> perezhivanie without clearly elaborating on how mediation does change >> anything or what it looks like as a real process. How is it different >> saying that a perezhivanie mediates the experiencing-as-struggle from >> simply saying that it "affects" or "determines" it? Indeed, if perezhivanie >> mediates experiencing-as-struggle, does not experiencing-as-struglgle too >> mediate perezhivanie? And do not both may be said to mediate development, >> or development mediate them? Is not this explaining everything and nothing? >> >> I do believe you can argue that there is a difference between mediation >> and classical psychology's cause-effect relations, but to show this you >> need to dig into the dialectical underpinnings of the theory. In your >> paper, you offer a nice analysis of a lovely case of a teacher who, in >> dealing with a challenge with one of her students, changes her >> perezhivanie. I think you can rightly argue that there is a semiotic >> transformation, and I fully support your statement that by studying >> discourse we can empirically approach questions of psychological >> development. The contradictions you show as being involved and resolved >> resonate really well with what I experience as a parent or as a teacher in >> the classroom. Yet, without unpacking what this "mediation" taking place >> between one perezhivanie and the next one means as a concrete and real, the >> same analysis could be done taking an information processing approach: >> there is an situation that is processed (represented?) in one way, which >> then leads to a (cognitive) dissonance, and then there is a cognitive >> resolution by means of which the situation is presented differently in >> consciousness (indeed, when seen in this way, the term perezhivanie and the >> term "representation" become almost indistinguishable). How is mediation, >> as an analytical concept, helping here? And most importantly to the >> question of perezhivanie, how is this analysis going to show the internal >> connection between intellect and affect that Vygotsky formulates as >> constitutive of the notion of perezhivanie? >> >> I believe that the key lies in understanding what Vygotsky means when he >> says that perezhivanie is a unit of analysis. I will not repeat here what >> already is written in at least a couple of the articles in the special >> issue (Blunden, ours), that is the difference between analysis by elements >> and unit analysis (Vygotsky 1987). A unit analysis approach is consistent >> with Spinoza, for whom cause-effect explanations were not adequate, >> requiring instead an understanding of self-development, perezhivanie as a >> kernel cell for the development of personality. And I think you may be >> after this in your article in suggesting a form of continuous movement from >> perezhivanie to experiencing-as-struggle. But perhaps the major difficulty >> I find is that, in positing Vygotsky's perezhivanie as "a type of meaning" >> and Vasilyuk's perezhivanie (or experiencing-as-struggle) as a "type of >> activity," it is difficult not to see here a division between product and >> process, a division that then is analytically bridged by the addition of a >> third term, mediation, that should bring back the real movement between the >> product and the process. >> >> A different approach involves considering the concrete extension of actual >> living and lived social relations, and look at them as generative >> phenomena. What is there in the encounter between Carla and the child that >> leads to change? For it is not inside the mind, but in real life, in >> consciousness as the real relation between people, that Carla is changed. >> How is the semantic structure that you nicely present and attribute to >> Carla a product of the social relation between her and the child? I think >> that to rightfully situate perezhivanie as a concept in a Vygotskian >> framework, we ought to address its relation to the genetic law of >> development. >> >> There is much more to disentangle, but this is long enough. I hope I have >> succeeded in making clear these ideas. Thanks so much for engaging in the >> discussion! >> Alfredo >> >> >> >> ________________________________________ >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> on behalf of Marc Clar? >> Sent: 02 January 2017 22:14 >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! >> >> Hi, all, and thank you so much, Alfredo, for your kind invitation to >> participate in this discussion. My paper in the MCA special issue focuses >> on a distinction between a type of activity, which I argue that is what >> Vasilyuk called *perezhivanie* (experiencing) and a type of semiotic >> mediator, which I argue that is what Vygotsky, in The Problem of the >> Environment, called *perezhivanie.* I argue, following Vasilyuk, that in >> experiencing activities (Vasilyuk's perezhivanie), this type of mediator is >> profoundly transformed ? in fact, that experiencing activities consist of >> the semiotic transformation of this type of mediator. >> >> As Veresov and Fleer argue in their commentary, perezhivanie (as a type of >> mediator) is for me a psychological phenomenon, one which is of course >> conceptualized from a specific theoretical framework. But the phenomenon is >> also visible from other theoretical frameworks as well, as I mention in the >> paper. This phenomenon is my main interest, and it is from this interest >> that I arrived at the concept of perezhivanie (not the other way around). >> Now, the phenomenon is that at least emotion, reasoning, and volition >> (formation of conscious purposes) seem to be decisively mediated by >> holistic situational meaning. My current research concern is trying to find >> ways to study and understand how this mediation occurs and how these >> semiotic mediators are transformed and distributed. From this view, I think >> that experiencing activities (Vasilyuk's perezhivanie) may provide a good >> terrain to study these issues (especially regarding the mediation of >> emotion), as I tried to exemplify in the paper. >> >> Studying semiotic mediation, however, is of course not easy. Following >> Vygotsky, I assume that extended discourse is the manifestation of thinking >> within certain psychological conditions (Vygotsky's Thinking and Speech, >> chapter 7), and I also assume the Vygotsky's law of the unity of the >> structure and function of thinking (Vygotsky's Thinking and Speech, chapter >> 6). From these two assumptions, I propose that meaning (and its functions >> in human activity) can be scientifically studied by structurally analyzing >> the narratives generated by subjects, considering that the discourse >> produced in the narrative is the point of departure of this study, but that >> considerable analytical work must be done to move from this discourse to >> the full characterization of meaning. It is in that point where I find >> useful the work developed by Greimas, the usefulness of which I only >> suggest in the paper. >> >> >From this background, I found many interesting ideas and questions in the >> other papers of the special issue. In this first post I will propose two of >> them for possible discussion. The first one was raised by Gonz?lez-Rey, >> when he introduces, in connection with perezhivanie, the concepts of >> personality, and especially, of sense. So, which is the conceptual (and-or >> phenomenal) relation between perezhivanie and sense? Gonz?lez-Rey suggests >> that both concepts are somewhat similar (and overcome by the concept of >> ?subjective sense?); my opinion, partly expressed in my commentary, is that >> perezhivanie is a type of meaning, which includes different levels of >> depth, and that sense corresponds to the deepest level of meaning (which >> can be characterized as a system of semic oppositions). Therefore, sense >> wouldn't be in opposition to meaning (as ?a microcosm of human >> consciousness?, as Kozulin remembers in his commentary), although it would >> be in opposition to manifested meaning (the surface level of meaning). >> >> The second issue was raised by Roth and Jornet, and I think it goes beyond >> the issue of perezhivanie itself. If I understand them well, they argue >> that Vygotsky's core proposal of cultural mediation is influenced by the >> Cartesian dualism (mind-matter), and that a promising approach to Cultural >> Psychology would be a Spinozist monism. I am actually very interested on >> the issue of which epistemological position can best substantiate the >> construction of a cultural psychology, and that's why I feel inclined to >> take the opportunity to ask for your opinions about that. About the >> proposal of Roth and Jornet, I have some doubts. First, I don't see why >> Vygotsky's proposals can be seen as dualist (in the Cartesian sense) -I >> suspect that it is because of the analytical distinctions?. Anyway, in my >> understanding, Vygotsky explicitly assumes a materialist monism (for >> example in The Crisis), and in fact he constructs his proposal on mediation >> upon reflexology, which also explicitly assumed a materialist monism (e.g. >> Sechenov). Would a Spinozist monism be a better point of departure? I don't >> know, in my understanding it is a more idealist monism, and I don't clearly >> see what could be gained. In my opinion, a scientific psychology which >> includes the study of mind is only possible if any type of monism is >> assumed. However, in my view, for a scientific psychology, the ontological >> nature of the world is perhaps less important (it is an issue for >> metaphysics?), and I am inclined to assume a neutral monism (e.g. Russell). >> So from this view, a materialist monism and a Spinozist monism wouldn't be >> so different, so from both views it could be assumed that all is of the >> same nature and all is similarly knowable (including mind) [which is the >> ontological nature of the world and to what degree it is knowable are >> issues that can be left to philosophy]. However, in my opinion, this does >> not mean that, while assuming a monism, analytical distinctions cannot be >> done when studying the world. In that sense, I had the impression that Roth >> and Jornet tended to dilute analytical distinctions in the name of monism; >> I repeat that I don't know if I understood them well, but if this was the >> case, in my opinion, analysis would be impossible within the new psychology >> suggested by Roth and Jornet, and, regarding perezhivanie, there would be >> the danger, noted by Vygotsky in The Crisis and cautioned by Kozulin in his >> commentary, that by meaning everything, perezhivanie ends by meaning >> nothing. >> >> Best regards and happy new year, >> >> Marc. >> >> 2017-01-02 9:12 GMT+01:00 Alfredo Jornet Gil : >> >>> Dear all, >>> >>> >>> I would like to join David, Luisa, Ana, Henry and the others to wish you >>> all a Happy New Year! May it be full of joy, peace, and opportunity. >>> >>> >>> I also would like to begin the year announcing our first ?MCA article >>> discussion, ?although in fact corresponds to the last issue of the year >> we >>> just passed, Issue 4 on Perezhivanie. This is a very special *special* >>> issue, not only because its topic has raised lots of interest lately in >> the >>> CHAT community but also because, greatly coordinated by Andy Blunden and >>> the rest of the editorial team, the issue takes the form of a symposium >>> where authors get the chance to present and respond to each others' ideas >>> on the subject. In my view, this allows having a rich and >> multidimensional >>> approach to a subject as important as perezhivanie. >>> >>> >>> Following with the dialogical spirit in which the special issue was >>> assembled, we will focus on one lead article, but hoping to also engage >>> ideas and insights present in or relevant to other contributions in the >>> issue. ?Marc Clar?'s "Vygotsky and Vasilyuk on Perezhivanie: Two Notions >>> and One Word" will be our focus. The article very nicely engages the lead >>> work of Vygotsky, but also the less known ??(?in educational literature) >>> but totally relevant works of psychologist ?F. Vasilyuk and semiotician >> A. >>> J. Greimas, mobilising a number of key concepts including those of >> semiotic >>> mediation and transformation. >>> >>> ?In addition to Marc, who will soon join us, I have encouraged some of >> the >>> other authors in the special issue to also join as "relevant others," if >>> time and circumstances allow them. Let's hope that this will help keeping >>> the symposium spirit up. >>> >>> >>> Marc's article is attached to this e-mail and will be made open access at >>> the T&F pages as soon as people is back from the holidays. The T&F link >> is >>> this: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039.2016.1186194 >>> >>> The link to the MCA Forum pages, where we announce our discussions and >>> other xmca things, is here: http://lchc.ucsd.edu/MCA/ >>> >>> >>> I wish us all a very productive and interesting discussion. >>> >>> Alfredo >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> From ablunden@mira.net Fri Jan 6 23:13:13 2017 From: ablunden@mira.net (Andy Blunden) Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2017 18:13:13 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! In-Reply-To: <1483770614134.193@iped.uio.no> References: <1483344752182.40904@iped.uio.no> <1483467423798.57819@iped.uio.no> <1483601196884.31418@iped.uio.no> <5df5e870-3ef8-70d6-0c17-f8647ba17e62@mira.net> <1483770614134.193@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: Well, I read that to say there is no distinction between mediated activity and mediating activity. I shall wait to be convinced otherwise. "Everything is mediated" does not lead to "mediation" being a meaningless term (as would "everything is material" for example) because, mediation has the function of pointing to a third element in the relation between two things - the opposite of the effect of "everything is material" for example, which cancels all relation to anything. Hegel says at the beginning of the Logic that everything is both immediate and mediated. That is an even stronger claim, and one that Vygotsky and Vasilyuk make good in the concept of perezhivanie, and other units of analysis. It is this - both immediate and mediated - which is the essential characteristic of Vygotsky's approach. It had been my hope that by getting all the authors to write a 2,000 word response after reading all the first round articles, that I would simulate something like a symposium. But of course, we were all far too polite and the differences were not engaged with. I should have anticipated that. But perhaps this is the forum where that can happen? This "tension" for example. You are right, of course, Alfredo, it runs through all the articles, and it is not engaged. I accept Marc's scholarship leading to him claiming that Vasilyuk, writing in 1984, would not have known of Vygotsky's use of perezhivanie in his 1934 lecture. But both wrote at their time in the same paradigm and both called on a common word already a part of mainstream positivist psychology and gave it a Marxist twist - i.e., making it both immediate and mediating. I don't see any advantage in bringing in two new terms to further complicate matters and generate more uncertainty about meaning. What is at issue is a Marxist conception of experiences and the formation of the personality. When Veresov and Fleer distinguish between perezhivanie the phenomenon and perezhivanie the lens, then I ask: of what use to science is a lens which does not have a basis in observation and what sort of a phenomenon is it that cannot provide a lens into human experience? In my response I "doubled down" (the new word of 2016 , reflecting the stubbornness of these times perhaps) on this question: only certain experiences transform our lives and oblige us to struggle with them, but it is these that provide the key to understanding the everyday experiences. If we do not recognise that that are *the same thing* then science is impossible. Andy ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making On 7/01/2017 5:29 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > Veresov (in his paper on "duality of categories or dialectical concepts") makes that distinction between mediated activity and mediating activity; and, to me, it seems to contrast mediated as something that already has been done (hence past participle; he mentions "the triangle of activity"), something that can be said of any activity even if one is not focusing on its sign formation dimensions; versus mediating as something that is ongoing, and that is very specific (yet diverse): the activities (plural) of producing sign relations. > > I think that if you study how people change (learn or develop) as they relate to other people in actual practices or projects using the "mediated activity" perspective (as per the above distinction), then the verb "to mediate" adds very little to what you already knew before you began your inquiry: that all activity was mediated. But if you consider mediating as that particular class of activities in which sign relations are produced, then you can find different forms, where the relations you observe could not be known with certainty before the study begun, because different societal (universal) forms of relation lead to very different forms of perezhivanija/word meaning/etc. Hence, the need of unit analysis (and this latter point I partly learned from you, if I did not mis-learned it). Of course, you can still, if you wish, say that mediating activity is mediated and that it mediates, but then again, mediation would explain everything and nothing, probably because its function is not analytic in the same sense that a unit of analysis is. > > But all this may be my own confusion, so please, help! > > I did not use the word "tension" in any technical or well defined way, but perhaps to mark the fact that in most conversations on perezhivanie, there is no just one straightforward way to address the fact that, as you clearly state in your article, "perezhivanie is both an experience ... and the working over of it". I think that all papers have this statement in one form or another, but also differ in the way they approach this fact as an empirical question. > > > > > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Andy Blunden > Sent: 07 January 2017 02:12 > To: xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > I have never understood this supposed distinction, Alfredo, > between "mediated activity" and "mediating activity" given > that all activity is mediated and all activity mediates. > Also, could you spell out what you mean by the "tension" > between perezhivanie as meaning and perezhivanie as struggle. > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Andy Blunden > http://home.mira.net/~andy > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > On 5/01/2017 6:26 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: >> Thanks Marc for your careful response. >> >> I am familiar to Vygotsky's notion of cultural mediation and I am aware and acknowledge that it was elaborated as a means to overcome dualism, and that it is not analog to a computational approach. >> >> When I brought the computing analogy, I did so with regard not to the concept of cultural mediation in general, but to the way it can be (and is) deployed analytically. I react to what it seems to me a dichotomy between a "meaning" as something that is static (thereby a form of "representation" or reflection of the relation with the environment instead of ?refraction)?? and the experiencing-as-struggling, which is described as ?transformation or change. If so, mediation here would seem to be part of a methodological device that first dissects "a type of meaning" from "a type of activity" (or a given state from the process that changes that state), and then unites it by adding the term "mediation." And this may be my misreading, but in that (mis)reading (which perhaps is mostly due to the fact that in your empirical illustration only the initial and end product, i.e., perezhivanie, are described, but not the experiencing-as-struggle, that is, the moving between the two), mediation here seems to do as analytical concept precisely what you were afraid our monism was doing: explaining nothing. Only the end products but not the process of producing perezhivanie are revealed. This may be problematic if one attends to what Veresov argues in the paper I shared yesterday, where he defends the notion of mediation but also specifies that Vygotsky speaks of *mediating activity* (as opposed to *mediated* activity). That is, not mediation by signs as products, but mediating activity as the activity of producing signs (which again is an activity of producing social relations, perhaps what you refer as "holistic meanings"?). What do you think? >> >> I did not think you were trying to deny the influence of Spinoza, and I do not think we ever said that Perezhivanie was primarily a move from Cartesian Dualism to Monism, as you suggest in your post. I copy and paste from my prior post: "The fact is that Vygotsky was building a theory on the unity of the affect and the intellect that was to be grounded on Spinoza, and what we try to do is to explore how perezhivanie, as a concept being developed during the same period (but not finalised or totally settled!), could be seen from the perspective of the Spinozist Vygotsky." >> >> I totally believe that bringing the distinction between perezhivanie as meaning, and perezhivanie as struggle, is totally relevant, and Beth Ferholt's vignettes of Where the Wild Things Are do indeed illustrate this. We really need to address this tension, which as Beth's examples and as our own everyday experience shows, is a tension that matters not just to books and to theories but to living persons (children, teachers), a tension that moreover is present and mentioned in all the articles of the symposium. The papers offer different proposals, and I think is so great we have the chance to discuss them! I too, as you, am very interesting in hearing others about the questions you had concerning sense and meaning. >> >> Alfredo >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Marc Clar? >> Sent: 04 January 2017 22:31 >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! >> >> Thank you very much, Alfredo, for sharing this excellent paper by Veresov, >> and thanks also for your responses, which really helped me to better >> understand your points. My main doubt about your proposal was/is caused by >> the statement that the idea of cultural mediation/mediator implies a >> cartesian dualism. This shocks me because, to me, the idea of cultural >> mediation is absolutely crucial (in fact, the keystone) for the >> construction of a monist (and scientific) psychology that does not forget >> mind ?that is, a cultural psychology. From your response, however, I >> realized that we may be approaching the idea of mediation in different >> ways. I talk of mediation and mediators in a quite restricted way. The >> starting point of my understanding of mediation is a dialectical >> relationship (organic, transactional) between the subject and the world >> (Vygotsky departs from the scheme stimulus-response, from reflexology). >> This relationship, that Vygotsky calls primitive psychological functions, >> would be basically biological. However, in human beings this relationship >> is mediated by cultural means: signs and tools; or primary, secondary and >> terciary artifacts. These cultural means reorganize the primitive functions >> (dialectic S-O relationship), which become then higher psychological >> functions (S-M-O) (see for example, The problem of the cultural development >> of the child, in The Vygotsky Reader). Now, the subject, the cultural >> mediators, and the object form an inseparable dialectical unit, so that the >> subject acts on (transforms) the object through the prism of the cultural >> mediators, the object acts on (transforms) the subject also through the >> prism of the cultural mediators, and the cultural means are themselves also >> transformed as a consequence of their mediation in this continuous dynamic >> dialectical tension. Here, for me, it is important the idea that the >> cultural means are as material (if we assume a materialist monism) as all >> the rest of the world; in fact, are parts of the material world which >> become signs or tools (and can be therefore socially distributed). This >> permits the introduction of the scientific study of mind-consciousness (as >> mediating systems of signs), because mind is not anymore something >> immaterial and unobservable, but it is as material and observable as the >> rest of the natural world. It is from this view that, for me, the idea of >> cultural mediation is the keystone of a monist psychology that includes >> mind. Thus, when I speak of mediators, I refer to the cultural means which >> mediate in the S-O dialectics; I am especially interested in >> signs/secondary artifacts. Here, it is perhaps necessary to insist that >> when I talk of studying mediators (and their semantic structure), this >> doesn't mean that they are taken out from the activity (the flux of live) >> in which they mediate (since out of activity they are not signs anymore); >> here, I think Vygotsky tries again to overcome another old dichotomy, the >> functionalism-structuralism one. I hope that all this makes also clear the >> difference between this view and that of computational psychologies (which >> in general are profoundly and explicitly dualist and not dialectic). >> >> Back to perezhivanie, I'm not obviously trying to deny the influence of >> Spinoza on Vygotsky's thinking (this is explicit in Vygotsky's writings, >> especially in ?The teaching about emotions?, in the Vol.6 of the Collected >> Works). But I have doubts that Vygotsky's introduction of the concept of >> perezhivanie is to be regarded primarily as a movement towards monism (from >> a previous cartesian dualism), and that this movement questions the concept >> of cultural mediation. Instead, and I think that this is in line with some >> of Gonz?lez-Rey observations in his paper, my impression is that the >> introduction of the concept of perezhivanie responds more to a movement (a >> further step) towards holism (something that, in my understanding, can also >> be found in Spinoza). Thus, I think that the word meaning is still the unit >> of analysis in the last Vygotsky -and therefore, the idea of cultural >> mediation is still crucial (in fact, in The problem of the environment, he >> connects the concept of perezhivanie, which has just introduced, to the >> development of word meaning [p.345-346, also cited in my paper]). However, >> in my view, in the last Vygotsky the focus is not anymore primarily on the >> word-meaning as formed for things (or collections of things, as in the >> ontogenetic research with Sakharov), but the focus is now in the formation >> of meaning for holistic situations. >> >> Best regards, >> >> Marc. >> >> 2017-01-03 19:16 GMT+01:00 Alfredo Jornet Gil : >> >>> Hi Marc, all, >>> >>> thanks for joining and for your interesting work, which I follow since I >>> became aware of it. I appreciate the way in your paper you show careful and >>> honest attention to the texts of the authors involved, but perhaps most of >>> all I appreciate that the paper makes the transformational dimension >>> related to struggle and change salient, a dimension all papers deemed >>> central to perezhivanie. And I have learned more about Vasilyuk by reading >>> your paper. But I also see that we have approached the question of >>> perezhivanie differently and I think that addressing the questions that you >>> raise concerning our article may be a good way to both respond and discuss >>> your paper. >>> >>> I am aware that our use of the term monism may be problematic to some, and >>> N. Veresov, who has recently written about this (see attached article), >>> warns against the dangers of simply moving from dualism into an >>> undifferentiating monism that relativizes everything, making development >>> un-studiable. This seems to be the way in which you have understood our >>> argument, and of course this is not what we are or want to be doing. >>> Probably many will think that *dialectical materialism* rather than monism >>> is the proper term, and I could agree with them; we do in fact use >>> dialectical materialism there and elsewhere. Yet, we wanted to emphasise >>> the Spinozist influence (an influence that also runs through Marx) and so >>> we found it appropriate to use the term monism, a term that Vygotsky uses >>> before arguing that Spinoza "develops an essentially materialistic view" >>> (Collected Works, Vol. 6, p. 124). For us, the aim is working out ways to >>> empirically examine and formulate problems in ways that do not reify a >>> mind-body dualism. >>> >>> Although overcoming dualism is foundational to the CHAT paradigm, I would >>> however not say that Vygotsky did get to solve all of the problems that >>> Cartesian dualism had created for psychology, even though he recognised >>> those problems brilliantly as early as in the "Crisis". It should suffice >>> to cite Vygotsky's own remarks, which we quote in the paper (and which A.N. >>> Leont'ev mentions in the introduction to the collected works), where >>> Vygotsky explicitly critiques some of his own prior ideas for failing to >>> overcome dualism. We agree with those who, like F. G. Rey, see Vygotsky's >>> project as a developing rather than as a finalised one. The fact is that >>> Vygotsky was building a theory on the unity of the affect and the intellect >>> that was to be grounded on Spinoza, and what we try to do is to explore how >>> perezhivanie, as a concept being developed during the same period (but not >>> finalised or totally settled!), could be seen from the perspective of the >>> Spinozist Vygotsky. >>> >>> As you note, in our article we argue that, if one takes the Spinozist >>> one-substance approach, classical concepts used in non-classical >>> psychology, at least in the way they are commonly used in the current >>> literature, should be revised. One such concept is mediation. And I >>> personally do not have much of a problem when mediation is used to denote >>> the fundamental fact that every thing exists always through *another*, >>> never in and of itself. But I do think that it is problematic to identify >>> MEDIATORS, such as "a meaning", as a means to account for or explain >>> developmental processes and learning events, precisely because it is there, >>> at least in my view, that dualism creeps in. >>> >>> For example, I find it paradoxical that you are concerned that our monist >>> approach risks turning perezhivanie into a useless category because it may >>> be used to explain everything and nothing, and yet you do not seem to have >>> a problem using the term mediation to account for the transformation of >>> perezhivanie without clearly elaborating on how mediation does change >>> anything or what it looks like as a real process. How is it different >>> saying that a perezhivanie mediates the experiencing-as-struggle from >>> simply saying that it "affects" or "determines" it? Indeed, if perezhivanie >>> mediates experiencing-as-struggle, does not experiencing-as-struglgle too >>> mediate perezhivanie? And do not both may be said to mediate development, >>> or development mediate them? Is not this explaining everything and nothing? >>> >>> I do believe you can argue that there is a difference between mediation >>> and classical psychology's cause-effect relations, but to show this you >>> need to dig into the dialectical underpinnings of the theory. In your >>> paper, you offer a nice analysis of a lovely case of a teacher who, in >>> dealing with a challenge with one of her students, changes her >>> perezhivanie. I think you can rightly argue that there is a semiotic >>> transformation, and I fully support your statement that by studying >>> discourse we can empirically approach questions of psychological >>> development. The contradictions you show as being involved and resolved >>> resonate really well with what I experience as a parent or as a teacher in >>> the classroom. Yet, without unpacking what this "mediation" taking place >>> between one perezhivanie and the next one means as a concrete and real, the >>> same analysis could be done taking an information processing approach: >>> there is an situation that is processed (represented?) in one way, which >>> then leads to a (cognitive) dissonance, and then there is a cognitive >>> resolution by means of which the situation is presented differently in >>> consciousness (indeed, when seen in this way, the term perezhivanie and the >>> term "representation" become almost indistinguishable). How is mediation, >>> as an analytical concept, helping here? And most importantly to the >>> question of perezhivanie, how is this analysis going to show the internal >>> connection between intellect and affect that Vygotsky formulates as >>> constitutive of the notion of perezhivanie? >>> >>> I believe that the key lies in understanding what Vygotsky means when he >>> says that perezhivanie is a unit of analysis. I will not repeat here what >>> already is written in at least a couple of the articles in the special >>> issue (Blunden, ours), that is the difference between analysis by elements >>> and unit analysis (Vygotsky 1987). A unit analysis approach is consistent >>> with Spinoza, for whom cause-effect explanations were not adequate, >>> requiring instead an understanding of self-development, perezhivanie as a >>> kernel cell for the development of personality. And I think you may be >>> after this in your article in suggesting a form of continuous movement from >>> perezhivanie to experiencing-as-struggle. But perhaps the major difficulty >>> I find is that, in positing Vygotsky's perezhivanie as "a type of meaning" >>> and Vasilyuk's perezhivanie (or experiencing-as-struggle) as a "type of >>> activity," it is difficult not to see here a division between product and >>> process, a division that then is analytically bridged by the addition of a >>> third term, mediation, that should bring back the real movement between the >>> product and the process. >>> >>> A different approach involves considering the concrete extension of actual >>> living and lived social relations, and look at them as generative >>> phenomena. What is there in the encounter between Carla and the child that >>> leads to change? For it is not inside the mind, but in real life, in >>> consciousness as the real relation between people, that Carla is changed. >>> How is the semantic structure that you nicely present and attribute to >>> Carla a product of the social relation between her and the child? I think >>> that to rightfully situate perezhivanie as a concept in a Vygotskian >>> framework, we ought to address its relation to the genetic law of >>> development. >>> >>> There is much more to disentangle, but this is long enough. I hope I have >>> succeeded in making clear these ideas. Thanks so much for engaging in the >>> discussion! >>> Alfredo >>> >>> >>> >>> ________________________________________ >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>> on behalf of Marc Clar? >>> Sent: 02 January 2017 22:14 >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! >>> >>> Hi, all, and thank you so much, Alfredo, for your kind invitation to >>> participate in this discussion. My paper in the MCA special issue focuses >>> on a distinction between a type of activity, which I argue that is what >>> Vasilyuk called *perezhivanie* (experiencing) and a type of semiotic >>> mediator, which I argue that is what Vygotsky, in The Problem of the >>> Environment, called *perezhivanie.* I argue, following Vasilyuk, that in >>> experiencing activities (Vasilyuk's perezhivanie), this type of mediator is >>> profoundly transformed ? in fact, that experiencing activities consist of >>> the semiotic transformation of this type of mediator. >>> >>> As Veresov and Fleer argue in their commentary, perezhivanie (as a type of >>> mediator) is for me a psychological phenomenon, one which is of course >>> conceptualized from a specific theoretical framework. But the phenomenon is >>> also visible from other theoretical frameworks as well, as I mention in the >>> paper. This phenomenon is my main interest, and it is from this interest >>> that I arrived at the concept of perezhivanie (not the other way around). >>> Now, the phenomenon is that at least emotion, reasoning, and volition >>> (formation of conscious purposes) seem to be decisively mediated by >>> holistic situational meaning. My current research concern is trying to find >>> ways to study and understand how this mediation occurs and how these >>> semiotic mediators are transformed and distributed. From this view, I think >>> that experiencing activities (Vasilyuk's perezhivanie) may provide a good >>> terrain to study these issues (especially regarding the mediation of >>> emotion), as I tried to exemplify in the paper. >>> >>> Studying semiotic mediation, however, is of course not easy. Following >>> Vygotsky, I assume that extended discourse is the manifestation of thinking >>> within certain psychological conditions (Vygotsky's Thinking and Speech, >>> chapter 7), and I also assume the Vygotsky's law of the unity of the >>> structure and function of thinking (Vygotsky's Thinking and Speech, chapter >>> 6). From these two assumptions, I propose that meaning (and its functions >>> in human activity) can be scientifically studied by structurally analyzing >>> the narratives generated by subjects, considering that the discourse >>> produced in the narrative is the point of departure of this study, but that >>> considerable analytical work must be done to move from this discourse to >>> the full characterization of meaning. It is in that point where I find >>> useful the work developed by Greimas, the usefulness of which I only >>> suggest in the paper. >>> >>> >From this background, I found many interesting ideas and questions in the >>> other papers of the special issue. In this first post I will propose two of >>> them for possible discussion. The first one was raised by Gonz?lez-Rey, >>> when he introduces, in connection with perezhivanie, the concepts of >>> personality, and especially, of sense. So, which is the conceptual (and-or >>> phenomenal) relation between perezhivanie and sense? Gonz?lez-Rey suggests >>> that both concepts are somewhat similar (and overcome by the concept of >>> ?subjective sense?); my opinion, partly expressed in my commentary, is that >>> perezhivanie is a type of meaning, which includes different levels of >>> depth, and that sense corresponds to the deepest level of meaning (which >>> can be characterized as a system of semic oppositions). Therefore, sense >>> wouldn't be in opposition to meaning (as ?a microcosm of human >>> consciousness?, as Kozulin remembers in his commentary), although it would >>> be in opposition to manifested meaning (the surface level of meaning). >>> >>> The second issue was raised by Roth and Jornet, and I think it goes beyond >>> the issue of perezhivanie itself. If I understand them well, they argue >>> that Vygotsky's core proposal of cultural mediation is influenced by the >>> Cartesian dualism (mind-matter), and that a promising approach to Cultural >>> Psychology would be a Spinozist monism. I am actually very interested on >>> the issue of which epistemological position can best substantiate the >>> construction of a cultural psychology, and that's why I feel inclined to >>> take the opportunity to ask for your opinions about that. About the >>> proposal of Roth and Jornet, I have some doubts. First, I don't see why >>> Vygotsky's proposals can be seen as dualist (in the Cartesian sense) -I >>> suspect that it is because of the analytical distinctions?. Anyway, in my >>> understanding, Vygotsky explicitly assumes a materialist monism (for >>> example in The Crisis), and in fact he constructs his proposal on mediation >>> upon reflexology, which also explicitly assumed a materialist monism (e.g. >>> Sechenov). Would a Spinozist monism be a better point of departure? I don't >>> know, in my understanding it is a more idealist monism, and I don't clearly >>> see what could be gained. In my opinion, a scientific psychology which >>> includes the study of mind is only possible if any type of monism is >>> assumed. However, in my view, for a scientific psychology, the ontological >>> nature of the world is perhaps less important (it is an issue for >>> metaphysics?), and I am inclined to assume a neutral monism (e.g. Russell). >>> So from this view, a materialist monism and a Spinozist monism wouldn't be >>> so different, so from both views it could be assumed that all is of the >>> same nature and all is similarly knowable (including mind) [which is the >>> ontological nature of the world and to what degree it is knowable are >>> issues that can be left to philosophy]. However, in my opinion, this does >>> not mean that, while assuming a monism, analytical distinctions cannot be >>> done when studying the world. In that sense, I had the impression that Roth >>> and Jornet tended to dilute analytical distinctions in the name of monism; >>> I repeat that I don't know if I understood them well, but if this was the >>> case, in my opinion, analysis would be impossible within the new psychology >>> suggested by Roth and Jornet, and, regarding perezhivanie, there would be >>> the danger, noted by Vygotsky in The Crisis and cautioned by Kozulin in his >>> commentary, that by meaning everything, perezhivanie ends by meaning >>> nothing. >>> >>> Best regards and happy new year, >>> >>> Marc. >>> >>> 2017-01-02 9:12 GMT+01:00 Alfredo Jornet Gil : >>> >>>> Dear all, >>>> >>>> >>>> I would like to join David, Luisa, Ana, Henry and the others to wish you >>>> all a Happy New Year! May it be full of joy, peace, and opportunity. >>>> >>>> >>>> I also would like to begin the year announcing our first ?MCA article >>>> discussion, ?although in fact corresponds to the last issue of the year >>> we >>>> just passed, Issue 4 on Perezhivanie. This is a very special *special* >>>> issue, not only because its topic has raised lots of interest lately in >>> the >>>> CHAT community but also because, greatly coordinated by Andy Blunden and >>>> the rest of the editorial team, the issue takes the form of a symposium >>>> where authors get the chance to present and respond to each others' ideas >>>> on the subject. In my view, this allows having a rich and >>> multidimensional >>>> approach to a subject as important as perezhivanie. >>>> >>>> >>>> Following with the dialogical spirit in which the special issue was >>>> assembled, we will focus on one lead article, but hoping to also engage >>>> ideas and insights present in or relevant to other contributions in the >>>> issue. ?Marc Clar?'s "Vygotsky and Vasilyuk on Perezhivanie: Two Notions >>>> and One Word" will be our focus. The article very nicely engages the lead >>>> work of Vygotsky, but also the less known ??(?in educational literature) >>>> but totally relevant works of psychologist ?F. Vasilyuk and semiotician >>> A. >>>> J. Greimas, mobilising a number of key concepts including those of >>> semiotic >>>> mediation and transformation. >>>> >>>> ?In addition to Marc, who will soon join us, I have encouraged some of >>> the >>>> other authors in the special issue to also join as "relevant others," if >>>> time and circumstances allow them. Let's hope that this will help keeping >>>> the symposium spirit up. >>>> >>>> >>>> Marc's article is attached to this e-mail and will be made open access at >>>> the T&F pages as soon as people is back from the holidays. The T&F link >>> is >>>> this: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039.2016.1186194 >>>> >>>> The link to the MCA Forum pages, where we announce our discussions and >>>> other xmca things, is here: http://lchc.ucsd.edu/MCA/ >>>> >>>> >>>> I wish us all a very productive and interesting discussion. >>>> >>>> Alfredo >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> From smago@uga.edu Sat Jan 7 04:23:22 2017 From: smago@uga.edu (Peter Smagorinsky) Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2017 12:23:22 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! In-Reply-To: <5df5e870-3ef8-70d6-0c17-f8647ba17e62@mira.net> References: <1483344752182.40904@iped.uio.no> <1483467423798.57819@iped.uio.no> <1483601196884.31418@iped.uio.no> <5df5e870-3ef8-70d6-0c17-f8647ba17e62@mira.net> Message-ID: Andy and others, I tried to work out the mediated/mediating question in the area of reading....see if this helps. Smagorinsky, P., & O'Donnell-Allen, C. (1998). Reading as mediated and mediating action: Composing meaning for literature through multimedia interpretive texts. Reading Research Quarterly, 33, 198-226. Available at http://www.petersmagorinsky.net/About/PDF/RRQ/RRQ1998.pdf -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden Sent: Friday, January 6, 2017 7:12 PM To: xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! I have never understood this supposed distinction, Alfredo, between "mediated activity" and "mediating activity" given that all activity is mediated and all activity mediates. Also, could you spell out what you mean by the "tension" between perezhivanie as meaning and perezhivanie as struggle. Andy ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making On 5/01/2017 6:26 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > Thanks Marc for your careful response. > > I am familiar to Vygotsky's notion of cultural mediation and I am aware and acknowledge that it was elaborated as a means to overcome dualism, and that it is not analog to a computational approach. > > When I brought the computing analogy, I did so with regard not to the concept of cultural mediation in general, but to the way it can be (and is) deployed analytically. I react to what it seems to me a dichotomy between a "meaning" as something that is static (thereby a form of "representation" or reflection of the relation with the environment instead of ?refraction)?? and the experiencing-as-struggling, which is described as ?transformation or change. If so, mediation here would seem to be part of a methodological device that first dissects "a type of meaning" from "a type of activity" (or a given state from the process that changes that state), and then unites it by adding the term "mediation." And this may be my misreading, but in that (mis)reading (which perhaps is mostly due to the fact that in your empirical illustration only the initial and end product, i.e., perezhivanie, are described, but not the experiencing-as-struggle, that is, the moving between the two), mediation here seems to do as analytical concept precisely what you were afraid our monism was doing: explaining nothing. Only the end products but not the process of producing perezhivanie are revealed. This may be problematic if one attends to what Veresov argues in the paper I shared yesterday, where he defends the notion of mediation but also specifies that Vygotsky speaks of *mediating activity* (as opposed to *mediated* activity). That is, not mediation by signs as products, but mediating activity as the activity of producing signs (which again is an activity of producing social relations, perhaps what you refer as "holistic meanings"?). What do you think? > > I did not think you were trying to deny the influence of Spinoza, and I do not think we ever said that Perezhivanie was primarily a move from Cartesian Dualism to Monism, as you suggest in your post. I copy and paste from my prior post: "The fact is that Vygotsky was building a theory on the unity of the affect and the intellect that was to be grounded on Spinoza, and what we try to do is to explore how perezhivanie, as a concept being developed during the same period (but not finalised or totally settled!), could be seen from the perspective of the Spinozist Vygotsky." > > I totally believe that bringing the distinction between perezhivanie as meaning, and perezhivanie as struggle, is totally relevant, and Beth Ferholt's vignettes of Where the Wild Things Are do indeed illustrate this. We really need to address this tension, which as Beth's examples and as our own everyday experience shows, is a tension that matters not just to books and to theories but to living persons (children, teachers), a tension that moreover is present and mentioned in all the articles of the symposium. The papers offer different proposals, and I think is so great we have the chance to discuss them! I too, as you, am very interesting in hearing others about the questions you had concerning sense and meaning. > > Alfredo > > > > > > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of Marc Clar? > > Sent: 04 January 2017 22:31 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > Thank you very much, Alfredo, for sharing this excellent paper by > Veresov, and thanks also for your responses, which really helped me to > better understand your points. My main doubt about your proposal > was/is caused by the statement that the idea of cultural > mediation/mediator implies a cartesian dualism. This shocks me > because, to me, the idea of cultural mediation is absolutely crucial > (in fact, the keystone) for the construction of a monist (and > scientific) psychology that does not forget mind ?that is, a cultural > psychology. From your response, however, I realized that we may be > approaching the idea of mediation in different ways. I talk of > mediation and mediators in a quite restricted way. The starting point > of my understanding of mediation is a dialectical relationship > (organic, transactional) between the subject and the world (Vygotsky departs from the scheme stimulus-response, from reflexology). > This relationship, that Vygotsky calls primitive psychological > functions, would be basically biological. However, in human beings > this relationship is mediated by cultural means: signs and tools; or > primary, secondary and terciary artifacts. These cultural means > reorganize the primitive functions (dialectic S-O relationship), which > become then higher psychological functions (S-M-O) (see for example, > The problem of the cultural development of the child, in The Vygotsky > Reader). Now, the subject, the cultural mediators, and the object form > an inseparable dialectical unit, so that the subject acts on > (transforms) the object through the prism of the cultural mediators, > the object acts on (transforms) the subject also through the prism of > the cultural mediators, and the cultural means are themselves also > transformed as a consequence of their mediation in this continuous > dynamic dialectical tension. Here, for me, it is important the idea > that the cultural means are as material (if we assume a materialist > monism) as all the rest of the world; in fact, are parts of the > material world which become signs or tools (and can be therefore > socially distributed). This permits the introduction of the scientific > study of mind-consciousness (as mediating systems of signs), because > mind is not anymore something immaterial and unobservable, but it is > as material and observable as the rest of the natural world. It is > from this view that, for me, the idea of cultural mediation is the > keystone of a monist psychology that includes mind. Thus, when I speak > of mediators, I refer to the cultural means which mediate in the S-O > dialectics; I am especially interested in signs/secondary artifacts. > Here, it is perhaps necessary to insist that when I talk of studying > mediators (and their semantic structure), this doesn't mean that they > are taken out from the activity (the flux of live) in which they > mediate (since out of activity they are not signs anymore); here, I > think Vygotsky tries again to overcome another old dichotomy, the > functionalism-structuralism one. I hope that all this makes also clear the difference between this view and that of computational psychologies (which in general are profoundly and explicitly dualist and not dialectic). > > Back to perezhivanie, I'm not obviously trying to deny the influence > of Spinoza on Vygotsky's thinking (this is explicit in Vygotsky's > writings, especially in ?The teaching about emotions?, in the Vol.6 of > the Collected Works). But I have doubts that Vygotsky's introduction > of the concept of perezhivanie is to be regarded primarily as a > movement towards monism (from a previous cartesian dualism), and that > this movement questions the concept of cultural mediation. Instead, > and I think that this is in line with some of Gonz?lez-Rey > observations in his paper, my impression is that the introduction of > the concept of perezhivanie responds more to a movement (a further > step) towards holism (something that, in my understanding, can also be > found in Spinoza). Thus, I think that the word meaning is still the > unit of analysis in the last Vygotsky -and therefore, the idea of > cultural mediation is still crucial (in fact, in The problem of the > environment, he connects the concept of perezhivanie, which has just > introduced, to the development of word meaning [p.345-346, also cited > in my paper]). However, in my view, in the last Vygotsky the focus is > not anymore primarily on the word-meaning as formed for things (or > collections of things, as in the ontogenetic research with Sakharov), but the focus is now in the formation of meaning for holistic situations. > > Best regards, > > Marc. > > 2017-01-03 19:16 GMT+01:00 Alfredo Jornet Gil : > >> Hi Marc, all, >> >> thanks for joining and for your interesting work, which I follow >> since I became aware of it. I appreciate the way in your paper you >> show careful and honest attention to the texts of the authors >> involved, but perhaps most of all I appreciate that the paper makes >> the transformational dimension related to struggle and change >> salient, a dimension all papers deemed central to perezhivanie. And I >> have learned more about Vasilyuk by reading your paper. But I also >> see that we have approached the question of perezhivanie differently >> and I think that addressing the questions that you raise concerning >> our article may be a good way to both respond and discuss your paper. >> >> I am aware that our use of the term monism may be problematic to >> some, and N. Veresov, who has recently written about this (see >> attached article), warns against the dangers of simply moving from >> dualism into an undifferentiating monism that relativizes everything, >> making development un-studiable. This seems to be the way in which >> you have understood our argument, and of course this is not what we are or want to be doing. >> Probably many will think that *dialectical materialism* rather than >> monism is the proper term, and I could agree with them; we do in fact >> use dialectical materialism there and elsewhere. Yet, we wanted to >> emphasise the Spinozist influence (an influence that also runs >> through Marx) and so we found it appropriate to use the term monism, >> a term that Vygotsky uses before arguing that Spinoza "develops an essentially materialistic view" >> (Collected Works, Vol. 6, p. 124). For us, the aim is working out >> ways to empirically examine and formulate problems in ways that do >> not reify a mind-body dualism. >> >> Although overcoming dualism is foundational to the CHAT paradigm, I >> would however not say that Vygotsky did get to solve all of the >> problems that Cartesian dualism had created for psychology, even >> though he recognised those problems brilliantly as early as in the >> "Crisis". It should suffice to cite Vygotsky's own remarks, which we quote in the paper (and which A.N. >> Leont'ev mentions in the introduction to the collected works), where >> Vygotsky explicitly critiques some of his own prior ideas for failing >> to overcome dualism. We agree with those who, like F. G. Rey, see >> Vygotsky's project as a developing rather than as a finalised one. >> The fact is that Vygotsky was building a theory on the unity of the >> affect and the intellect that was to be grounded on Spinoza, and what >> we try to do is to explore how perezhivanie, as a concept being >> developed during the same period (but not finalised or totally >> settled!), could be seen from the perspective of the Spinozist Vygotsky. >> >> As you note, in our article we argue that, if one takes the Spinozist >> one-substance approach, classical concepts used in non-classical >> psychology, at least in the way they are commonly used in the current >> literature, should be revised. One such concept is mediation. And I >> personally do not have much of a problem when mediation is used to >> denote the fundamental fact that every thing exists always through >> *another*, never in and of itself. But I do think that it is >> problematic to identify MEDIATORS, such as "a meaning", as a means to >> account for or explain developmental processes and learning events, >> precisely because it is there, at least in my view, that dualism creeps in. >> >> For example, I find it paradoxical that you are concerned that our >> monist approach risks turning perezhivanie into a useless category >> because it may be used to explain everything and nothing, and yet you >> do not seem to have a problem using the term mediation to account for >> the transformation of perezhivanie without clearly elaborating on how >> mediation does change anything or what it looks like as a real >> process. How is it different saying that a perezhivanie mediates the >> experiencing-as-struggle from simply saying that it "affects" or >> "determines" it? Indeed, if perezhivanie mediates >> experiencing-as-struggle, does not experiencing-as-struglgle too >> mediate perezhivanie? And do not both may be said to mediate development, or development mediate them? Is not this explaining everything and nothing? >> >> I do believe you can argue that there is a difference between >> mediation and classical psychology's cause-effect relations, but to >> show this you need to dig into the dialectical underpinnings of the >> theory. In your paper, you offer a nice analysis of a lovely case of >> a teacher who, in dealing with a challenge with one of her students, >> changes her perezhivanie. I think you can rightly argue that there is >> a semiotic transformation, and I fully support your statement that by >> studying discourse we can empirically approach questions of >> psychological development. The contradictions you show as being >> involved and resolved resonate really well with what I experience as >> a parent or as a teacher in the classroom. Yet, without unpacking >> what this "mediation" taking place between one perezhivanie and the >> next one means as a concrete and real, the same analysis could be done taking an information processing approach: >> there is an situation that is processed (represented?) in one way, >> which then leads to a (cognitive) dissonance, and then there is a >> cognitive resolution by means of which the situation is presented >> differently in consciousness (indeed, when seen in this way, the term >> perezhivanie and the term "representation" become almost >> indistinguishable). How is mediation, as an analytical concept, >> helping here? And most importantly to the question of perezhivanie, >> how is this analysis going to show the internal connection between >> intellect and affect that Vygotsky formulates as constitutive of the notion of perezhivanie? >> >> I believe that the key lies in understanding what Vygotsky means when >> he says that perezhivanie is a unit of analysis. I will not repeat >> here what already is written in at least a couple of the articles in >> the special issue (Blunden, ours), that is the difference between >> analysis by elements and unit analysis (Vygotsky 1987). A unit >> analysis approach is consistent with Spinoza, for whom cause-effect >> explanations were not adequate, requiring instead an understanding of >> self-development, perezhivanie as a kernel cell for the development >> of personality. And I think you may be after this in your article in >> suggesting a form of continuous movement from perezhivanie to >> experiencing-as-struggle. But perhaps the major difficulty I find is that, in positing Vygotsky's perezhivanie as "a type of meaning" >> and Vasilyuk's perezhivanie (or experiencing-as-struggle) as a "type >> of activity," it is difficult not to see here a division between >> product and process, a division that then is analytically bridged by >> the addition of a third term, mediation, that should bring back the >> real movement between the product and the process. >> >> A different approach involves considering the concrete extension of >> actual living and lived social relations, and look at them as >> generative phenomena. What is there in the encounter between Carla >> and the child that leads to change? For it is not inside the mind, >> but in real life, in consciousness as the real relation between people, that Carla is changed. >> How is the semantic structure that you nicely present and attribute >> to Carla a product of the social relation between her and the child? >> I think that to rightfully situate perezhivanie as a concept in a >> Vygotskian framework, we ought to address its relation to the genetic >> law of development. >> >> There is much more to disentangle, but this is long enough. I hope I >> have succeeded in making clear these ideas. Thanks so much for >> engaging in the discussion! >> Alfredo >> >> >> >> ________________________________________ >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> on behalf of Marc Clar? >> >> Sent: 02 January 2017 22:14 >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! >> >> Hi, all, and thank you so much, Alfredo, for your kind invitation to >> participate in this discussion. My paper in the MCA special issue >> focuses on a distinction between a type of activity, which I argue >> that is what Vasilyuk called *perezhivanie* (experiencing) and a type >> of semiotic mediator, which I argue that is what Vygotsky, in The >> Problem of the Environment, called *perezhivanie.* I argue, following >> Vasilyuk, that in experiencing activities (Vasilyuk's perezhivanie), >> this type of mediator is profoundly transformed ? in fact, that >> experiencing activities consist of the semiotic transformation of this type of mediator. >> >> As Veresov and Fleer argue in their commentary, perezhivanie (as a >> type of >> mediator) is for me a psychological phenomenon, one which is of >> course conceptualized from a specific theoretical framework. But the >> phenomenon is also visible from other theoretical frameworks as well, >> as I mention in the paper. This phenomenon is my main interest, and >> it is from this interest that I arrived at the concept of perezhivanie (not the other way around). >> Now, the phenomenon is that at least emotion, reasoning, and volition >> (formation of conscious purposes) seem to be decisively mediated by >> holistic situational meaning. My current research concern is trying >> to find ways to study and understand how this mediation occurs and >> how these semiotic mediators are transformed and distributed. From >> this view, I think that experiencing activities (Vasilyuk's >> perezhivanie) may provide a good terrain to study these issues >> (especially regarding the mediation of emotion), as I tried to exemplify in the paper. >> >> Studying semiotic mediation, however, is of course not easy. >> Following Vygotsky, I assume that extended discourse is the >> manifestation of thinking within certain psychological conditions >> (Vygotsky's Thinking and Speech, chapter 7), and I also assume the >> Vygotsky's law of the unity of the structure and function of thinking >> (Vygotsky's Thinking and Speech, chapter 6). From these two >> assumptions, I propose that meaning (and its functions in human >> activity) can be scientifically studied by structurally analyzing the >> narratives generated by subjects, considering that the discourse >> produced in the narrative is the point of departure of this study, >> but that considerable analytical work must be done to move from this >> discourse to the full characterization of meaning. It is in that >> point where I find useful the work developed by Greimas, the usefulness of which I only suggest in the paper. >> >> >From this background, I found many interesting ideas and questions >> >in the >> other papers of the special issue. In this first post I will propose >> two of them for possible discussion. The first one was raised by >> Gonz?lez-Rey, when he introduces, in connection with perezhivanie, >> the concepts of personality, and especially, of sense. So, which is >> the conceptual (and-or >> phenomenal) relation between perezhivanie and sense? Gonz?lez-Rey >> suggests that both concepts are somewhat similar (and overcome by the >> concept of ?subjective sense?); my opinion, partly expressed in my >> commentary, is that perezhivanie is a type of meaning, which includes >> different levels of depth, and that sense corresponds to the deepest >> level of meaning (which can be characterized as a system of semic >> oppositions). Therefore, sense wouldn't be in opposition to meaning >> (as ?a microcosm of human consciousness?, as Kozulin remembers in his >> commentary), although it would be in opposition to manifested meaning (the surface level of meaning). >> >> The second issue was raised by Roth and Jornet, and I think it goes >> beyond the issue of perezhivanie itself. If I understand them well, >> they argue that Vygotsky's core proposal of cultural mediation is >> influenced by the Cartesian dualism (mind-matter), and that a >> promising approach to Cultural Psychology would be a Spinozist >> monism. I am actually very interested on the issue of which >> epistemological position can best substantiate the construction of a >> cultural psychology, and that's why I feel inclined to take the >> opportunity to ask for your opinions about that. About the proposal >> of Roth and Jornet, I have some doubts. First, I don't see why >> Vygotsky's proposals can be seen as dualist (in the Cartesian sense) >> -I suspect that it is because of the analytical distinctions?. >> Anyway, in my understanding, Vygotsky explicitly assumes a >> materialist monism (for example in The Crisis), and in fact he constructs his proposal on mediation upon reflexology, which also explicitly assumed a materialist monism (e.g. >> Sechenov). Would a Spinozist monism be a better point of departure? I >> don't know, in my understanding it is a more idealist monism, and I >> don't clearly see what could be gained. In my opinion, a scientific >> psychology which includes the study of mind is only possible if any >> type of monism is assumed. However, in my view, for a scientific >> psychology, the ontological nature of the world is perhaps less >> important (it is an issue for metaphysics?), and I am inclined to assume a neutral monism (e.g. Russell). >> So from this view, a materialist monism and a Spinozist monism >> wouldn't be so different, so from both views it could be assumed that >> all is of the same nature and all is similarly knowable (including >> mind) [which is the ontological nature of the world and to what >> degree it is knowable are issues that can be left to philosophy]. >> However, in my opinion, this does not mean that, while assuming a >> monism, analytical distinctions cannot be done when studying the >> world. In that sense, I had the impression that Roth and Jornet >> tended to dilute analytical distinctions in the name of monism; I >> repeat that I don't know if I understood them well, but if this was >> the case, in my opinion, analysis would be impossible within the new >> psychology suggested by Roth and Jornet, and, regarding perezhivanie, >> there would be the danger, noted by Vygotsky in The Crisis and >> cautioned by Kozulin in his commentary, that by meaning everything, perezhivanie ends by meaning nothing. >> >> Best regards and happy new year, >> >> Marc. >> >> 2017-01-02 9:12 GMT+01:00 Alfredo Jornet Gil : >> >>> Dear all, >>> >>> >>> I would like to join David, Luisa, Ana, Henry and the others to wish >>> you all a Happy New Year! May it be full of joy, peace, and opportunity. >>> >>> >>> I also would like to begin the year announcing our first ?MCA >>> article discussion, ?although in fact corresponds to the last issue >>> of the year >> we >>> just passed, Issue 4 on Perezhivanie. This is a very special >>> *special* issue, not only because its topic has raised lots of >>> interest lately in >> the >>> CHAT community but also because, greatly coordinated by Andy Blunden >>> and the rest of the editorial team, the issue takes the form of a >>> symposium where authors get the chance to present and respond to >>> each others' ideas on the subject. In my view, this allows having a >>> rich and >> multidimensional >>> approach to a subject as important as perezhivanie. >>> >>> >>> Following with the dialogical spirit in which the special issue was >>> assembled, we will focus on one lead article, but hoping to also >>> engage ideas and insights present in or relevant to other >>> contributions in the issue. ?Marc Clar?'s "Vygotsky and Vasilyuk on >>> Perezhivanie: Two Notions and One Word" will be our focus. The >>> article very nicely engages the lead work of Vygotsky, but also the >>> less known ??(?in educational literature) but totally relevant works >>> of psychologist ?F. Vasilyuk and semiotician >> A. >>> J. Greimas, mobilising a number of key concepts including those of >> semiotic >>> mediation and transformation. >>> >>> ?In addition to Marc, who will soon join us, I have encouraged some >>> of >> the >>> other authors in the special issue to also join as "relevant >>> others," if time and circumstances allow them. Let's hope that this >>> will help keeping the symposium spirit up. >>> >>> >>> Marc's article is attached to this e-mail and will be made open >>> access at the T&F pages as soon as people is back from the holidays. >>> The T&F link >> is >>> this: >>> http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039.2016.1186194 >>> >>> The link to the MCA Forum pages, where we announce our discussions >>> and other xmca things, is here: http://lchc.ucsd.edu/MCA/ >>> >>> >>> I wish us all a very productive and interesting discussion. >>> >>> Alfredo >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> From ablunden@mira.net Sat Jan 7 04:27:32 2017 From: ablunden@mira.net (Andy Blunden) Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2017 23:27:32 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! In-Reply-To: References: <1483344752182.40904@iped.uio.no> <1483467423798.57819@iped.uio.no> <1483601196884.31418@iped.uio.no> <5df5e870-3ef8-70d6-0c17-f8647ba17e62@mira.net> Message-ID: Can you explain in a paragraph or two,. Peter, rather than asking us all to read 10,000 words to extract an answer? Andy ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making On 7/01/2017 11:23 PM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > Andy and others, I tried to work out the mediated/mediating question in the area of reading....see if this helps. > Smagorinsky, P., & O'Donnell-Allen, C. (1998). Reading as mediated and mediating action: Composing meaning for literature through multimedia interpretive texts. Reading Research Quarterly, 33, 198-226. Available at http://www.petersmagorinsky.net/About/PDF/RRQ/RRQ1998.pdf > > -----Original Message----- > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden > Sent: Friday, January 6, 2017 7:12 PM > To: xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > I have never understood this supposed distinction, Alfredo, between "mediated activity" and "mediating activity" given that all activity is mediated and all activity mediates. > Also, could you spell out what you mean by the "tension" > between perezhivanie as meaning and perezhivanie as struggle. > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Andy Blunden > http://home.mira.net/~andy > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > On 5/01/2017 6:26 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: >> Thanks Marc for your careful response. >> >> I am familiar to Vygotsky's notion of cultural mediation and I am aware and acknowledge that it was elaborated as a means to overcome dualism, and that it is not analog to a computational approach. >> >> When I brought the computing analogy, I did so with regard not to the concept of cultural mediation in general, but to the way it can be (and is) deployed analytically. I react to what it seems to me a dichotomy between a "meaning" as something that is static (thereby a form of "representation" or reflection of the relation with the environment instead of ?refraction)?? and the experiencing-as-struggling, which is described as ?transformation or change. If so, mediation here would seem to be part of a methodological device that first dissects "a type of meaning" from "a type of activity" (or a given state from the process that changes that state), and then unites it by adding the term "mediation." And this may be my misreading, but in that (mis)reading (which perhaps is mostly due to the fact that in your empirical illustration only the initial and end product, i.e., perezhivanie, are described, but not the experiencing-as-struggle, that is, the moving between the two), mediation here seems to do as analytical concept precisely what you were afraid our monism was doing: explaining nothing. Only the end products but not the process of producing perezhivanie are revealed. This may be problematic if one attends to what Veresov argues in the paper I shared yesterday, where he defends the notion of mediation but also specifies that Vygotsky speaks of *mediating activity* (as opposed to *mediated* activity). That is, not mediation by signs as products, but mediating activity as the activity of producing signs (which again is an activity of producing social relations, perhaps what you refer as "holistic meanings"?). What do you think? >> >> I did not think you were trying to deny the influence of Spinoza, and I do not think we ever said that Perezhivanie was primarily a move from Cartesian Dualism to Monism, as you suggest in your post. I copy and paste from my prior post: "The fact is that Vygotsky was building a theory on the unity of the affect and the intellect that was to be grounded on Spinoza, and what we try to do is to explore how perezhivanie, as a concept being developed during the same period (but not finalised or totally settled!), could be seen from the perspective of the Spinozist Vygotsky." >> >> I totally believe that bringing the distinction between perezhivanie as meaning, and perezhivanie as struggle, is totally relevant, and Beth Ferholt's vignettes of Where the Wild Things Are do indeed illustrate this. We really need to address this tension, which as Beth's examples and as our own everyday experience shows, is a tension that matters not just to books and to theories but to living persons (children, teachers), a tension that moreover is present and mentioned in all the articles of the symposium. The papers offer different proposals, and I think is so great we have the chance to discuss them! I too, as you, am very interesting in hearing others about the questions you had concerning sense and meaning. >> >> Alfredo >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> on behalf of Marc Clar? >> >> Sent: 04 January 2017 22:31 >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! >> >> Thank you very much, Alfredo, for sharing this excellent paper by >> Veresov, and thanks also for your responses, which really helped me to >> better understand your points. My main doubt about your proposal >> was/is caused by the statement that the idea of cultural >> mediation/mediator implies a cartesian dualism. This shocks me >> because, to me, the idea of cultural mediation is absolutely crucial >> (in fact, the keystone) for the construction of a monist (and >> scientific) psychology that does not forget mind ?that is, a cultural >> psychology. From your response, however, I realized that we may be >> approaching the idea of mediation in different ways. I talk of >> mediation and mediators in a quite restricted way. The starting point >> of my understanding of mediation is a dialectical relationship >> (organic, transactional) between the subject and the world (Vygotsky departs from the scheme stimulus-response, from reflexology). >> This relationship, that Vygotsky calls primitive psychological >> functions, would be basically biological. However, in human beings >> this relationship is mediated by cultural means: signs and tools; or >> primary, secondary and terciary artifacts. These cultural means >> reorganize the primitive functions (dialectic S-O relationship), which >> become then higher psychological functions (S-M-O) (see for example, >> The problem of the cultural development of the child, in The Vygotsky >> Reader). Now, the subject, the cultural mediators, and the object form >> an inseparable dialectical unit, so that the subject acts on >> (transforms) the object through the prism of the cultural mediators, >> the object acts on (transforms) the subject also through the prism of >> the cultural mediators, and the cultural means are themselves also >> transformed as a consequence of their mediation in this continuous >> dynamic dialectical tension. Here, for me, it is important the idea >> that the cultural means are as material (if we assume a materialist >> monism) as all the rest of the world; in fact, are parts of the >> material world which become signs or tools (and can be therefore >> socially distributed). This permits the introduction of the scientific >> study of mind-consciousness (as mediating systems of signs), because >> mind is not anymore something immaterial and unobservable, but it is >> as material and observable as the rest of the natural world. It is >> from this view that, for me, the idea of cultural mediation is the >> keystone of a monist psychology that includes mind. Thus, when I speak >> of mediators, I refer to the cultural means which mediate in the S-O >> dialectics; I am especially interested in signs/secondary artifacts. >> Here, it is perhaps necessary to insist that when I talk of studying >> mediators (and their semantic structure), this doesn't mean that they >> are taken out from the activity (the flux of live) in which they >> mediate (since out of activity they are not signs anymore); here, I >> think Vygotsky tries again to overcome another old dichotomy, the >> functionalism-structuralism one. I hope that all this makes also clear the difference between this view and that of computational psychologies (which in general are profoundly and explicitly dualist and not dialectic). >> >> Back to perezhivanie, I'm not obviously trying to deny the influence >> of Spinoza on Vygotsky's thinking (this is explicit in Vygotsky's >> writings, especially in ?The teaching about emotions?, in the Vol.6 of >> the Collected Works). But I have doubts that Vygotsky's introduction >> of the concept of perezhivanie is to be regarded primarily as a >> movement towards monism (from a previous cartesian dualism), and that >> this movement questions the concept of cultural mediation. Instead, >> and I think that this is in line with some of Gonz?lez-Rey >> observations in his paper, my impression is that the introduction of >> the concept of perezhivanie responds more to a movement (a further >> step) towards holism (something that, in my understanding, can also be >> found in Spinoza). Thus, I think that the word meaning is still the >> unit of analysis in the last Vygotsky -and therefore, the idea of >> cultural mediation is still crucial (in fact, in The problem of the >> environment, he connects the concept of perezhivanie, which has just >> introduced, to the development of word meaning [p.345-346, also cited >> in my paper]). However, in my view, in the last Vygotsky the focus is >> not anymore primarily on the word-meaning as formed for things (or >> collections of things, as in the ontogenetic research with Sakharov), but the focus is now in the formation of meaning for holistic situations. >> >> Best regards, >> >> Marc. >> >> 2017-01-03 19:16 GMT+01:00 Alfredo Jornet Gil : >> >>> Hi Marc, all, >>> >>> thanks for joining and for your interesting work, which I follow >>> since I became aware of it. I appreciate the way in your paper you >>> show careful and honest attention to the texts of the authors >>> involved, but perhaps most of all I appreciate that the paper makes >>> the transformational dimension related to struggle and change >>> salient, a dimension all papers deemed central to perezhivanie. And I >>> have learned more about Vasilyuk by reading your paper. But I also >>> see that we have approached the question of perezhivanie differently >>> and I think that addressing the questions that you raise concerning >>> our article may be a good way to both respond and discuss your paper. >>> >>> I am aware that our use of the term monism may be problematic to >>> some, and N. Veresov, who has recently written about this (see >>> attached article), warns against the dangers of simply moving from >>> dualism into an undifferentiating monism that relativizes everything, >>> making development un-studiable. This seems to be the way in which >>> you have understood our argument, and of course this is not what we are or want to be doing. >>> Probably many will think that *dialectical materialism* rather than >>> monism is the proper term, and I could agree with them; we do in fact >>> use dialectical materialism there and elsewhere. Yet, we wanted to >>> emphasise the Spinozist influence (an influence that also runs >>> through Marx) and so we found it appropriate to use the term monism, >>> a term that Vygotsky uses before arguing that Spinoza "develops an essentially materialistic view" >>> (Collected Works, Vol. 6, p. 124). For us, the aim is working out >>> ways to empirically examine and formulate problems in ways that do >>> not reify a mind-body dualism. >>> >>> Although overcoming dualism is foundational to the CHAT paradigm, I >>> would however not say that Vygotsky did get to solve all of the >>> problems that Cartesian dualism had created for psychology, even >>> though he recognised those problems brilliantly as early as in the >>> "Crisis". It should suffice to cite Vygotsky's own remarks, which we quote in the paper (and which A.N. >>> Leont'ev mentions in the introduction to the collected works), where >>> Vygotsky explicitly critiques some of his own prior ideas for failing >>> to overcome dualism. We agree with those who, like F. G. Rey, see >>> Vygotsky's project as a developing rather than as a finalised one. >>> The fact is that Vygotsky was building a theory on the unity of the >>> affect and the intellect that was to be grounded on Spinoza, and what >>> we try to do is to explore how perezhivanie, as a concept being >>> developed during the same period (but not finalised or totally >>> settled!), could be seen from the perspective of the Spinozist Vygotsky. >>> >>> As you note, in our article we argue that, if one takes the Spinozist >>> one-substance approach, classical concepts used in non-classical >>> psychology, at least in the way they are commonly used in the current >>> literature, should be revised. One such concept is mediation. And I >>> personally do not have much of a problem when mediation is used to >>> denote the fundamental fact that every thing exists always through >>> *another*, never in and of itself. But I do think that it is >>> problematic to identify MEDIATORS, such as "a meaning", as a means to >>> account for or explain developmental processes and learning events, >>> precisely because it is there, at least in my view, that dualism creeps in. >>> >>> For example, I find it paradoxical that you are concerned that our >>> monist approach risks turning perezhivanie into a useless category >>> because it may be used to explain everything and nothing, and yet you >>> do not seem to have a problem using the term mediation to account for >>> the transformation of perezhivanie without clearly elaborating on how >>> mediation does change anything or what it looks like as a real >>> process. How is it different saying that a perezhivanie mediates the >>> experiencing-as-struggle from simply saying that it "affects" or >>> "determines" it? Indeed, if perezhivanie mediates >>> experiencing-as-struggle, does not experiencing-as-struglgle too >>> mediate perezhivanie? And do not both may be said to mediate development, or development mediate them? Is not this explaining everything and nothing? >>> >>> I do believe you can argue that there is a difference between >>> mediation and classical psychology's cause-effect relations, but to >>> show this you need to dig into the dialectical underpinnings of the >>> theory. In your paper, you offer a nice analysis of a lovely case of >>> a teacher who, in dealing with a challenge with one of her students, >>> changes her perezhivanie. I think you can rightly argue that there is >>> a semiotic transformation, and I fully support your statement that by >>> studying discourse we can empirically approach questions of >>> psychological development. The contradictions you show as being >>> involved and resolved resonate really well with what I experience as >>> a parent or as a teacher in the classroom. Yet, without unpacking >>> what this "mediation" taking place between one perezhivanie and the >>> next one means as a concrete and real, the same analysis could be done taking an information processing approach: >>> there is an situation that is processed (represented?) in one way, >>> which then leads to a (cognitive) dissonance, and then there is a >>> cognitive resolution by means of which the situation is presented >>> differently in consciousness (indeed, when seen in this way, the term >>> perezhivanie and the term "representation" become almost >>> indistinguishable). How is mediation, as an analytical concept, >>> helping here? And most importantly to the question of perezhivanie, >>> how is this analysis going to show the internal connection between >>> intellect and affect that Vygotsky formulates as constitutive of the notion of perezhivanie? >>> >>> I believe that the key lies in understanding what Vygotsky means when >>> he says that perezhivanie is a unit of analysis. I will not repeat >>> here what already is written in at least a couple of the articles in >>> the special issue (Blunden, ours), that is the difference between >>> analysis by elements and unit analysis (Vygotsky 1987). A unit >>> analysis approach is consistent with Spinoza, for whom cause-effect >>> explanations were not adequate, requiring instead an understanding of >>> self-development, perezhivanie as a kernel cell for the development >>> of personality. And I think you may be after this in your article in >>> suggesting a form of continuous movement from perezhivanie to >>> experiencing-as-struggle. But perhaps the major difficulty I find is that, in positing Vygotsky's perezhivanie as "a type of meaning" >>> and Vasilyuk's perezhivanie (or experiencing-as-struggle) as a "type >>> of activity," it is difficult not to see here a division between >>> product and process, a division that then is analytically bridged by >>> the addition of a third term, mediation, that should bring back the >>> real movement between the product and the process. >>> >>> A different approach involves considering the concrete extension of >>> actual living and lived social relations, and look at them as >>> generative phenomena. What is there in the encounter between Carla >>> and the child that leads to change? For it is not inside the mind, >>> but in real life, in consciousness as the real relation between people, that Carla is changed. >>> How is the semantic structure that you nicely present and attribute >>> to Carla a product of the social relation between her and the child? >>> I think that to rightfully situate perezhivanie as a concept in a >>> Vygotskian framework, we ought to address its relation to the genetic >>> law of development. >>> >>> There is much more to disentangle, but this is long enough. I hope I >>> have succeeded in making clear these ideas. Thanks so much for >>> engaging in the discussion! >>> Alfredo >>> >>> >>> >>> ________________________________________ >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>> on behalf of Marc Clar? >>> >>> Sent: 02 January 2017 22:14 >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! >>> >>> Hi, all, and thank you so much, Alfredo, for your kind invitation to >>> participate in this discussion. My paper in the MCA special issue >>> focuses on a distinction between a type of activity, which I argue >>> that is what Vasilyuk called *perezhivanie* (experiencing) and a type >>> of semiotic mediator, which I argue that is what Vygotsky, in The >>> Problem of the Environment, called *perezhivanie.* I argue, following >>> Vasilyuk, that in experiencing activities (Vasilyuk's perezhivanie), >>> this type of mediator is profoundly transformed ? in fact, that >>> experiencing activities consist of the semiotic transformation of this type of mediator. >>> >>> As Veresov and Fleer argue in their commentary, perezhivanie (as a >>> type of >>> mediator) is for me a psychological phenomenon, one which is of >>> course conceptualized from a specific theoretical framework. But the >>> phenomenon is also visible from other theoretical frameworks as well, >>> as I mention in the paper. This phenomenon is my main interest, and >>> it is from this interest that I arrived at the concept of perezhivanie (not the other way around). >>> Now, the phenomenon is that at least emotion, reasoning, and volition >>> (formation of conscious purposes) seem to be decisively mediated by >>> holistic situational meaning. My current research concern is trying >>> to find ways to study and understand how this mediation occurs and >>> how these semiotic mediators are transformed and distributed. From >>> this view, I think that experiencing activities (Vasilyuk's >>> perezhivanie) may provide a good terrain to study these issues >>> (especially regarding the mediation of emotion), as I tried to exemplify in the paper. >>> >>> Studying semiotic mediation, however, is of course not easy. >>> Following Vygotsky, I assume that extended discourse is the >>> manifestation of thinking within certain psychological conditions >>> (Vygotsky's Thinking and Speech, chapter 7), and I also assume the >>> Vygotsky's law of the unity of the structure and function of thinking >>> (Vygotsky's Thinking and Speech, chapter 6). From these two >>> assumptions, I propose that meaning (and its functions in human >>> activity) can be scientifically studied by structurally analyzing the >>> narratives generated by subjects, considering that the discourse >>> produced in the narrative is the point of departure of this study, >>> but that considerable analytical work must be done to move from this >>> discourse to the full characterization of meaning. It is in that >>> point where I find useful the work developed by Greimas, the usefulness of which I only suggest in the paper. >>> >>> >From this background, I found many interesting ideas and questions >>>> in the >>> other papers of the special issue. In this first post I will propose >>> two of them for possible discussion. The first one was raised by >>> Gonz?lez-Rey, when he introduces, in connection with perezhivanie, >>> the concepts of personality, and especially, of sense. So, which is >>> the conceptual (and-or >>> phenomenal) relation between perezhivanie and sense? Gonz?lez-Rey >>> suggests that both concepts are somewhat similar (and overcome by the >>> concept of ?subjective sense?); my opinion, partly expressed in my >>> commentary, is that perezhivanie is a type of meaning, which includes >>> different levels of depth, and that sense corresponds to the deepest >>> level of meaning (which can be characterized as a system of semic >>> oppositions). Therefore, sense wouldn't be in opposition to meaning >>> (as ?a microcosm of human consciousness?, as Kozulin remembers in his >>> commentary), although it would be in opposition to manifested meaning (the surface level of meaning). >>> >>> The second issue was raised by Roth and Jornet, and I think it goes >>> beyond the issue of perezhivanie itself. If I understand them well, >>> they argue that Vygotsky's core proposal of cultural mediation is >>> influenced by the Cartesian dualism (mind-matter), and that a >>> promising approach to Cultural Psychology would be a Spinozist >>> monism. I am actually very interested on the issue of which >>> epistemological position can best substantiate the construction of a >>> cultural psychology, and that's why I feel inclined to take the >>> opportunity to ask for your opinions about that. About the proposal >>> of Roth and Jornet, I have some doubts. First, I don't see why >>> Vygotsky's proposals can be seen as dualist (in the Cartesian sense) >>> -I suspect that it is because of the analytical distinctions?. >>> Anyway, in my understanding, Vygotsky explicitly assumes a >>> materialist monism (for example in The Crisis), and in fact he constructs his proposal on mediation upon reflexology, which also explicitly assumed a materialist monism (e.g. >>> Sechenov). Would a Spinozist monism be a better point of departure? I >>> don't know, in my understanding it is a more idealist monism, and I >>> don't clearly see what could be gained. In my opinion, a scientific >>> psychology which includes the study of mind is only possible if any >>> type of monism is assumed. However, in my view, for a scientific >>> psychology, the ontological nature of the world is perhaps less >>> important (it is an issue for metaphysics?), and I am inclined to assume a neutral monism (e.g. Russell). >>> So from this view, a materialist monism and a Spinozist monism >>> wouldn't be so different, so from both views it could be assumed that >>> all is of the same nature and all is similarly knowable (including >>> mind) [which is the ontological nature of the world and to what >>> degree it is knowable are issues that can be left to philosophy]. >>> However, in my opinion, this does not mean that, while assuming a >>> monism, analytical distinctions cannot be done when studying the >>> world. In that sense, I had the impression that Roth and Jornet >>> tended to dilute analytical distinctions in the name of monism; I >>> repeat that I don't know if I understood them well, but if this was >>> the case, in my opinion, analysis would be impossible within the new >>> psychology suggested by Roth and Jornet, and, regarding perezhivanie, >>> there would be the danger, noted by Vygotsky in The Crisis and >>> cautioned by Kozulin in his commentary, that by meaning everything, perezhivanie ends by meaning nothing. >>> >>> Best regards and happy new year, >>> >>> Marc. >>> >>> 2017-01-02 9:12 GMT+01:00 Alfredo Jornet Gil : >>> >>>> Dear all, >>>> >>>> >>>> I would like to join David, Luisa, Ana, Henry and the others to wish >>>> you all a Happy New Year! May it be full of joy, peace, and opportunity. >>>> >>>> >>>> I also would like to begin the year announcing our first ?MCA >>>> article discussion, ?although in fact corresponds to the last issue >>>> of the year >>> we >>>> just passed, Issue 4 on Perezhivanie. This is a very special >>>> *special* issue, not only because its topic has raised lots of >>>> interest lately in >>> the >>>> CHAT community but also because, greatly coordinated by Andy Blunden >>>> and the rest of the editorial team, the issue takes the form of a >>>> symposium where authors get the chance to present and respond to >>>> each others' ideas on the subject. In my view, this allows having a >>>> rich and >>> multidimensional >>>> approach to a subject as important as perezhivanie. >>>> >>>> >>>> Following with the dialogical spirit in which the special issue was >>>> assembled, we will focus on one lead article, but hoping to also >>>> engage ideas and insights present in or relevant to other >>>> contributions in the issue. ?Marc Clar?'s "Vygotsky and Vasilyuk on >>>> Perezhivanie: Two Notions and One Word" will be our focus. The >>>> article very nicely engages the lead work of Vygotsky, but also the >>>> less known ??(?in educational literature) but totally relevant works >>>> of psychologist ?F. Vasilyuk and semiotician >>> A. >>>> J. Greimas, mobilising a number of key concepts including those of >>> semiotic >>>> mediation and transformation. >>>> >>>> ?In addition to Marc, who will soon join us, I have encouraged some >>>> of >>> the >>>> other authors in the special issue to also join as "relevant >>>> others," if time and circumstances allow them. Let's hope that this >>>> will help keeping the symposium spirit up. >>>> >>>> >>>> Marc's article is attached to this e-mail and will be made open >>>> access at the T&F pages as soon as people is back from the holidays. >>>> The T&F link >>> is >>>> this: >>>> http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039.2016.1186194 >>>> >>>> The link to the MCA Forum pages, where we announce our discussions >>>> and other xmca things, is here: http://lchc.ucsd.edu/MCA/ >>>> >>>> >>>> I wish us all a very productive and interesting discussion. >>>> >>>> Alfredo >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> From smago@uga.edu Sat Jan 7 04:42:03 2017 From: smago@uga.edu (Peter Smagorinsky) Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2017 12:42:03 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! In-Reply-To: References: <1483344752182.40904@iped.uio.no> <1483467423798.57819@iped.uio.no> <1483601196884.31418@iped.uio.no> <5df5e870-3ef8-70d6-0c17-f8647ba17e62@mira.net> Message-ID: Let me try to illustrate. Reading as mediated action: The cultural-historical context of reading mediates how one?s attention and response are channeled in socially constructed ways. So, in one setting, say at home or reading in the company of friends, a novel might bring a reader to tears, or invite readers to share personal stories that parallel those of the plot lines, or laugh out loud. But another setting, a formal school or university class, would have historical values and practices that mute emotional and personal responses, and promote a more sober, analytic way of reading and talking that fits with specific historical critical conventions and genres, and discourages others. Reading as mediating action: The act of reading can be transformational. In reading about an talking about a character?s actions, a reader might reconsider a value system, become more sympathetic to real people who resemble oppressed characters, etc. In other words, reading a text may serve a mediational process in which textual ideas and exemplars enable a reader to think differently. From: Andy Blunden [mailto:ablunden@mira.net] Sent: Saturday, January 7, 2017 6:28 AM To: Peter Smagorinsky ; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: Re: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! Can you explain in a paragraph or two,. Peter, rather than asking us all to read 10,000 words to extract an answer? Andy ________________________________ Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making On 7/01/2017 11:23 PM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: Andy and others, I tried to work out the mediated/mediating question in the area of reading....see if this helps. Smagorinsky, P., & O'Donnell-Allen, C. (1998). Reading as mediated and mediating action: Composing meaning for literature through multimedia interpretive texts. Reading Research Quarterly, 33, 198-226. Available at http://www.petersmagorinsky.net/About/PDF/RRQ/RRQ1998.pdf -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden Sent: Friday, January 6, 2017 7:12 PM To: xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! I have never understood this supposed distinction, Alfredo, between "mediated activity" and "mediating activity" given that all activity is mediated and all activity mediates. Also, could you spell out what you mean by the "tension" between perezhivanie as meaning and perezhivanie as struggle. Andy ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making On 5/01/2017 6:26 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: Thanks Marc for your careful response. I am familiar to Vygotsky's notion of cultural mediation and I am aware and acknowledge that it was elaborated as a means to overcome dualism, and that it is not analog to a computational approach. When I brought the computing analogy, I did so with regard not to the concept of cultural mediation in general, but to the way it can be (and is) deployed analytically. I react to what it seems to me a dichotomy between a "meaning" as something that is static (thereby a form of "representation" or reflection of the relation with the environment instead of ?refraction)?? and the experiencing-as-struggling, which is described as ?transformation or change. If so, mediation here would seem to be part of a methodological device that first dissects "a type of meaning" from "a type of activity" (or a given state from the process that changes that state), and then unites it by adding the term "mediation." And this may be my misreading, but in that (mis)reading (which perhaps is mostly due to the fact that in your empirical illustration only the initial and end product, i.e., perezhivanie, are described, but not the experiencing-as-struggle, that is, the moving between the two), mediation here seems to do as analytical concept precisely what you were afraid our monism was doing: explaining nothing. Only the end products but not the process of producing perezhivanie are revealed. This may be problematic if one attends to what Veresov argues in the paper I shared yesterday, where he defends the notion of mediation but also specifies that Vygotsky speaks of *mediating activity* (as opposed to *mediated* activity). That is, not mediation by signs as products, but mediating activity as the activity of producing signs (which again is an activity of producing social relations, perhaps what you refer as "holistic meanings"?). What do you think? I did not think you were trying to deny the influence of Spinoza, and I do not think we ever said that Perezhivanie was primarily a move from Cartesian Dualism to Monism, as you suggest in your post. I copy and paste from my prior post: "The fact is that Vygotsky was building a theory on the unity of the affect and the intellect that was to be grounded on Spinoza, and what we try to do is to explore how perezhivanie, as a concept being developed during the same period (but not finalised or totally settled!), could be seen from the perspective of the Spinozist Vygotsky." I totally believe that bringing the distinction between perezhivanie as meaning, and perezhivanie as struggle, is totally relevant, and Beth Ferholt's vignettes of Where the Wild Things Are do indeed illustrate this. We really need to address this tension, which as Beth's examples and as our own everyday experience shows, is a tension that matters not just to books and to theories but to living persons (children, teachers), a tension that moreover is present and mentioned in all the articles of the symposium. The papers offer different proposals, and I think is so great we have the chance to discuss them! I too, as you, am very interesting in hearing others about the questions you had concerning sense and meaning. Alfredo From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Marc Clar? Sent: 04 January 2017 22:31 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! Thank you very much, Alfredo, for sharing this excellent paper by Veresov, and thanks also for your responses, which really helped me to better understand your points. My main doubt about your proposal was/is caused by the statement that the idea of cultural mediation/mediator implies a cartesian dualism. This shocks me because, to me, the idea of cultural mediation is absolutely crucial (in fact, the keystone) for the construction of a monist (and scientific) psychology that does not forget mind ?that is, a cultural psychology. From your response, however, I realized that we may be approaching the idea of mediation in different ways. I talk of mediation and mediators in a quite restricted way. The starting point of my understanding of mediation is a dialectical relationship (organic, transactional) between the subject and the world (Vygotsky departs from the scheme stimulus-response, from reflexology). This relationship, that Vygotsky calls primitive psychological functions, would be basically biological. However, in human beings this relationship is mediated by cultural means: signs and tools; or primary, secondary and terciary artifacts. These cultural means reorganize the primitive functions (dialectic S-O relationship), which become then higher psychological functions (S-M-O) (see for example, The problem of the cultural development of the child, in The Vygotsky Reader). Now, the subject, the cultural mediators, and the object form an inseparable dialectical unit, so that the subject acts on (transforms) the object through the prism of the cultural mediators, the object acts on (transforms) the subject also through the prism of the cultural mediators, and the cultural means are themselves also transformed as a consequence of their mediation in this continuous dynamic dialectical tension. Here, for me, it is important the idea that the cultural means are as material (if we assume a materialist monism) as all the rest of the world; in fact, are parts of the material world which become signs or tools (and can be therefore socially distributed). This permits the introduction of the scientific study of mind-consciousness (as mediating systems of signs), because mind is not anymore something immaterial and unobservable, but it is as material and observable as the rest of the natural world. It is from this view that, for me, the idea of cultural mediation is the keystone of a monist psychology that includes mind. Thus, when I speak of mediators, I refer to the cultural means which mediate in the S-O dialectics; I am especially interested in signs/secondary artifacts. Here, it is perhaps necessary to insist that when I talk of studying mediators (and their semantic structure), this doesn't mean that they are taken out from the activity (the flux of live) in which they mediate (since out of activity they are not signs anymore); here, I think Vygotsky tries again to overcome another old dichotomy, the functionalism-structuralism one. I hope that all this makes also clear the difference between this view and that of computational psychologies (which in general are profoundly and explicitly dualist and not dialectic). Back to perezhivanie, I'm not obviously trying to deny the influence of Spinoza on Vygotsky's thinking (this is explicit in Vygotsky's writings, especially in ?The teaching about emotions?, in the Vol.6 of the Collected Works). But I have doubts that Vygotsky's introduction of the concept of perezhivanie is to be regarded primarily as a movement towards monism (from a previous cartesian dualism), and that this movement questions the concept of cultural mediation. Instead, and I think that this is in line with some of Gonz?lez-Rey observations in his paper, my impression is that the introduction of the concept of perezhivanie responds more to a movement (a further step) towards holism (something that, in my understanding, can also be found in Spinoza). Thus, I think that the word meaning is still the unit of analysis in the last Vygotsky -and therefore, the idea of cultural mediation is still crucial (in fact, in The problem of the environment, he connects the concept of perezhivanie, which has just introduced, to the development of word meaning [p.345-346, also cited in my paper]). However, in my view, in the last Vygotsky the focus is not anymore primarily on the word-meaning as formed for things (or collections of things, as in the ontogenetic research with Sakharov), but the focus is now in the formation of meaning for holistic situations. Best regards, Marc. 2017-01-03 19:16 GMT+01:00 Alfredo Jornet Gil : Hi Marc, all, thanks for joining and for your interesting work, which I follow since I became aware of it. I appreciate the way in your paper you show careful and honest attention to the texts of the authors involved, but perhaps most of all I appreciate that the paper makes the transformational dimension related to struggle and change salient, a dimension all papers deemed central to perezhivanie. And I have learned more about Vasilyuk by reading your paper. But I also see that we have approached the question of perezhivanie differently and I think that addressing the questions that you raise concerning our article may be a good way to both respond and discuss your paper. I am aware that our use of the term monism may be problematic to some, and N. Veresov, who has recently written about this (see attached article), warns against the dangers of simply moving from dualism into an undifferentiating monism that relativizes everything, making development un-studiable. This seems to be the way in which you have understood our argument, and of course this is not what we are or want to be doing. Probably many will think that *dialectical materialism* rather than monism is the proper term, and I could agree with them; we do in fact use dialectical materialism there and elsewhere. Yet, we wanted to emphasise the Spinozist influence (an influence that also runs through Marx) and so we found it appropriate to use the term monism, a term that Vygotsky uses before arguing that Spinoza "develops an essentially materialistic view" (Collected Works, Vol. 6, p. 124). For us, the aim is working out ways to empirically examine and formulate problems in ways that do not reify a mind-body dualism. Although overcoming dualism is foundational to the CHAT paradigm, I would however not say that Vygotsky did get to solve all of the problems that Cartesian dualism had created for psychology, even though he recognised those problems brilliantly as early as in the "Crisis". It should suffice to cite Vygotsky's own remarks, which we quote in the paper (and which A.N. Leont'ev mentions in the introduction to the collected works), where Vygotsky explicitly critiques some of his own prior ideas for failing to overcome dualism. We agree with those who, like F. G. Rey, see Vygotsky's project as a developing rather than as a finalised one. The fact is that Vygotsky was building a theory on the unity of the affect and the intellect that was to be grounded on Spinoza, and what we try to do is to explore how perezhivanie, as a concept being developed during the same period (but not finalised or totally settled!), could be seen from the perspective of the Spinozist Vygotsky. As you note, in our article we argue that, if one takes the Spinozist one-substance approach, classical concepts used in non-classical psychology, at least in the way they are commonly used in the current literature, should be revised. One such concept is mediation. And I personally do not have much of a problem when mediation is used to denote the fundamental fact that every thing exists always through *another*, never in and of itself. But I do think that it is problematic to identify MEDIATORS, such as "a meaning", as a means to account for or explain developmental processes and learning events, precisely because it is there, at least in my view, that dualism creeps in. For example, I find it paradoxical that you are concerned that our monist approach risks turning perezhivanie into a useless category because it may be used to explain everything and nothing, and yet you do not seem to have a problem using the term mediation to account for the transformation of perezhivanie without clearly elaborating on how mediation does change anything or what it looks like as a real process. How is it different saying that a perezhivanie mediates the experiencing-as-struggle from simply saying that it "affects" or "determines" it? Indeed, if perezhivanie mediates experiencing-as-struggle, does not experiencing-as-struglgle too mediate perezhivanie? And do not both may be said to mediate development, or development mediate them? Is not this explaining everything and nothing? I do believe you can argue that there is a difference between mediation and classical psychology's cause-effect relations, but to show this you need to dig into the dialectical underpinnings of the theory. In your paper, you offer a nice analysis of a lovely case of a teacher who, in dealing with a challenge with one of her students, changes her perezhivanie. I think you can rightly argue that there is a semiotic transformation, and I fully support your statement that by studying discourse we can empirically approach questions of psychological development. The contradictions you show as being involved and resolved resonate really well with what I experience as a parent or as a teacher in the classroom. Yet, without unpacking what this "mediation" taking place between one perezhivanie and the next one means as a concrete and real, the same analysis could be done taking an information processing approach: there is an situation that is processed (represented?) in one way, which then leads to a (cognitive) dissonance, and then there is a cognitive resolution by means of which the situation is presented differently in consciousness (indeed, when seen in this way, the term perezhivanie and the term "representation" become almost indistinguishable). How is mediation, as an analytical concept, helping here? And most importantly to the question of perezhivanie, how is this analysis going to show the internal connection between intellect and affect that Vygotsky formulates as constitutive of the notion of perezhivanie? I believe that the key lies in understanding what Vygotsky means when he says that perezhivanie is a unit of analysis. I will not repeat here what already is written in at least a couple of the articles in the special issue (Blunden, ours), that is the difference between analysis by elements and unit analysis (Vygotsky 1987). A unit analysis approach is consistent with Spinoza, for whom cause-effect explanations were not adequate, requiring instead an understanding of self-development, perezhivanie as a kernel cell for the development of personality. And I think you may be after this in your article in suggesting a form of continuous movement from perezhivanie to experiencing-as-struggle. But perhaps the major difficulty I find is that, in positing Vygotsky's perezhivanie as "a type of meaning" and Vasilyuk's perezhivanie (or experiencing-as-struggle) as a "type of activity," it is difficult not to see here a division between product and process, a division that then is analytically bridged by the addition of a third term, mediation, that should bring back the real movement between the product and the process. A different approach involves considering the concrete extension of actual living and lived social relations, and look at them as generative phenomena. What is there in the encounter between Carla and the child that leads to change? For it is not inside the mind, but in real life, in consciousness as the real relation between people, that Carla is changed. How is the semantic structure that you nicely present and attribute to Carla a product of the social relation between her and the child? I think that to rightfully situate perezhivanie as a concept in a Vygotskian framework, we ought to address its relation to the genetic law of development. There is much more to disentangle, but this is long enough. I hope I have succeeded in making clear these ideas. Thanks so much for engaging in the discussion! Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Marc Clar? Sent: 02 January 2017 22:14 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! Hi, all, and thank you so much, Alfredo, for your kind invitation to participate in this discussion. My paper in the MCA special issue focuses on a distinction between a type of activity, which I argue that is what Vasilyuk called *perezhivanie* (experiencing) and a type of semiotic mediator, which I argue that is what Vygotsky, in The Problem of the Environment, called *perezhivanie.* I argue, following Vasilyuk, that in experiencing activities (Vasilyuk's perezhivanie), this type of mediator is profoundly transformed ? in fact, that experiencing activities consist of the semiotic transformation of this type of mediator. As Veresov and Fleer argue in their commentary, perezhivanie (as a type of mediator) is for me a psychological phenomenon, one which is of course conceptualized from a specific theoretical framework. But the phenomenon is also visible from other theoretical frameworks as well, as I mention in the paper. This phenomenon is my main interest, and it is from this interest that I arrived at the concept of perezhivanie (not the other way around). Now, the phenomenon is that at least emotion, reasoning, and volition (formation of conscious purposes) seem to be decisively mediated by holistic situational meaning. My current research concern is trying to find ways to study and understand how this mediation occurs and how these semiotic mediators are transformed and distributed. From this view, I think that experiencing activities (Vasilyuk's perezhivanie) may provide a good terrain to study these issues (especially regarding the mediation of emotion), as I tried to exemplify in the paper. Studying semiotic mediation, however, is of course not easy. Following Vygotsky, I assume that extended discourse is the manifestation of thinking within certain psychological conditions (Vygotsky's Thinking and Speech, chapter 7), and I also assume the Vygotsky's law of the unity of the structure and function of thinking (Vygotsky's Thinking and Speech, chapter 6). From these two assumptions, I propose that meaning (and its functions in human activity) can be scientifically studied by structurally analyzing the narratives generated by subjects, considering that the discourse produced in the narrative is the point of departure of this study, but that considerable analytical work must be done to move from this discourse to the full characterization of meaning. It is in that point where I find useful the work developed by Greimas, the usefulness of which I only suggest in the paper. >From this background, I found many interesting ideas and questions in the other papers of the special issue. In this first post I will propose two of them for possible discussion. The first one was raised by Gonz?lez-Rey, when he introduces, in connection with perezhivanie, the concepts of personality, and especially, of sense. So, which is the conceptual (and-or phenomenal) relation between perezhivanie and sense? Gonz?lez-Rey suggests that both concepts are somewhat similar (and overcome by the concept of ?subjective sense?); my opinion, partly expressed in my commentary, is that perezhivanie is a type of meaning, which includes different levels of depth, and that sense corresponds to the deepest level of meaning (which can be characterized as a system of semic oppositions). Therefore, sense wouldn't be in opposition to meaning (as ?a microcosm of human consciousness?, as Kozulin remembers in his commentary), although it would be in opposition to manifested meaning (the surface level of meaning). The second issue was raised by Roth and Jornet, and I think it goes beyond the issue of perezhivanie itself. If I understand them well, they argue that Vygotsky's core proposal of cultural mediation is influenced by the Cartesian dualism (mind-matter), and that a promising approach to Cultural Psychology would be a Spinozist monism. I am actually very interested on the issue of which epistemological position can best substantiate the construction of a cultural psychology, and that's why I feel inclined to take the opportunity to ask for your opinions about that. About the proposal of Roth and Jornet, I have some doubts. First, I don't see why Vygotsky's proposals can be seen as dualist (in the Cartesian sense) -I suspect that it is because of the analytical distinctions?. Anyway, in my understanding, Vygotsky explicitly assumes a materialist monism (for example in The Crisis), and in fact he constructs his proposal on mediation upon reflexology, which also explicitly assumed a materialist monism (e.g. Sechenov). Would a Spinozist monism be a better point of departure? I don't know, in my understanding it is a more idealist monism, and I don't clearly see what could be gained. In my opinion, a scientific psychology which includes the study of mind is only possible if any type of monism is assumed. However, in my view, for a scientific psychology, the ontological nature of the world is perhaps less important (it is an issue for metaphysics?), and I am inclined to assume a neutral monism (e.g. Russell). So from this view, a materialist monism and a Spinozist monism wouldn't be so different, so from both views it could be assumed that all is of the same nature and all is similarly knowable (including mind) [which is the ontological nature of the world and to what degree it is knowable are issues that can be left to philosophy]. However, in my opinion, this does not mean that, while assuming a monism, analytical distinctions cannot be done when studying the world. In that sense, I had the impression that Roth and Jornet tended to dilute analytical distinctions in the name of monism; I repeat that I don't know if I understood them well, but if this was the case, in my opinion, analysis would be impossible within the new psychology suggested by Roth and Jornet, and, regarding perezhivanie, there would be the danger, noted by Vygotsky in The Crisis and cautioned by Kozulin in his commentary, that by meaning everything, perezhivanie ends by meaning nothing. Best regards and happy new year, Marc. 2017-01-02 9:12 GMT+01:00 Alfredo Jornet Gil : Dear all, I would like to join David, Luisa, Ana, Henry and the others to wish you all a Happy New Year! May it be full of joy, peace, and opportunity. I also would like to begin the year announcing our first ?MCA article discussion, ?although in fact corresponds to the last issue of the year we just passed, Issue 4 on Perezhivanie. This is a very special *special* issue, not only because its topic has raised lots of interest lately in the CHAT community but also because, greatly coordinated by Andy Blunden and the rest of the editorial team, the issue takes the form of a symposium where authors get the chance to present and respond to each others' ideas on the subject. In my view, this allows having a rich and multidimensional approach to a subject as important as perezhivanie. Following with the dialogical spirit in which the special issue was assembled, we will focus on one lead article, but hoping to also engage ideas and insights present in or relevant to other contributions in the issue. ?Marc Clar?'s "Vygotsky and Vasilyuk on Perezhivanie: Two Notions and One Word" will be our focus. The article very nicely engages the lead work of Vygotsky, but also the less known ??(?in educational literature) but totally relevant works of psychologist ?F. Vasilyuk and semiotician A. J. Greimas, mobilising a number of key concepts including those of semiotic mediation and transformation. ?In addition to Marc, who will soon join us, I have encouraged some of the other authors in the special issue to also join as "relevant others," if time and circumstances allow them. Let's hope that this will help keeping the symposium spirit up. Marc's article is attached to this e-mail and will be made open access at the T&F pages as soon as people is back from the holidays. The T&F link is this: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039.2016.1186194 The link to the MCA Forum pages, where we announce our discussions and other xmca things, is here: http://lchc.ucsd.edu/MCA/ I wish us all a very productive and interesting discussion. Alfredo From ablunden@mira.net Sat Jan 7 04:58:40 2017 From: ablunden@mira.net (Andy Blunden) Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2017 23:58:40 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! In-Reply-To: References: <1483344752182.40904@iped.uio.no> <1483467423798.57819@iped.uio.no> <1483601196884.31418@iped.uio.no> <5df5e870-3ef8-70d6-0c17-f8647ba17e62@mira.net> Message-ID: OK Peter, what you say is all very true I am sure, but it entails conflating activity and action (as mass nouns) and context and mediation, and makes the required distinction much like one could find multiple meanings for the word "and" by listing the different phrases and clauses which can be linked by "and." Andy ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making On 7/01/2017 11:42 PM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > > Let me try to illustrate. > > Reading as mediated action: The cultural-historical > context of reading mediates how one?s attention and > response are channeled in socially constructed ways. So, > in one setting, say at home or reading in the company of > friends, a novel might bring a reader to tears, or invite > readers to share personal stories that parallel those of > the plot lines, or laugh out loud. But another setting, a > formal school or university class, would have historical > values and practices that mute emotional and personal > responses, and promote a more sober, analytic way of > reading and talking that fits with specific historical > critical conventions and genres, and discourages others. > > Reading as mediating action: The act of reading can be > transformational. In reading about an talking about a > character?s actions, a reader might reconsider a value > system, become more sympathetic to real people who > resemble oppressed characters, etc. In other words, > reading a text may serve a mediational process in which > textual ideas and exemplars enable a reader to think > differently. > > *From:*Andy Blunden [mailto:ablunden@mira.net] > *Sent:* Saturday, January 7, 2017 6:28 AM > *To:* Peter Smagorinsky ; eXtended Mind, > Culture, Activity > *Subject:* Re: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > Can you explain in a paragraph or two,. Peter, rather than > asking us all to read 10,000 words to extract an answer? > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > Andy Blunden > http://home.mira.net/~andy > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > > On 7/01/2017 11:23 PM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > > Andy and others, I tried to work out the mediated/mediating question in the area of reading....see if this helps. > > Smagorinsky, P., & O'Donnell-Allen, C. (1998). Reading as mediated and mediating action: Composing meaning for literature through multimedia interpretive texts. Reading Research Quarterly, 33, 198-226. Available athttp://www.petersmagorinsky.net/About/PDF/RRQ/RRQ1998.pdf > > -----Original Message----- > > From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden > > Sent: Friday, January 6, 2017 7:12 PM > > To:xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > I have never understood this supposed distinction, Alfredo, between "mediated activity" and "mediating activity" given that all activity is mediated and all activity mediates. > > Also, could you spell out what you mean by the "tension" > > between perezhivanie as meaning and perezhivanie as struggle. > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > Andy Blunden > > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > On 5/01/2017 6:26 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > > Thanks Marc for your careful response. > > I am familiar to Vygotsky's notion of cultural mediation and I am aware and acknowledge that it was elaborated as a means to overcome dualism, and that it is not analog to a computational approach. > > When I brought the computing analogy, I did so with regard not to the concept of cultural mediation in general, but to the way it can be (and is) deployed analytically. I react to what it seems to me a dichotomy between a "meaning" as something that is static (thereby a form of "representation" or reflection of the relation with the environment instead of?refraction)?? and the experiencing-as-struggling, which is described as?transformation or change. If so, mediation here would seem to be part of a methodological device that first dissects "a type of meaning" from "a type of activity" (or a given state from the process that changes that state), and then unites it by adding the term "mediation." And this may be my misreading, but in that (mis)reading (which perhaps is mostly due to the fact that in your empirical illustration only the initial and end product, i.e., perezhivanie, are described, but not the experiencing-as-struggle, that is, the moving between the two), mediation here seems to do as analytical concept precisely what you were afraid our monism was doing: explaining nothing. Only the end products but not the process of producing perezhivanie are revealed. This may be problematic if one attends to what Veresov argues in the paper I shared yesterday, where he defends the notion of mediation but also specifies that Vygotsky speaks of *mediating activity* (as opposed to *mediated* activity). That is, not mediation by signs as products, but mediating activity as the activity of producing signs (which again is an activity of producing social relations, perhaps what you refer as "holistic meanings"?). What do you think? > > I did not think you were trying to deny the influence of Spinoza, and I do not think we ever said that Perezhivanie was primarily a move from Cartesian Dualism to Monism, as you suggest in your post. I copy and paste from my prior post: "The fact is that Vygotsky was building a theory on the unity of the affect and the intellect that was to be grounded on Spinoza, and what we try to do is to explore how perezhivanie, as a concept being developed during the same period (but not finalised or totally settled!), could be seen from the perspective of the Spinozist Vygotsky." > > I totally believe that bringing the distinction between perezhivanie as meaning, and perezhivanie as struggle, is totally relevant, and Beth Ferholt's vignettes of Where the Wild Things Are do indeed illustrate this. We really need to address this tension, which as Beth's examples and as our own everyday experience shows, is a tension that matters not just to books and to theories but to living persons (children, teachers), a tension that moreover is present and mentioned in all the articles of the symposium. The papers offer different proposals, and I think is so great we have the chance to discuss them! I too, as you, am very interesting in hearing others about the questions you had concerning sense and meaning. > > Alfredo > > From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > on behalf of Marc Clar? > > > > Sent: 04 January 2017 22:31 > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > Thank you very much, Alfredo, for sharing this excellent paper by > > Veresov, and thanks also for your responses, which really helped me to > > better understand your points. My main doubt about your proposal > > was/is caused by the statement that the idea of cultural > > mediation/mediator implies a cartesian dualism. This shocks me > > because, to me, the idea of cultural mediation is absolutely crucial > > (in fact, the keystone) for the construction of a monist (and > > scientific) psychology that does not forget mind ?that is, a cultural > > psychology. From your response, however, I realized that we may be > > approaching the idea of mediation in different ways. I talk of > > mediation and mediators in a quite restricted way. The starting point > > of my understanding of mediation is a dialectical relationship > > (organic, transactional) between the subject and the world (Vygotsky departs from the scheme stimulus-response, from reflexology). > > This relationship, that Vygotsky calls primitive psychological > > functions, would be basically biological. However, in human beings > > this relationship is mediated by cultural means: signs and tools; or > > primary, secondary and terciary artifacts. These cultural means > > reorganize the primitive functions (dialectic S-O relationship), which > > become then higher psychological functions (S-M-O) (see for example, > > The problem of the cultural development of the child, in The Vygotsky > > Reader). Now, the subject, the cultural mediators, and the object form > > an inseparable dialectical unit, so that the subject acts on > > (transforms) the object through the prism of the cultural mediators, > > the object acts on (transforms) the subject also through the prism of > > the cultural mediators, and the cultural means are themselves also > > transformed as a consequence of their mediation in this continuous > > dynamic dialectical tension. Here, for me, it is important the idea > > that the cultural means are as material (if we assume a materialist > > monism) as all the rest of the world; in fact, are parts of the > > material world which become signs or tools (and can be therefore > > socially distributed). This permits the introduction of the scientific > > study of mind-consciousness (as mediating systems of signs), because > > mind is not anymore something immaterial and unobservable, but it is > > as material and observable as the rest of the natural world. It is > > from this view that, for me, the idea of cultural mediation is the > > keystone of a monist psychology that includes mind. Thus, when I speak > > of mediators, I refer to the cultural means which mediate in the S-O > > dialectics; I am especially interested in signs/secondary artifacts. > > Here, it is perhaps necessary to insist that when I talk of studying > > mediators (and their semantic structure), this doesn't mean that they > > are taken out from the activity (the flux of live) in which they > > mediate (since out of activity they are not signs anymore); here, I > > think Vygotsky tries again to overcome another old dichotomy, the > > functionalism-structuralism one. I hope that all this makes also clear the difference between this view and that of computational psychologies (which in general are profoundly and explicitly dualist and not dialectic). > > Back to perezhivanie, I'm not obviously trying to deny the influence > > of Spinoza on Vygotsky's thinking (this is explicit in Vygotsky's > > writings, especially in ?The teaching about emotions?, in the Vol.6 of > > the Collected Works). But I have doubts that Vygotsky's introduction > > of the concept of perezhivanie is to be regarded primarily as a > > movement towards monism (from a previous cartesian dualism), and that > > this movement questions the concept of cultural mediation. Instead, > > and I think that this is in line with some of Gonz?lez-Rey > > observations in his paper, my impression is that the introduction of > > the concept of perezhivanie responds more to a movement (a further > > step) towards holism (something that, in my understanding, can also be > > found in Spinoza). Thus, I think that the word meaning is still the > > unit of analysis in the last Vygotsky -and therefore, the idea of > > cultural mediation is still crucial (in fact, in The problem of the > > environment, he connects the concept of perezhivanie, which has just > > introduced, to the development of word meaning [p.345-346, also cited > > in my paper]). However, in my view, in the last Vygotsky the focus is > > not anymore primarily on the word-meaning as formed for things (or > > collections of things, as in the ontogenetic research with Sakharov), but the focus is now in the formation of meaning for holistic situations. > > Best regards, > > Marc. > > 2017-01-03 19:16 GMT+01:00 Alfredo Jornet Gil : > > Hi Marc, all, > > thanks for joining and for your interesting work, which I follow > > since I became aware of it. I appreciate the way in your paper you > > show careful and honest attention to the texts of the authors > > involved, but perhaps most of all I appreciate that the paper makes > > the transformational dimension related to struggle and change > > salient, a dimension all papers deemed central to perezhivanie. And I > > have learned more about Vasilyuk by reading your paper. But I also > > see that we have approached the question of perezhivanie differently > > and I think that addressing the questions that you raise concerning > > our article may be a good way to both respond and discuss your paper. > > I am aware that our use of the term monism may be problematic to > > some, and N. Veresov, who has recently written about this (see > > attached article), warns against the dangers of simply moving from > > dualism into an undifferentiating monism that relativizes everything, > > making development un-studiable. This seems to be the way in which > > you have understood our argument, and of course this is not what we are or want to be doing. > > Probably many will think that *dialectical materialism* rather than > > monism is the proper term, and I could agree with them; we do in fact > > use dialectical materialism there and elsewhere. Yet, we wanted to > > emphasise the Spinozist influence (an influence that also runs > > through Marx) and so we found it appropriate to use the term monism, > > a term that Vygotsky uses before arguing that Spinoza "develops an essentially materialistic view" > > (Collected Works, Vol. 6, p. 124). For us, the aim is working out > > ways to empirically examine and formulate problems in ways that do > > not reify a mind-body dualism. > > Although overcoming dualism is foundational to the CHAT paradigm, I > > would however not say that Vygotsky did get to solve all of the > > problems that Cartesian dualism had created for psychology, even > > though he recognised those problems brilliantly as early as in the > > "Crisis". It should suffice to cite Vygotsky's own remarks, which we quote in the paper (and which A.N. > > Leont'ev mentions in the introduction to the collected works), where > > Vygotsky explicitly critiques some of his own prior ideas for failing > > to overcome dualism. We agree with those who, like F. G. Rey, see > > Vygotsky's project as a developing rather than as a finalised one. > > The fact is that Vygotsky was building a theory on the unity of the > > affect and the intellect that was to be grounded on Spinoza, and what > > we try to do is to explore how perezhivanie, as a concept being > > developed during the same period (but not finalised or totally > > settled!), could be seen from the perspective of the Spinozist Vygotsky. > > As you note, in our article we argue that, if one takes the Spinozist > > one-substance approach, classical concepts used in non-classical > > psychology, at least in the way they are commonly used in the current > > literature, should be revised. One such concept is mediation. And I > > personally do not have much of a problem when mediation is used to > > denote the fundamental fact that every thing exists always through > > *another*, never in and of itself. But I do think that it is > > problematic to identify MEDIATORS, such as "a meaning", as a means to > > account for or explain developmental processes and learning events, > > precisely because it is there, at least in my view, that dualism creeps in. > > For example, I find it paradoxical that you are concerned that our > > monist approach risks turning perezhivanie into a useless category > > because it may be used to explain everything and nothing, and yet you > > do not seem to have a problem using the term mediation to account for > > the transformation of perezhivanie without clearly elaborating on how > > mediation does change anything or what it looks like as a real > > process. How is it different saying that a perezhivanie mediates the > > experiencing-as-struggle from simply saying that it "affects" or > > "determines" it? Indeed, if perezhivanie mediates > > experiencing-as-struggle, does not experiencing-as-struglgle too > > mediate perezhivanie? And do not both may be said to mediate development, or development mediate them? Is not this explaining everything and nothing? > > I do believe you can argue that there is a difference between > > mediation and classical psychology's cause-effect relations, but to > > show this you need to dig into the dialectical underpinnings of the > > theory. In your paper, you offer a nice analysis of a lovely case of > > a teacher who, in dealing with a challenge with one of her students, > > changes her perezhivanie. I think you can rightly argue that there is > > a semiotic transformation, and I fully support your statement that by > > studying discourse we can empirically approach questions of > > psychological development. The contradictions you show as being > > involved and resolved resonate really well with what I experience as > > a parent or as a teacher in the classroom. Yet, without unpacking > > what this "mediation" taking place between one perezhivanie and the > > next one means as a concrete and real, the same analysis could be done taking an information processing approach: > > there is an situation that is processed (represented?) in one way, > > which then leads to a (cognitive) dissonance, and then there is a > > cognitive resolution by means of which the situation is presented > > differently in consciousness (indeed, when seen in this way, the term > > perezhivanie and the term "representation" become almost > > indistinguishable). How is mediation, as an analytical concept, > > helping here? And most importantly to the question of perezhivanie, > > how is this analysis going to show the internal connection between > > intellect and affect that Vygotsky formulates as constitutive of the notion of perezhivanie? > > I believe that the key lies in understanding what Vygotsky means when > > he says that perezhivanie is a unit of analysis. I will not repeat > > here what already is written in at least a couple of the articles in > > the special issue (Blunden, ours), that is the difference between > > analysis by elements and unit analysis (Vygotsky 1987). A unit > > analysis approach is consistent with Spinoza, for whom cause-effect > > explanations were not adequate, requiring instead an understanding of > > self-development, perezhivanie as a kernel cell for the development > > of personality. And I think you may be after this in your article in > > suggesting a form of continuous movement from perezhivanie to > > experiencing-as-struggle. But perhaps the major difficulty I find is that, in positing Vygotsky's perezhivanie as "a type of meaning" > > and Vasilyuk's perezhivanie (or experiencing-as-struggle) as a "type > > of activity," it is difficult not to see here a division between > > product and process, a division that then is analytically bridged by > > the addition of a third term, mediation, that should bring back the > > real movement between the product and the process. > > A different approach involves considering the concrete extension of > > actual living and lived social relations, and look at them as > > generative phenomena. What is there in the encounter between Carla > > and the child that leads to change? For it is not inside the mind, > > but in real life, in consciousness as the real relation between people, that Carla is changed. > > How is the semantic structure that you nicely present and attribute > > to Carla a product of the social relation between her and the child? > > I think that to rightfully situate perezhivanie as a concept in a > > Vygotskian framework, we ought to address its relation to the genetic > > law of development. > > There is much more to disentangle, but this is long enough. I hope I > > have succeeded in making clear these ideas. Thanks so much for > > engaging in the discussion! > > Alfredo > > ________________________________________ > > From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > on behalf of Marc Clar? > > > > > Sent: 02 January 2017 22:14 > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > Hi, all, and thank you so much, Alfredo, for your kind invitation to > > participate in this discussion. My paper in the MCA special issue > > focuses on a distinction between a type of activity, which I argue > > that is what Vasilyuk called *perezhivanie* (experiencing) and a type > > of semiotic mediator, which I argue that is what Vygotsky, in The > > Problem of the Environment, called *perezhivanie.* I argue, following > > Vasilyuk, that in experiencing activities (Vasilyuk's perezhivanie), > > this type of mediator is profoundly transformed ? in fact, that > > experiencing activities consist of the semiotic transformation of this type of mediator. > > As Veresov and Fleer argue in their commentary, perezhivanie (as a > > type of > > mediator) is for me a psychological phenomenon, one which is of > > course conceptualized from a specific theoretical framework. But the > > phenomenon is also visible from other theoretical frameworks as well, > > as I mention in the paper. This phenomenon is my main interest, and > > it is from this interest that I arrived at the concept of perezhivanie (not the other way around). > > Now, the phenomenon is that at least emotion, reasoning, and volition > > (formation of conscious purposes) seem to be decisively mediated by > > holistic situational meaning. My current research concern is trying > > to find ways to study and understand how this mediation occurs and > > how these semiotic mediators are transformed and distributed. From > > this view, I think that experiencing activities (Vasilyuk's > > perezhivanie) may provide a good terrain to study these issues > > (especially regarding the mediation of emotion), as I tried to exemplify in the paper. > > Studying semiotic mediation, however, is of course not easy. > > Following Vygotsky, I assume that extended discourse is the > > manifestation of thinking within certain psychological conditions > > (Vygotsky's Thinking and Speech, chapter 7), and I also assume the > > Vygotsky's law of the unity of the structure and function of thinking > > (Vygotsky's Thinking and Speech, chapter 6). From these two > > assumptions, I propose that meaning (and its functions in human > > activity) can be scientifically studied by structurally analyzing the > > narratives generated by subjects, considering that the discourse > > produced in the narrative is the point of departure of this study, > > but that considerable analytical work must be done to move from this > > discourse to the full characterization of meaning. It is in that > > point where I find useful the work developed by Greimas, the usefulness of which I only suggest in the paper. > > >From this background, I found many interesting ideas and questions > > in the > > other papers of the special issue. In this first post I will propose > > two of them for possible discussion. The first one was raised by > > Gonz?lez-Rey, when he introduces, in connection with perezhivanie, > > the concepts of personality, and especially, of sense. So, which is > > the conceptual (and-or > > phenomenal) relation between perezhivanie and sense? Gonz?lez-Rey > > suggests that both concepts are somewhat similar (and overcome by the > > concept of ?subjective sense?); my opinion, partly expressed in my > > commentary, is that perezhivanie is a type of meaning, which includes > > different levels of depth, and that sense corresponds to the deepest > > level of meaning (which can be characterized as a system of semic > > oppositions). Therefore, sense wouldn't be in opposition to meaning > > (as ?a microcosm of human consciousness?, as Kozulin remembers in his > > commentary), although it would be in opposition to manifested meaning (the surface level of meaning). > > The second issue was raised by Roth and Jornet, and I think it goes > > beyond the issue of perezhivanie itself. If I understand them well, > > they argue that Vygotsky's core proposal of cultural mediation is > > influenced by the Cartesian dualism (mind-matter), and that a > > promising approach to Cultural Psychology would be a Spinozist > > monism. I am actually very interested on the issue of which > > epistemological position can best substantiate the construction of a > > cultural psychology, and that's why I feel inclined to take the > > opportunity to ask for your opinions about that. About the proposal > > of Roth and Jornet, I have some doubts. First, I don't see why > > Vygotsky's proposals can be seen as dualist (in the Cartesian sense) > > -I suspect that it is because of the analytical distinctions?. > > Anyway, in my understanding, Vygotsky explicitly assumes a > > materialist monism (for example in The Crisis), and in fact he constructs his proposal on mediation upon reflexology, which also explicitly assumed a materialist monism (e.g. > > Sechenov). Would a Spinozist monism be a better point of departure? I > > don't know, in my understanding it is a more idealist monism, and I > > don't clearly see what could be gained. In my opinion, a scientific > > psychology which includes the study of mind is only possible if any > > type of monism is assumed. However, in my view, for a scientific > > psychology, the ontological nature of the world is perhaps less > > important (it is an issue for metaphysics?), and I am inclined to assume a neutral monism (e.g. Russell). > > So from this view, a materialist monism and a Spinozist monism > > wouldn't be so different, so from both views it could be assumed that > > all is of the same nature and all is similarly knowable (including > > mind) [which is the ontological nature of the world and to what > > degree it is knowable are issues that can be left to philosophy]. > > However, in my opinion, this does not mean that, while assuming a > > monism, analytical distinctions cannot be done when studying the > > world. In that sense, I had the impression that Roth and Jornet > > tended to dilute analytical distinctions in the name of monism; I > > repeat that I don't know if I understood them well, but if this was > > the case, in my opinion, analysis would be impossible within the new > > psychology suggested by Roth and Jornet, and, regarding perezhivanie, > > there would be the danger, noted by Vygotsky in The Crisis and > > cautioned by Kozulin in his commentary, that by meaning everything, perezhivanie ends by meaning nothing. > > Best regards and happy new year, > > Marc. > > 2017-01-02 9:12 GMT+01:00 Alfredo Jornet Gil : > > Dear all, > > I would like to join David, Luisa, Ana, Henry and the others to wish > > you all a Happy New Year! May it be full of joy, peace, and opportunity. > > I also would like to begin the year announcing our first ?MCA > > article discussion, ?although in fact corresponds to the last issue > > of the year > > we > > just passed, Issue 4 on Perezhivanie. This is a very special > > *special* issue, not only because its topic has raised lots of > > interest lately in > > the > > CHAT community but also because, greatly coordinated by Andy Blunden > > and the rest of the editorial team, the issue takes the form of a > > symposium where authors get the chance to present and respond to > > each others' ideas on the subject. In my view, this allows having a > > rich and > > multidimensional > > approach to a subject as important as perezhivanie. > > Following with the dialogical spirit in which the special issue was > > assembled, we will focus on one lead article, but hoping to also > > engage ideas and insights present in or relevant to other > > contributions in the issue. ?Marc Clar?'s "Vygotsky and Vasilyuk on > > Perezhivanie: Two Notions and One Word" will be our focus. The > > article very nicely engages the lead work of Vygotsky, but also the > > less known ??(?in educational literature) but totally relevant works > > of psychologist ?F. Vasilyuk and semiotician > > A. > > J. Greimas, mobilising a number of key concepts including those of > > semiotic > > mediation and transformation. > > ?In addition to Marc, who will soon join us, I have encouraged some > > of > > the > > other authors in the special issue to also join as "relevant > > others," if time and circumstances allow them. Let's hope that this > > will help keeping the symposium spirit up. > > Marc's article is attached to this e-mail and will be made open > > access at the T&F pages as soon as people is back from the holidays. > > The T&F link > > is > > this: > > http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039.2016.1186194 > > The link to the MCA Forum pages, where we announce our discussions > > and other xmca things, is here:http://lchc.ucsd.edu/MCA/ > > I wish us all a very productive and interesting discussion. > > Alfredo > From lpscholar2@gmail.com Sat Jan 7 09:26:13 2017 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2017 09:26:13 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! In-Reply-To: References: <1483344752182.40904@iped.uio.no> <1483467423798.57819@iped.uio.no> <1483601196884.31418@iped.uio.no> <5df5e870-3ef8-70d6-0c17-f8647ba17e62@mira.net> Message-ID: <587124d9.d957620a.4a5a8.bd56@mx.google.com> Andy, Peter, i hope the intention to move beyond politeness to struggle with this topic materializes. In this vein i want to introduce exploration of the ?excess? of actual over intended meaning as he sketched his introduction to ?experience?. Citing Dewey, Alfredo says that this excess of actual learning over intended learning INCLUDES what Dewey refers to as ?attitudes? and these ?attitudes? are FUNDAMENTALLY what count in the future. Alfredo and Roth then add this summary statement?: There is therefore, a need to theorize experience in terms that do not assume control and rationality as the sine qua non of learning. It also implies a need to develop analytical accounts that retain the ?uncertainty? that is an ?integral part? of human experience. Where are Alfredo and Roth leading us with this sketch of experience? To highlight ?attitudes? that occur in the excess of actual over intended learning? The word ?attitudes? generates images of (atmosphere) and (moods) that ?flow? like cascading waterfalls that can be imaged as (force) or as (receptive). Attitudes that flow to places where they are received within a certain attitude of care and concern. Not as forceful an image as moving only with control and rationality. Describing ?weaker? thought that remains uncertain but that also opens us to the other?s peril and plight. Possibly a post-analytic motion that exceeds the intended by living-through the actual that develops ?attitudes? that are fundamentally what count for the future. Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Andy Blunden Sent: January 7, 2017 5:00 AM To: Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! OK Peter, what you say is all very true I am sure, but it entails conflating activity and action (as mass nouns) and context and mediation, and makes the required distinction much like one could find multiple meanings for the word "and" by listing the different phrases and clauses which can be linked by "and." Andy ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making On 7/01/2017 11:42 PM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > > Let me try to illustrate. > > Reading as mediated action: The cultural-historical > context of reading mediates how one?s attention and > response are channeled in socially constructed ways. So, > in one setting, say at home or reading in the company of > friends, a novel might bring a reader to tears, or invite > readers to share personal stories that parallel those of > the plot lines, or laugh out loud. But another setting, a > formal school or university class, would have historical > values and practices that mute emotional and personal > responses, and promote a more sober, analytic way of > reading and talking that fits with specific historical > critical conventions and genres, and discourages others. > > Reading as mediating action: The act of reading can be > transformational. In reading about an talking about a > character?s actions, a reader might reconsider a value > system, become more sympathetic to real people who > resemble oppressed characters, etc. In other words, > reading a text may serve a mediational process in which > textual ideas and exemplars enable a reader to think > differently. > > *From:*Andy Blunden [mailto:ablunden@mira.net] > *Sent:* Saturday, January 7, 2017 6:28 AM > *To:* Peter Smagorinsky ; eXtended Mind, > Culture, Activity > *Subject:* Re: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > Can you explain in a paragraph or two,. Peter, rather than > asking us all to read 10,000 words to extract an answer? > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > Andy Blunden > http://home.mira.net/~andy > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > > On 7/01/2017 11:23 PM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > > Andy and others, I tried to work out the mediated/mediating question in the area of reading....see if this helps. > > Smagorinsky, P., & O'Donnell-Allen, C. (1998). Reading as mediated and mediating action: Composing meaning for literature through multimedia interpretive texts. Reading Research Quarterly, 33, 198-226. Available athttp://www.petersmagorinsky.net/About/PDF/RRQ/RRQ1998.pdf > > -----Original Message----- > > From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden > > Sent: Friday, January 6, 2017 7:12 PM > > To:xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > I have never understood this supposed distinction, Alfredo, between "mediated activity" and "mediating activity" given that all activity is mediated and all activity mediates. > > Also, could you spell out what you mean by the "tension" > > between perezhivanie as meaning and perezhivanie as struggle. > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > Andy Blunden > > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > On 5/01/2017 6:26 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > > Thanks Marc for your careful response. > > I am familiar to Vygotsky's notion of cultural mediation and I am aware and acknowledge that it was elaborated as a means to overcome dualism, and that it is not analog to a computational approach. > > When I brought the computing analogy, I did so with regard not to the concept of cultural mediation in general, but to the way it can be (and is) deployed analytically. I react to what it seems to me a dichotomy between a "meaning" as something that is static (thereby a form of "representation" or reflection of the relation with the environment instead of?refraction)?? and the experiencing-as-struggling, which is described as?transformation or change. If so, mediation here would seem to be part of a methodological device that first dissects "a type of meaning" from "a type of activity" (or a given state from the process that changes that state), and then unites it by adding the term "mediation." And this may be my misreading, but in that (mis)reading (which perhaps is mostly due to the fact that in your empirical illustration only the initial and end product, i.e., perezhivanie, are described, but not the experiencing-as-struggle, that is, the moving between the two), mediation here seems to do as analytical concept precisely what you were afraid our monism was doing: explaining nothing. Only the end products but not the process of producing perezhivanie are revealed. This may be problematic if one attends to what Veresov argues in the paper I shared yesterday, where he defends the notion of mediation but also specifies that Vygotsky speaks of *mediating activity* (as opposed to *mediated* activity). That is, not mediation by signs as products, but mediating activity as the activity of producing signs (which again is an activity of producing social relations, perhaps what you refer as "holistic meanings"?). What do you think? > > I did not think you were trying to deny the influence of Spinoza, and I do not think we ever said that Perezhivanie was primarily a move from Cartesian Dualism to Monism, as you suggest in your post. I copy and paste from my prior post: "The fact is that Vygotsky was building a theory on the unity of the affect and the intellect that was to be grounded on Spinoza, and what we try to do is to explore how perezhivanie, as a concept being developed during the same period (but not finalised or totally settled!), could be seen from the perspective of the Spinozist Vygotsky." > > I totally believe that bringing the distinction between perezhivanie as meaning, and perezhivanie as struggle, is totally relevant, and Beth Ferholt's vignettes of Where the Wild Things Are do indeed illustrate this. We really need to address this tension, which as Beth's examples and as our own everyday experience shows, is a tension that matters not just to books and to theories but to living persons (children, teachers), a tension that moreover is present and mentioned in all the articles of the symposium. The papers offer different proposals, and I think is so great we have the chance to discuss them! I too, as you, am very interesting in hearing others about the questions you had concerning sense and meaning. > > Alfredo > > From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > on behalf of Marc Clar? > > > > Sent: 04 January 2017 22:31 > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > Thank you very much, Alfredo, for sharing this excellent paper by > > Veresov, and thanks also for your responses, which really helped me to > > better understand your points. My main doubt about your proposal > > was/is caused by the statement that the idea of cultural > > mediation/mediator implies a cartesian dualism. This shocks me > > because, to me, the idea of cultural mediation is absolutely crucial > > (in fact, the keystone) for the construction of a monist (and > > scientific) psychology that does not forget mind ?that is, a cultural > > psychology. From your response, however, I realized that we may be > > approaching the idea of mediation in different ways. I talk of > > mediation and mediators in a quite restricted way. The starting point > > of my understanding of mediation is a dialectical relationship > > (organic, transactional) between the subject and the world (Vygotsky departs from the scheme stimulus-response, from reflexology). > > This relationship, that Vygotsky calls primitive psychological > > functions, would be basically biological. However, in human beings > > this relationship is mediated by cultural means: signs and tools; or > > primary, secondary and terciary artifacts. These cultural means > > reorganize the primitive functions (dialectic S-O relationship), which > > become then higher psychological functions (S-M-O) (see for example, > > The problem of the cultural development of the child, in The Vygotsky > > Reader). Now, the subject, the cultural mediators, and the object form > > an inseparable dialectical unit, so that the subject acts on > > (transforms) the object through the prism of the cultural mediators, > > the object acts on (transforms) the subject also through the prism of > > the cultural mediators, and the cultural means are themselves also > > transformed as a consequence of their mediation in this continuous > > dynamic dialectical tension. Here, for me, it is important the idea > > that the cultural means are as material (if we assume a materialist > > monism) as all the rest of the world; in fact, are parts of the > > material world which become signs or tools (and can be therefore > > socially distributed). This permits the introduction of the scientific > > study of mind-consciousness (as mediating systems of signs), because > > mind is not anymore something immaterial and unobservable, but it is > > as material and observable as the rest of the natural world. It is > > from this view that, for me, the idea of cultural mediation is the > > keystone of a monist psychology that includes mind. Thus, when I speak > > of mediators, I refer to the cultural means which mediate in the S-O > > dialectics; I am especially interested in signs/secondary artifacts. > > Here, it is perhaps necessary to insist that when I talk of studying > > mediators (and their semantic structure), this doesn't mean that they > > are taken out from the activity (the flux of live) in which they > > mediate (since out of activity they are not signs anymore); here, I > > think Vygotsky tries again to overcome another old dichotomy, the > > functionalism-structuralism one. I hope that all this makes also clear the difference between this view and that of computational psychologies (which in general are profoundly and explicitly dualist and not dialectic). > > Back to perezhivanie, I'm not obviously trying to deny the influence > > of Spinoza on Vygotsky's thinking (this is explicit in Vygotsky's > > writings, especially in ?The teaching about emotions?, in the Vol.6 of > > the Collected Works). But I have doubts that Vygotsky's introduction > > of the concept of perezhivanie is to be regarded primarily as a > > movement towards monism (from a previous cartesian dualism), and that > > this movement questions the concept of cultural mediation. Instead, > > and I think that this is in line with some of Gonz?lez-Rey > > observations in his paper, my impression is that the introduction of > > the concept of perezhivanie responds more to a movement (a further > > step) towards holism (something that, in my understanding, can also be > > found in Spinoza). Thus, I think that the word meaning is still the > > unit of analysis in the last Vygotsky -and therefore, the idea of > > cultural mediation is still crucial (in fact, in The problem of the > > environment, he connects the concept of perezhivanie, which has just > > introduced, to the development of word meaning [p.345-346, also cited > > in my paper]). However, in my view, in the last Vygotsky the focus is > > not anymore primarily on the word-meaning as formed for things (or > > collections of things, as in the ontogenetic research with Sakharov), but the focus is now in the formation of meaning for holistic situations. > > Best regards, > > Marc. > > 2017-01-03 19:16 GMT+01:00 Alfredo Jornet Gil : > > Hi Marc, all, > > thanks for joining and for your interesting work, which I follow > > since I became aware of it. I appreciate the way in your paper you > > show careful and honest attention to the texts of the authors > > involved, but perhaps most of all I appreciate that the paper makes > > the transformational dimension related to struggle and change > > salient, a dimension all papers deemed central to perezhivanie. And I > > have learned more about Vasilyuk by reading your paper. But I also > > see that we have approached the question of perezhivanie differently > > and I think that addressing the questions that you raise concerning > > our article may be a good way to both respond and discuss your paper. > > I am aware that our use of the term monism may be problematic to > > some, and N. Veresov, who has recently written about this (see > > attached article), warns against the dangers of simply moving from > > dualism into an undifferentiating monism that relativizes everything, > > making development un-studiable. This seems to be the way in which > > you have understood our argument, and of course this is not what we are or want to be doing. > > Probably many will think that *dialectical materialism* rather than > > monism is the proper term, and I could agree with them; we do in fact > > use dialectical materialism there and elsewhere. Yet, we wanted to > > emphasise the Spinozist influence (an influence that also runs > > through Marx) and so we found it appropriate to use the term monism, > > a term that Vygotsky uses before arguing that Spinoza "develops an essentially materialistic view" > > (Collected Works, Vol. 6, p. 124). For us, the aim is working out > > ways to empirically examine and formulate problems in ways that do > > not reify a mind-body dualism. > > Although overcoming dualism is foundational to the CHAT paradigm, I > > would however not say that Vygotsky did get to solve all of the > > problems that Cartesian dualism had created for psychology, even > > though he recognised those problems brilliantly as early as in the > > "Crisis". It should suffice to cite Vygotsky's own remarks, which we quote in the paper (and which A.N. > > Leont'ev mentions in the introduction to the collected works), where > > Vygotsky explicitly critiques some of his own prior ideas for failing > > to overcome dualism. We agree with those who, like F. G. Rey, see > > Vygotsky's project as a developing rather than as a finalised one. > > The fact is that Vygotsky was building a theory on the unity of the > > affect and the intellect that was to be grounded on Spinoza, and what > > we try to do is to explore how perezhivanie, as a concept being > > developed during the same period (but not finalised or totally > > settled!), could be seen from the perspective of the Spinozist Vygotsky. > > As you note, in our article we argue that, if one takes the Spinozist > > one-substance approach, classical concepts used in non-classical > > psychology, at least in the way they are commonly used in the current > > literature, should be revised. One such concept is mediation. And I > > personally do not have much of a problem when mediation is used to > > denote the fundamental fact that every thing exists always through > > *another*, never in and of itself. But I do think that it is > > problematic to identify MEDIATORS, such as "a meaning", as a means to > > account for or explain developmental processes and learning events, > > precisely because it is there, at least in my view, that dualism creeps in. > > For example, I find it paradoxical that you are concerned that our > > monist approach risks turning perezhivanie into a useless category > > because it may be used to explain everything and nothing, and yet you > > do not seem to have a problem using the term mediation to account for > > the transformation of perezhivanie without clearly elaborating on how > > mediation does change anything or what it looks like as a real > > process. How is it different saying that a perezhivanie mediates the > > experiencing-as-struggle from simply saying that it "affects" or > > "determines" it? Indeed, if perezhivanie mediates > > experiencing-as-struggle, does not experiencing-as-struglgle too > > mediate perezhivanie? And do not both may be said to mediate development, or development mediate them? Is not this explaining everything and nothing? > > I do believe you can argue that there is a difference between > > mediation and classical psychology's cause-effect relations, but to > > show this you need to dig into the dialectical underpinnings of the > > theory. In your paper, you offer a nice analysis of a lovely case of > > a teacher who, in dealing with a challenge with one of her students, > > changes her perezhivanie. I think you can rightly argue that there is > > a semiotic transformation, and I fully support your statement that by > > studying discourse we can empirically approach questions of > > psychological development. The contradictions you show as being > > involved and resolved resonate really well with what I experience as > > a parent or as a teacher in the classroom. Yet, without unpacking > > what this "mediation" taking place between one perezhivanie and the > > next one means as a concrete and real, the same analysis could be done taking an information processing approach: > > there is an situation that is processed (represented?) in one way, > > which then leads to a (cognitive) dissonance, and then there is a > > cognitive resolution by means of which the situation is presented > > differently in consciousness (indeed, when seen in this way, the term > > perezhivanie and the term "representation" become almost > > indistinguishable). How is mediation, as an analytical concept, > > helping here? And most importantly to the question of perezhivanie, > > how is this analysis going to show the internal connection between > > intellect and affect that Vygotsky formulates as constitutive of the notion of perezhivanie? > > I believe that the key lies in understanding what Vygotsky means when > > he says that perezhivanie is a unit of analysis. I will not repeat > > here what already is written in at least a couple of the articles in > > the special issue (Blunden, ours), that is the difference between > > analysis by elements and unit analysis (Vygotsky 1987). A unit > > analysis approach is consistent with Spinoza, for whom cause-effect > > explanations were not adequate, requiring instead an understanding of > > self-development, perezhivanie as a kernel cell for the development > > of personality. And I think you may be after this in your article in > > suggesting a form of continuous movement from perezhivanie to > > experiencing-as-struggle. But perhaps the major difficulty I find is that, in positing Vygotsky's perezhivanie as "a type of meaning" > > and Vasilyuk's perezhivanie (or experiencing-as-struggle) as a "type > > of activity," it is difficult not to see here a division between > > product and process, a division that then is analytically bridged by > > the addition of a third term, mediation, that should bring back the > > real movement between the product and the process. > > A different approach involves considering the concrete extension of > > actual living and lived social relations, and look at them as > > generative phenomena. What is there in the encounter between Carla > > and the child that leads to change? For it is not inside the mind, > > but in real life, in consciousness as the real relation between people, that Carla is changed. > > How is the semantic structure that you nicely present and attribute > > to Carla a product of the social relation between her and the child? > > I think that to rightfully situate perezhivanie as a concept in a > > Vygotskian framework, we ought to address its relation to the genetic > > law of development. > > There is much more to disentangle, but this is long enough. I hope I > > have succeeded in making clear these ideas. Thanks so much for > > engaging in the discussion! > > Alfredo > > ________________________________________ > > From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > on behalf of Marc Clar? > > > > > Sent: 02 January 2017 22:14 > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > Hi, all, and thank you so much, Alfredo, for your kind invitation to > > participate in this discussion. My paper in the MCA special issue > > focuses on a distinction between a type of activity, which I argue > > that is what Vasilyuk called *perezhivanie* (experiencing) and a type > > of semiotic mediator, which I argue that is what Vygotsky, in The > > Problem of the Environment, called *perezhivanie.* I argue, following > > Vasilyuk, that in experiencing activities (Vasilyuk's perezhivanie), > > this type of mediator is profoundly transformed ? in fact, that > > experiencing activities consist of the semiotic transformation of this type of mediator. > > As Veresov and Fleer argue in their commentary, perezhivanie (as a > > type of > > mediator) is for me a psychological phenomenon, one which is of > > course conceptualized from a specific theoretical framework. But the > > phenomenon is also visible from other theoretical frameworks as well, > > as I mention in the paper. This phenomenon is my main interest, and > > it is from this interest that I arrived at the concept of perezhivanie (not the other way around). > > Now, the phenomenon is that at least emotion, reasoning, and volition > > (formation of conscious purposes) seem to be decisively mediated by > > holistic situational meaning. My current research concern is trying > > to find ways to study and understand how this mediation occurs and > > how these semiotic mediators are transformed and distributed. From > > this view, I think that experiencing activities (Vasilyuk's > > perezhivanie) may provide a good terrain to study these issues > > (especially regarding the mediation of emotion), as I tried to exemplify in the paper. > > Studying semiotic mediation, however, is of course not easy. > > Following Vygotsky, I assume that extended discourse is the > > manifestation of thinking within certain psychological conditions > > (Vygotsky's Thinking and Speech, chapter 7), and I also assume the > > Vygotsky's law of the unity of the structure and function of thinking > > (Vygotsky's Thinking and Speech, chapter 6). From these two > > assumptions, I propose that meaning (and its functions in human > > activity) can be scientifically studied by structurally analyzing the > > narratives generated by subjects, considering that the discourse > > produced in the narrative is the point of departure of this study, > > but that considerable analytical work must be done to move from this > > discourse to the full characterization of meaning. It is in that > > point where I find useful the work developed by Greimas, the usefulness of which I only suggest in the paper. > > >From this background, I found many interesting ideas and questions > > in the > > other papers of the special issue. In this first post I will propose > > two of them for possible discussion. The first one was raised by > > Gonz?lez-Rey, when he introduces, in connection with perezhivanie, > > the concepts of personality, and especially, of sense. So, which is > > the conceptual (and-or > > phenomenal) relation between perezhivanie and sense? Gonz?lez-Rey > > suggests that both concepts are somewhat similar (and overcome by the > > concept of ?subjective sense?); my opinion, partly expressed in my > > commentary, is that perezhivanie is a type of meaning, which includes > > different levels of depth, and that sense corresponds to the deepest > > level of meaning (which can be characterized as a system of semic > > oppositions). Therefore, sense wouldn't be in opposition to meaning > > (as ?a microcosm of human consciousness?, as Kozulin remembers in his > > commentary), although it would be in opposition to manifested meaning (the surface level of meaning). > > The second issue was raised by Roth and Jornet, and I think it goes > > beyond the issue of perezhivanie itself. If I understand them well, > > they argue that Vygotsky's core proposal of cultural mediation is > > influenced by the Cartesian dualism (mind-matter), and that a > > promising approach to Cultural Psychology would be a Spinozist > > monism. I am actually very interested on the issue of which > > epistemological position can best substantiate the construction of a > > cultural psychology, and that's why I feel inclined to take the > > opportunity to ask for your opinions about that. About the proposal > > of Roth and Jornet, I have some doubts. First, I don't see why > > Vygotsky's proposals can be seen as dualist (in the Cartesian sense) > > -I suspect that it is because of the analytical distinctions?. > > Anyway, in my understanding, Vygotsky explicitly assumes a > > materialist monism (for example in The Crisis), and in fact he constructs his proposal on mediation upon reflexology, which also explicitly assumed a materialist monism (e.g. > > Sechenov). Would a Spinozist monism be a better point of departure? I > > don't know, in my understanding it is a more idealist monism, and I > > don't clearly see what could be gained. In my opinion, a scientific > > psychology which includes the study of mind is only possible if any > > type of monism is assumed. However, in my view, for a scientific > > psychology, the ontological nature of the world is perhaps less > > important (it is an issue for metaphysics?), and I am inclined to assume a neutral monism (e.g. Russell). > > So from this view, a materialist monism and a Spinozist monism > > wouldn't be so different, so from both views it could be assumed that > > all is of the same nature and all is similarly knowable (including > > mind) [which is the ontological nature of the world and to what > > degree it is knowable are issues that can be left to philosophy]. > > However, in my opinion, this does not mean that, while assuming a > > monism, analytical distinctions cannot be done when studying the > > world. In that sense, I had the impression that Roth and Jornet > > tended to dilute analytical distinctions in the name of monism; I > > repeat that I don't know if I understood them well, but if this was > > the case, in my opinion, analysis would be impossible within the new > > psychology suggested by Roth and Jornet, and, regarding perezhivanie, > > there would be the danger, noted by Vygotsky in The Crisis and > > cautioned by Kozulin in his commentary, that by meaning everything, perezhivanie ends by meaning nothing. > > Best regards and happy new year, > > Marc. > > 2017-01-02 9:12 GMT+01:00 Alfredo Jornet Gil : > > Dear all, > > I would like to join David, Luisa, Ana, Henry and the others to wish > > you all a Happy New Year! May it be full of joy, peace, and opportunity. > > I also would like to begin the year announcing our first ?MCA > > article discussion, ?although in fact corresponds to the last issue > > of the year > > we > > just passed, Issue 4 on Perezhivanie. This is a very special > > *special* issue, not only because its topic has raised lots of > > interest lately in > > the > > CHAT community but also because, greatly coordinated by Andy Blunden > > and the rest of the editorial team, the issue takes the form of a > > symposium where authors get the chance to present and respond to > > each others' ideas on the subject. In my view, this allows having a > > rich and > > multidimensional > > approach to a subject as important as perezhivanie. > > Following with the dialogical spirit in which the special issue was > > assembled, we will focus on one lead article, but hoping to also > > engage ideas and insights present in or relevant to other > > contributions in the issue. ?Marc Clar?'s "Vygotsky and Vasilyuk on > > Perezhivanie: Two Notions and One Word" will be our focus. The > > article very nicely engages the lead work of Vygotsky, but also the > > less known ??(?in educational literature) but totally relevant works > > of psychologist ?F. Vasilyuk and semiotician > > A. > > J. Greimas, mobilising a number of key concepts including those of > > semiotic > > mediation and transformation. > > ?In addition to Marc, who will soon join us, I have encouraged some > > of > > the > > other authors in the special issue to also join as "relevant > > others," if time and circumstances allow them. Let's hope that this > > will help keeping the symposium spirit up. > > Marc's article is attached to this e-mail and will be made open > > access at the T&F pages as soon as people is back from the holidays. > > The T&F link > > is > > this: > > http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039.2016.1186194 > > The link to the MCA Forum pages, where we announce our discussions > > and other xmca things, is here:http://lchc.ucsd.edu/MCA/ > > I wish us all a very productive and interesting discussion. > > Alfredo > From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Sat Jan 7 12:21:06 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2017 20:21:06 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! In-Reply-To: <587124d9.d957620a.4a5a8.bd56@mx.google.com> References: <1483344752182.40904@iped.uio.no> <1483467423798.57819@iped.uio.no> <1483601196884.31418@iped.uio.no> <5df5e870-3ef8-70d6-0c17-f8647ba17e62@mira.net> , <587124d9.d957620a.4a5a8.bd56@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <1483820996800.91513@iped.uio.no> Larry, all, our arguments in the 2014 address a science education literature in which the constructivist perspective is the leading perspective; We note that the assertion that people learn from experience is everywhere taken for granted but nowhere accounted for. We resort to pragmatist and phenomenological literature along with Vygotsky's insights to point out the need to account for learning as something that cannot be the result of an individual's construction; in experience there is always something in excess of what you intended, and this is a basic feature of doing, of performing. I take that to be your "trans" in the trans/zhivanie word, Larry, which already is denoted in the word PERezhivanie. But I do not wish to move our discussion too far away from Marc's paper and the Perezhivanie special issue. We also risk disengaging many that have not have the privilege we've had to have the time to read so many articles in just few days into the new year. I think we are a point in the discussion where a pretty clear point of agreement/disagreement, and therefore of possibility for growth, has been reached with regard to the view of perezhivanie as "an experience" and as the "working over it". I think that to allow as many as possible to follow, and hopefully also engage, I think it will be helpful to bring the diverse perspectives and theoretical accounts to matter in accounting for some actual material. And there are a number of cases described in the articles, including Marc's case of a teacher, as well as everyday facts, such as those brought by Beth, and in Beth's article... I take the task for myself too, but Saturday morning need to attend to other things! A ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com Sent: 07 January 2017 18:26 To: Andy Blunden; Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; Larry Purss Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! Andy, Peter, i hope the intention to move beyond politeness to struggle with this topic materializes. In this vein i want to introduce exploration of the ?excess? of actual over intended meaning as he sketched his introduction to ?experience?. Citing Dewey, Alfredo says that this excess of actual learning over intended learning INCLUDES what Dewey refers to as ?attitudes? and these ?attitudes? are FUNDAMENTALLY what count in the future. Alfredo and Roth then add this summary statement : There is therefore, a need to theorize experience in terms that do not assume control and rationality as the sine qua non of learning. It also implies a need to develop analytical accounts that retain the ?uncertainty? that is an ?integral part? of human experience. Where are Alfredo and Roth leading us with this sketch of experience? To highlight ?attitudes? that occur in the excess of actual over intended learning? The word ?attitudes? generates images of (atmosphere) and (moods) that ?flow? like cascading waterfalls that can be imaged as (force) or as (receptive). Attitudes that flow to places where they are received within a certain attitude of care and concern. Not as forceful an image as moving only with control and rationality. Describing ?weaker? thought that remains uncertain but that also opens us to the other?s peril and plight. Possibly a post-analytic motion that exceeds the intended by living-through the actual that develops ?attitudes? that are fundamentally what count for the future. Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Andy Blunden Sent: January 7, 2017 5:00 AM To: Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! OK Peter, what you say is all very true I am sure, but it entails conflating activity and action (as mass nouns) and context and mediation, and makes the required distinction much like one could find multiple meanings for the word "and" by listing the different phrases and clauses which can be linked by "and." Andy ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making On 7/01/2017 11:42 PM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > > Let me try to illustrate. > > Reading as mediated action: The cultural-historical > context of reading mediates how one?s attention and > response are channeled in socially constructed ways. So, > in one setting, say at home or reading in the company of > friends, a novel might bring a reader to tears, or invite > readers to share personal stories that parallel those of > the plot lines, or laugh out loud. But another setting, a > formal school or university class, would have historical > values and practices that mute emotional and personal > responses, and promote a more sober, analytic way of > reading and talking that fits with specific historical > critical conventions and genres, and discourages others. > > Reading as mediating action: The act of reading can be > transformational. In reading about an talking about a > character?s actions, a reader might reconsider a value > system, become more sympathetic to real people who > resemble oppressed characters, etc. In other words, > reading a text may serve a mediational process in which > textual ideas and exemplars enable a reader to think > differently. > > *From:*Andy Blunden [mailto:ablunden@mira.net] > *Sent:* Saturday, January 7, 2017 6:28 AM > *To:* Peter Smagorinsky ; eXtended Mind, > Culture, Activity > *Subject:* Re: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > Can you explain in a paragraph or two,. Peter, rather than > asking us all to read 10,000 words to extract an answer? > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > Andy Blunden > http://home.mira.net/~andy > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > > On 7/01/2017 11:23 PM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > > Andy and others, I tried to work out the mediated/mediating question in the area of reading....see if this helps. > > Smagorinsky, P., & O'Donnell-Allen, C. (1998). Reading as mediated and mediating action: Composing meaning for literature through multimedia interpretive texts. Reading Research Quarterly, 33, 198-226. Available athttp://www.petersmagorinsky.net/About/PDF/RRQ/RRQ1998.pdf > > -----Original Message----- > > From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden > > Sent: Friday, January 6, 2017 7:12 PM > > To:xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > I have never understood this supposed distinction, Alfredo, between "mediated activity" and "mediating activity" given that all activity is mediated and all activity mediates. > > Also, could you spell out what you mean by the "tension" > > between perezhivanie as meaning and perezhivanie as struggle. > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > Andy Blunden > > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > On 5/01/2017 6:26 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > > Thanks Marc for your careful response. > > I am familiar to Vygotsky's notion of cultural mediation and I am aware and acknowledge that it was elaborated as a means to overcome dualism, and that it is not analog to a computational approach. > > When I brought the computing analogy, I did so with regard not to the concept of cultural mediation in general, but to the way it can be (and is) deployed analytically. I react to what it seems to me a dichotomy between a "meaning" as something that is static (thereby a form of "representation" or reflection of the relation with the environment instead of?refraction)?? and the experiencing-as-struggling, which is described as?transformation or change. If so, mediation here would seem to be part of a methodological device that first dissects "a type of meaning" from "a type of activity" (or a given state from the process that changes that state), and then unites it by adding the term "mediation." And this may be my misreading, but in that (mis)reading (which perhaps is mostly due to the fact that in your empirical illustration only the initial and end product, i.e., perezhivanie, are described, but not the experiencing-as-struggle, that is, the moving between the two), mediation here seems to do as analytical concept precisely what you were afraid our monism was doing: explaining nothing. Only the end products but not the process of producing perezhivanie are revealed. This may be problematic if one attends to what Veresov argues in the paper I shared yesterday, where he defends the notion of mediation but also specifies that Vygotsky speaks of *mediating activity* (as opposed to *mediated* activity). That is, not mediation by signs as products, but mediating activity as the activity of producing signs (which again is an activity of producing social relations, perhaps what you refer as "holistic meanings"?). What do you think? > > I did not think you were trying to deny the influence of Spinoza, and I do not think we ever said that Perezhivanie was primarily a move from Cartesian Dualism to Monism, as you suggest in your post. I copy and paste from my prior post: "The fact is that Vygotsky was building a theory on the unity of the affect and the intellect that was to be grounded on Spinoza, and what we try to do is to explore how perezhivanie, as a concept being developed during the same period (but not finalised or totally settled!), could be seen from the perspective of the Spinozist Vygotsky." > > I totally believe that bringing the distinction between perezhivanie as meaning, and perezhivanie as struggle, is totally relevant, and Beth Ferholt's vignettes of Where the Wild Things Are do indeed illustrate this. We really need to address this tension, which as Beth's examples and as our own everyday experience shows, is a tension that matters not just to books and to theories but to living persons (children, teachers), a tension that moreover is present and mentioned in all the articles of the symposium. The papers offer different proposals, and I think is so great we have the chance to discuss them! I too, as you, am very interesting in hearing others about the questions you had concerning sense and meaning. > > Alfredo > > From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > on behalf of Marc Clar? > > > > Sent: 04 January 2017 22:31 > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > Thank you very much, Alfredo, for sharing this excellent paper by > > Veresov, and thanks also for your responses, which really helped me to > > better understand your points. My main doubt about your proposal > > was/is caused by the statement that the idea of cultural > > mediation/mediator implies a cartesian dualism. This shocks me > > because, to me, the idea of cultural mediation is absolutely crucial > > (in fact, the keystone) for the construction of a monist (and > > scientific) psychology that does not forget mind ?that is, a cultural > > psychology. From your response, however, I realized that we may be > > approaching the idea of mediation in different ways. I talk of > > mediation and mediators in a quite restricted way. The starting point > > of my understanding of mediation is a dialectical relationship > > (organic, transactional) between the subject and the world (Vygotsky departs from the scheme stimulus-response, from reflexology). > > This relationship, that Vygotsky calls primitive psychological > > functions, would be basically biological. However, in human beings > > this relationship is mediated by cultural means: signs and tools; or > > primary, secondary and terciary artifacts. These cultural means > > reorganize the primitive functions (dialectic S-O relationship), which > > become then higher psychological functions (S-M-O) (see for example, > > The problem of the cultural development of the child, in The Vygotsky > > Reader). Now, the subject, the cultural mediators, and the object form > > an inseparable dialectical unit, so that the subject acts on > > (transforms) the object through the prism of the cultural mediators, > > the object acts on (transforms) the subject also through the prism of > > the cultural mediators, and the cultural means are themselves also > > transformed as a consequence of their mediation in this continuous > > dynamic dialectical tension. Here, for me, it is important the idea > > that the cultural means are as material (if we assume a materialist > > monism) as all the rest of the world; in fact, are parts of the > > material world which become signs or tools (and can be therefore > > socially distributed). This permits the introduction of the scientific > > study of mind-consciousness (as mediating systems of signs), because > > mind is not anymore something immaterial and unobservable, but it is > > as material and observable as the rest of the natural world. It is > > from this view that, for me, the idea of cultural mediation is the > > keystone of a monist psychology that includes mind. Thus, when I speak > > of mediators, I refer to the cultural means which mediate in the S-O > > dialectics; I am especially interested in signs/secondary artifacts. > > Here, it is perhaps necessary to insist that when I talk of studying > > mediators (and their semantic structure), this doesn't mean that they > > are taken out from the activity (the flux of live) in which they > > mediate (since out of activity they are not signs anymore); here, I > > think Vygotsky tries again to overcome another old dichotomy, the > > functionalism-structuralism one. I hope that all this makes also clear the difference between this view and that of computational psychologies (which in general are profoundly and explicitly dualist and not dialectic). > > Back to perezhivanie, I'm not obviously trying to deny the influence > > of Spinoza on Vygotsky's thinking (this is explicit in Vygotsky's > > writings, especially in ?The teaching about emotions?, in the Vol.6 of > > the Collected Works). But I have doubts that Vygotsky's introduction > > of the concept of perezhivanie is to be regarded primarily as a > > movement towards monism (from a previous cartesian dualism), and that > > this movement questions the concept of cultural mediation. Instead, > > and I think that this is in line with some of Gonz?lez-Rey > > observations in his paper, my impression is that the introduction of > > the concept of perezhivanie responds more to a movement (a further > > step) towards holism (something that, in my understanding, can also be > > found in Spinoza). Thus, I think that the word meaning is still the > > unit of analysis in the last Vygotsky -and therefore, the idea of > > cultural mediation is still crucial (in fact, in The problem of the > > environment, he connects the concept of perezhivanie, which has just > > introduced, to the development of word meaning [p.345-346, also cited > > in my paper]). However, in my view, in the last Vygotsky the focus is > > not anymore primarily on the word-meaning as formed for things (or > > collections of things, as in the ontogenetic research with Sakharov), but the focus is now in the formation of meaning for holistic situations. > > Best regards, > > Marc. > > 2017-01-03 19:16 GMT+01:00 Alfredo Jornet Gil : > > Hi Marc, all, > > thanks for joining and for your interesting work, which I follow > > since I became aware of it. I appreciate the way in your paper you > > show careful and honest attention to the texts of the authors > > involved, but perhaps most of all I appreciate that the paper makes > > the transformational dimension related to struggle and change > > salient, a dimension all papers deemed central to perezhivanie. And I > > have learned more about Vasilyuk by reading your paper. But I also > > see that we have approached the question of perezhivanie differently > > and I think that addressing the questions that you raise concerning > > our article may be a good way to both respond and discuss your paper. > > I am aware that our use of the term monism may be problematic to > > some, and N. Veresov, who has recently written about this (see > > attached article), warns against the dangers of simply moving from > > dualism into an undifferentiating monism that relativizes everything, > > making development un-studiable. This seems to be the way in which > > you have understood our argument, and of course this is not what we are or want to be doing. > > Probably many will think that *dialectical materialism* rather than > > monism is the proper term, and I could agree with them; we do in fact > > use dialectical materialism there and elsewhere. Yet, we wanted to > > emphasise the Spinozist influence (an influence that also runs > > through Marx) and so we found it appropriate to use the term monism, > > a term that Vygotsky uses before arguing that Spinoza "develops an essentially materialistic view" > > (Collected Works, Vol. 6, p. 124). For us, the aim is working out > > ways to empirically examine and formulate problems in ways that do > > not reify a mind-body dualism. > > Although overcoming dualism is foundational to the CHAT paradigm, I > > would however not say that Vygotsky did get to solve all of the > > problems that Cartesian dualism had created for psychology, even > > though he recognised those problems brilliantly as early as in the > > "Crisis". It should suffice to cite Vygotsky's own remarks, which we quote in the paper (and which A.N. > > Leont'ev mentions in the introduction to the collected works), where > > Vygotsky explicitly critiques some of his own prior ideas for failing > > to overcome dualism. We agree with those who, like F. G. Rey, see > > Vygotsky's project as a developing rather than as a finalised one. > > The fact is that Vygotsky was building a theory on the unity of the > > affect and the intellect that was to be grounded on Spinoza, and what > > we try to do is to explore how perezhivanie, as a concept being > > developed during the same period (but not finalised or totally > > settled!), could be seen from the perspective of the Spinozist Vygotsky. > > As you note, in our article we argue that, if one takes the Spinozist > > one-substance approach, classical concepts used in non-classical > > psychology, at least in the way they are commonly used in the current > > literature, should be revised. One such concept is mediation. And I > > personally do not have much of a problem when mediation is used to > > denote the fundamental fact that every thing exists always through > > *another*, never in and of itself. But I do think that it is > > problematic to identify MEDIATORS, such as "a meaning", as a means to > > account for or explain developmental processes and learning events, > > precisely because it is there, at least in my view, that dualism creeps in. > > For example, I find it paradoxical that you are concerned that our > > monist approach risks turning perezhivanie into a useless category > > because it may be used to explain everything and nothing, and yet you > > do not seem to have a problem using the term mediation to account for > > the transformation of perezhivanie without clearly elaborating on how > > mediation does change anything or what it looks like as a real > > process. How is it different saying that a perezhivanie mediates the > > experiencing-as-struggle from simply saying that it "affects" or > > "determines" it? Indeed, if perezhivanie mediates > > experiencing-as-struggle, does not experiencing-as-struglgle too > > mediate perezhivanie? And do not both may be said to mediate development, or development mediate them? Is not this explaining everything and nothing? > > I do believe you can argue that there is a difference between > > mediation and classical psychology's cause-effect relations, but to > > show this you need to dig into the dialectical underpinnings of the > > theory. In your paper, you offer a nice analysis of a lovely case of > > a teacher who, in dealing with a challenge with one of her students, > > changes her perezhivanie. I think you can rightly argue that there is > > a semiotic transformation, and I fully support your statement that by > > studying discourse we can empirically approach questions of > > psychological development. The contradictions you show as being > > involved and resolved resonate really well with what I experience as > > a parent or as a teacher in the classroom. Yet, without unpacking > > what this "mediation" taking place between one perezhivanie and the > > next one means as a concrete and real, the same analysis could be done taking an information processing approach: > > there is an situation that is processed (represented?) in one way, > > which then leads to a (cognitive) dissonance, and then there is a > > cognitive resolution by means of which the situation is presented > > differently in consciousness (indeed, when seen in this way, the term > > perezhivanie and the term "representation" become almost > > indistinguishable). How is mediation, as an analytical concept, > > helping here? And most importantly to the question of perezhivanie, > > how is this analysis going to show the internal connection between > > intellect and affect that Vygotsky formulates as constitutive of the notion of perezhivanie? > > I believe that the key lies in understanding what Vygotsky means when > > he says that perezhivanie is a unit of analysis. I will not repeat > > here what already is written in at least a couple of the articles in > > the special issue (Blunden, ours), that is the difference between > > analysis by elements and unit analysis (Vygotsky 1987). A unit > > analysis approach is consistent with Spinoza, for whom cause-effect > > explanations were not adequate, requiring instead an understanding of > > self-development, perezhivanie as a kernel cell for the development > > of personality. And I think you may be after this in your article in > > suggesting a form of continuous movement from perezhivanie to > > experiencing-as-struggle. But perhaps the major difficulty I find is that, in positing Vygotsky's perezhivanie as "a type of meaning" > > and Vasilyuk's perezhivanie (or experiencing-as-struggle) as a "type > > of activity," it is difficult not to see here a division between > > product and process, a division that then is analytically bridged by > > the addition of a third term, mediation, that should bring back the > > real movement between the product and the process. > > A different approach involves considering the concrete extension of > > actual living and lived social relations, and look at them as > > generative phenomena. What is there in the encounter between Carla > > and the child that leads to change? For it is not inside the mind, > > but in real life, in consciousness as the real relation between people, that Carla is changed. > > How is the semantic structure that you nicely present and attribute > > to Carla a product of the social relation between her and the child? > > I think that to rightfully situate perezhivanie as a concept in a > > Vygotskian framework, we ought to address its relation to the genetic > > law of development. > > There is much more to disentangle, but this is long enough. I hope I > > have succeeded in making clear these ideas. Thanks so much for > > engaging in the discussion! > > Alfredo > > ________________________________________ > > From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > on behalf of Marc Clar? > > > > > Sent: 02 January 2017 22:14 > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > Hi, all, and thank you so much, Alfredo, for your kind invitation to > > participate in this discussion. My paper in the MCA special issue > > focuses on a distinction between a type of activity, which I argue > > that is what Vasilyuk called *perezhivanie* (experiencing) and a type > > of semiotic mediator, which I argue that is what Vygotsky, in The > > Problem of the Environment, called *perezhivanie.* I argue, following > > Vasilyuk, that in experiencing activities (Vasilyuk's perezhivanie), > > this type of mediator is profoundly transformed ? in fact, that > > experiencing activities consist of the semiotic transformation of this type of mediator. > > As Veresov and Fleer argue in their commentary, perezhivanie (as a > > type of > > mediator) is for me a psychological phenomenon, one which is of > > course conceptualized from a specific theoretical framework. But the > > phenomenon is also visible from other theoretical frameworks as well, > > as I mention in the paper. This phenomenon is my main interest, and > > it is from this interest that I arrived at the concept of perezhivanie (not the other way around). > > Now, the phenomenon is that at least emotion, reasoning, and volition > > (formation of conscious purposes) seem to be decisively mediated by > > holistic situational meaning. My current research concern is trying > > to find ways to study and understand how this mediation occurs and > > how these semiotic mediators are transformed and distributed. From > > this view, I think that experiencing activities (Vasilyuk's > > perezhivanie) may provide a good terrain to study these issues > > (especially regarding the mediation of emotion), as I tried to exemplify in the paper. > > Studying semiotic mediation, however, is of course not easy. > > Following Vygotsky, I assume that extended discourse is the > > manifestation of thinking within certain psychological conditions > > (Vygotsky's Thinking and Speech, chapter 7), and I also assume the > > Vygotsky's law of the unity of the structure and function of thinking > > (Vygotsky's Thinking and Speech, chapter 6). From these two > > assumptions, I propose that meaning (and its functions in human > > activity) can be scientifically studied by structurally analyzing the > > narratives generated by subjects, considering that the discourse > > produced in the narrative is the point of departure of this study, > > but that considerable analytical work must be done to move from this > > discourse to the full characterization of meaning. It is in that > > point where I find useful the work developed by Greimas, the usefulness of which I only suggest in the paper. > > >From this background, I found many interesting ideas and questions > > in the > > other papers of the special issue. In this first post I will propose > > two of them for possible discussion. The first one was raised by > > Gonz?lez-Rey, when he introduces, in connection with perezhivanie, > > the concepts of personality, and especially, of sense. So, which is > > the conceptual (and-or > > phenomenal) relation between perezhivanie and sense? Gonz?lez-Rey > > suggests that both concepts are somewhat similar (and overcome by the > > concept of ?subjective sense?); my opinion, partly expressed in my > > commentary, is that perezhivanie is a type of meaning, which includes > > different levels of depth, and that sense corresponds to the deepest > > level of meaning (which can be characterized as a system of semic > > oppositions). Therefore, sense wouldn't be in opposition to meaning > > (as ?a microcosm of human consciousness?, as Kozulin remembers in his > > commentary), although it would be in opposition to manifested meaning (the surface level of meaning). > > The second issue was raised by Roth and Jornet, and I think it goes > > beyond the issue of perezhivanie itself. If I understand them well, > > they argue that Vygotsky's core proposal of cultural mediation is > > influenced by the Cartesian dualism (mind-matter), and that a > > promising approach to Cultural Psychology would be a Spinozist > > monism. I am actually very interested on the issue of which > > epistemological position can best substantiate the construction of a > > cultural psychology, and that's why I feel inclined to take the > > opportunity to ask for your opinions about that. About the proposal > > of Roth and Jornet, I have some doubts. First, I don't see why > > Vygotsky's proposals can be seen as dualist (in the Cartesian sense) > > -I suspect that it is because of the analytical distinctions?. > > Anyway, in my understanding, Vygotsky explicitly assumes a > > materialist monism (for example in The Crisis), and in fact he constructs his proposal on mediation upon reflexology, which also explicitly assumed a materialist monism (e.g. > > Sechenov). Would a Spinozist monism be a better point of departure? I > > don't know, in my understanding it is a more idealist monism, and I > > don't clearly see what could be gained. In my opinion, a scientific > > psychology which includes the study of mind is only possible if any > > type of monism is assumed. However, in my view, for a scientific > > psychology, the ontological nature of the world is perhaps less > > important (it is an issue for metaphysics?), and I am inclined to assume a neutral monism (e.g. Russell). > > So from this view, a materialist monism and a Spinozist monism > > wouldn't be so different, so from both views it could be assumed that > > all is of the same nature and all is similarly knowable (including > > mind) [which is the ontological nature of the world and to what > > degree it is knowable are issues that can be left to philosophy]. > > However, in my opinion, this does not mean that, while assuming a > > monism, analytical distinctions cannot be done when studying the > > world. In that sense, I had the impression that Roth and Jornet > > tended to dilute analytical distinctions in the name of monism; I > > repeat that I don't know if I understood them well, but if this was > > the case, in my opinion, analysis would be impossible within the new > > psychology suggested by Roth and Jornet, and, regarding perezhivanie, > > there would be the danger, noted by Vygotsky in The Crisis and > > cautioned by Kozulin in his commentary, that by meaning everything, perezhivanie ends by meaning nothing. > > Best regards and happy new year, > > Marc. > > 2017-01-02 9:12 GMT+01:00 Alfredo Jornet Gil : > > Dear all, > > I would like to join David, Luisa, Ana, Henry and the others to wish > > you all a Happy New Year! May it be full of joy, peace, and opportunity. > > I also would like to begin the year announcing our first ?MCA > > article discussion, ?although in fact corresponds to the last issue > > of the year > > we > > just passed, Issue 4 on Perezhivanie. This is a very special > > *special* issue, not only because its topic has raised lots of > > interest lately in > > the > > CHAT community but also because, greatly coordinated by Andy Blunden > > and the rest of the editorial team, the issue takes the form of a > > symposium where authors get the chance to present and respond to > > each others' ideas on the subject. In my view, this allows having a > > rich and > > multidimensional > > approach to a subject as important as perezhivanie. > > Following with the dialogical spirit in which the special issue was > > assembled, we will focus on one lead article, but hoping to also > > engage ideas and insights present in or relevant to other > > contributions in the issue. ?Marc Clar?'s "Vygotsky and Vasilyuk on > > Perezhivanie: Two Notions and One Word" will be our focus. The > > article very nicely engages the lead work of Vygotsky, but also the > > less known ??(?in educational literature) but totally relevant works > > of psychologist ?F. Vasilyuk and semiotician > > A. > > J. Greimas, mobilising a number of key concepts including those of > > semiotic > > mediation and transformation. > > ?In addition to Marc, who will soon join us, I have encouraged some > > of > > the > > other authors in the special issue to also join as "relevant > > others," if time and circumstances allow them. Let's hope that this > > will help keeping the symposium spirit up. > > Marc's article is attached to this e-mail and will be made open > > access at the T&F pages as soon as people is back from the holidays. > > The T&F link > > is > > this: > > http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039.2016.1186194 > > The link to the MCA Forum pages, where we announce our discussions > > and other xmca things, is here:http://lchc.ucsd.edu/MCA/ > > I wish us all a very productive and interesting discussion. > > Alfredo > From dkellogg60@gmail.com Sat Jan 7 12:59:32 2017 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2017 05:59:32 +0900 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! In-Reply-To: <1483820996800.91513@iped.uio.no> References: <1483344752182.40904@iped.uio.no> <1483467423798.57819@iped.uio.no> <1483601196884.31418@iped.uio.no> <5df5e870-3ef8-70d6-0c17-f8647ba17e62@mira.net> <587124d9.d957620a.4a5a8.bd56@mx.google.com> <1483820996800.91513@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: Are words really units? When we look at their ideational meaning (that is, their logical and experiential content--their capacity for representing and linking together human experiences) they seem to fall into two very different categories: lexical words like "perezhivanie" or "sense" or "personality" of "individual" and grammatical words like "of", or "might", or "is". The lexical words seem to behave like units--they are bounded, discrete, and, as Andy would say, "countable" (the problem is that almost all nouns are both countable and uncountable depending on the context you put them in, so this distinction is really not as essential as Andy seems to assume). But the more grammatical words seem to be elements of some larger unit, which we can call wording. Veresov and Fleer come up against this problem with "edintsvo" and "edintsa". Of course, as they say, the two words are distinct. But this doesn't necessarily mean that the former always corresponds to "unity" in English and the latter is always "unit". If you look at the paragraph they translate on 330, you can see that Vygotsky starts with an idea that is quite "synoptic" and is well expressed by "unit". But in the last sentence there is a sense that "perezhivanie" is a meta-stable unit--one that remains self-similar only through a process of thorough change, like a bicycle whose every part is replaced--and in English is it is better to express this idea with "unity". The problem is that the differences between "edintsvo" and "edintsva" in Russian is a matter of gender (I think) and not simply abstractness, and as a result the English version, which cannot use the resource of gender,has to rely on abstractness, so the words "unity" and "unit" are somewhat more distinct and less linked than "edintsvo" and "edintsva". There are other problems that are similar. When Gonzalez Rey uses the word "final moment" to refer to the final period of Vygotsky's thinking, he leaves the anglophone reader the impression that he is referring to Vygotsky's deathbed thoughts. On the other hand, when Veresov and Fleer use "factor" to translate the same Russian word that Gonzalez Rey is using, they are giving us something more quantitative than Vygotsky intended, and their translation of "dalee nerazloshim'im chastyami etava edinstva" into "vital and further indivisible part of the whole" is quite opaque in English (notice that here Veresov and Fleer use "whole" to translate "edinstva" rather than "unit"!) At some point you have to accept that you can change Russian words into English words as if you were exchanging rubles for dollars, but you still won't be able to buy a samovar at Walmart. David Kellogg Macquarie University On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 5:21 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > Larry, all, > > our arguments in the 2014 address a science education literature in which > the constructivist perspective is the leading perspective; We note that the > assertion that people learn from experience is everywhere taken for granted > but nowhere accounted for. We resort to pragmatist and phenomenological > literature along with Vygotsky's insights to point out the need to account > for learning as something that cannot be the result of an individual's > construction; in experience there is always something in excess of what you > intended, and this is a basic feature of doing, of performing. I take that > to be your "trans" in the trans/zhivanie word, Larry, which already is > denoted in the word PERezhivanie. > > But I do not wish to move our discussion too far away from Marc's paper > and the Perezhivanie special issue. We also risk disengaging many that have > not have the privilege we've had to have the time to read so many articles > in just few days into the new year. I think we are a point in the > discussion where a pretty clear point of agreement/disagreement, and > therefore of possibility for growth, has been reached with regard to the > view of perezhivanie as "an experience" and as the "working over it". I > think that to allow as many as possible to follow, and hopefully also > engage, I think it will be helpful to bring the diverse perspectives and > theoretical accounts to matter in accounting for some actual material. And > there are a number of cases described in the articles, including Marc's > case of a teacher, as well as everyday facts, such as those brought by > Beth, and in Beth's article... > > I take the task for myself too, but Saturday morning need to attend to > other things! > A > > > > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com > Sent: 07 January 2017 18:26 > To: Andy Blunden; Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; > Larry Purss > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > Andy, Peter, i hope the intention to move beyond politeness to struggle > with this topic materializes. > In this vein i want to introduce exploration of the ?excess? of actual > over intended meaning as he sketched his introduction to ?experience?. > > Citing Dewey, Alfredo says that this excess of actual learning over > intended learning INCLUDES what Dewey refers to as ?attitudes? and these > ?attitudes? are FUNDAMENTALLY what count in the future. > Alfredo and Roth then add this summary statement : > > There is therefore, a need to theorize experience in terms that do not > assume control and rationality as the sine qua non of learning. It also > implies a need to develop analytical accounts that retain the ?uncertainty? > that is an ?integral part? of human experience. > > Where are Alfredo and Roth leading us with this sketch of experience? To > highlight ?attitudes? that occur in the excess of actual over intended > learning? The word ?attitudes? generates images of (atmosphere) and (moods) > that ?flow? like cascading waterfalls that can be imaged as (force) or as > (receptive). Attitudes that flow to places where they are received within a > certain attitude of care and concern. Not as forceful an image as moving > only with control and rationality. Describing ?weaker? thought that > remains uncertain but that also opens us to the other?s peril and plight. > Possibly a post-analytic motion that exceeds the intended by living-through > the actual that develops ?attitudes? that are fundamentally what count for > the future. > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > From: Andy Blunden > Sent: January 7, 2017 5:00 AM > To: Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > OK Peter, what you say is all very true I am sure, but it > entails conflating activity and action (as mass nouns) and > context and mediation, and makes the required distinction > much like one could find multiple meanings for the word > "and" by listing the different phrases and clauses which can > be linked by "and." > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Andy Blunden > http://home.mira.net/~andy > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > On 7/01/2017 11:42 PM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > > > > Let me try to illustrate. > > > > Reading as mediated action: The cultural-historical > > context of reading mediates how one?s attention and > > response are channeled in socially constructed ways. So, > > in one setting, say at home or reading in the company of > > friends, a novel might bring a reader to tears, or invite > > readers to share personal stories that parallel those of > > the plot lines, or laugh out loud. But another setting, a > > formal school or university class, would have historical > > values and practices that mute emotional and personal > > responses, and promote a more sober, analytic way of > > reading and talking that fits with specific historical > > critical conventions and genres, and discourages others. > > > > Reading as mediating action: The act of reading can be > > transformational. In reading about an talking about a > > character?s actions, a reader might reconsider a value > > system, become more sympathetic to real people who > > resemble oppressed characters, etc. In other words, > > reading a text may serve a mediational process in which > > textual ideas and exemplars enable a reader to think > > differently. > > > > *From:*Andy Blunden [mailto:ablunden@mira.net] > > *Sent:* Saturday, January 7, 2017 6:28 AM > > *To:* Peter Smagorinsky ; eXtended Mind, > > Culture, Activity > > *Subject:* Re: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > > > Can you explain in a paragraph or two,. Peter, rather than > > asking us all to read 10,000 words to extract an answer? > > > > Andy > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > Andy Blunden > > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > > > > > On 7/01/2017 11:23 PM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > > > > Andy and others, I tried to work out the mediated/mediating question > in the area of reading....see if this helps. > > > > Smagorinsky, P., & O'Donnell-Allen, C. (1998). Reading as mediated > and mediating action: Composing meaning for literature through multimedia > interpretive texts. Reading Research Quarterly, 33, 198-226. Available > athttp://www.petersmagorinsky.net/About/PDF/RRQ/RRQ1998.pdf > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ > mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden > > > > Sent: Friday, January 6, 2017 7:12 PM > > > > To:xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > > > I have never understood this supposed distinction, Alfredo, between > "mediated activity" and "mediating activity" given that all activity is > mediated and all activity mediates. > > > > Also, could you spell out what you mean by the "tension" > > > > between perezhivanie as meaning and perezhivanie as struggle. > > > > Andy > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > Andy Blunden > > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective- > decision-making > > > > On 5/01/2017 6:26 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > > > > Thanks Marc for your careful response. > > > > I am familiar to Vygotsky's notion of cultural mediation and I > am aware and acknowledge that it was elaborated as a means to overcome > dualism, and that it is not analog to a computational approach. > > > > When I brought the computing analogy, I did so with regard not > to the concept of cultural mediation in general, but to the way it can be > (and is) deployed analytically. I react to what it seems to me a dichotomy > between a "meaning" as something that is static (thereby a form of > "representation" or reflection of the relation with the environment instead > of?refraction)?? and the experiencing-as-struggling, which is described > as?transformation or change. If so, mediation here would seem to be part of > a methodological device that first dissects "a type of meaning" from "a > type of activity" (or a given state from the process that changes that > state), and then unites it by adding the term "mediation." And this may be > my misreading, but in that (mis)reading (which perhaps is mostly due to the > fact that in your empirical illustration only the initial and end product, > i.e., perezhivanie, are described, but not the experiencing-as-struggle, > that is, the moving between the two), mediation here seems to do as > analytical concept precisely what you were afraid our monism was doing: > explaining nothing. Only the end products but not the process of producing > perezhivanie are revealed. This may be problematic if one attends to what > Veresov argues in the paper I shared yesterday, where he defends the notion > of mediation but also specifies that Vygotsky speaks of *mediating > activity* (as opposed to *mediated* activity). That is, not mediation by > signs as products, but mediating activity as the activity of producing > signs (which again is an activity of producing social relations, perhaps > what you refer as "holistic meanings"?). What do you think? > > > > I did not think you were trying to deny the influence of > Spinoza, and I do not think we ever said that Perezhivanie was primarily a > move from Cartesian Dualism to Monism, as you suggest in your post. I copy > and paste from my prior post: "The fact is that Vygotsky was building a > theory on the unity of the affect and the intellect that was to be grounded > on Spinoza, and what we try to do is to explore how perezhivanie, as a > concept being developed during the same period (but not finalised or > totally settled!), could be seen from the perspective of the Spinozist > Vygotsky." > > > > I totally believe that bringing the distinction between > perezhivanie as meaning, and perezhivanie as struggle, is totally relevant, > and Beth Ferholt's vignettes of Where the Wild Things Are do indeed > illustrate this. We really need to address this tension, which as Beth's > examples and as our own everyday experience shows, is a tension that > matters not just to books and to theories but to living persons (children, > teachers), a tension that moreover is present and mentioned in all the > articles of the symposium. The papers offer different proposals, and I > think is so great we have the chance to discuss them! I too, as you, am > very interesting in hearing others about the questions you had concerning > sense and meaning. > > > > Alfredo > > > > From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > > > > on behalf of Marc > Clar? > > > > > > > > Sent: 04 January 2017 22:31 > > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > > > Thank you very much, Alfredo, for sharing this excellent paper by > > > > Veresov, and thanks also for your responses, which really helped > me to > > > > better understand your points. My main doubt about your proposal > > > > was/is caused by the statement that the idea of cultural > > > > mediation/mediator implies a cartesian dualism. This shocks me > > > > because, to me, the idea of cultural mediation is absolutely > crucial > > > > (in fact, the keystone) for the construction of a monist (and > > > > scientific) psychology that does not forget mind ?that is, a > cultural > > > > psychology. From your response, however, I realized that we may > be > > > > approaching the idea of mediation in different ways. I talk of > > > > mediation and mediators in a quite restricted way. The starting > point > > > > of my understanding of mediation is a dialectical relationship > > > > (organic, transactional) between the subject and the world > (Vygotsky departs from the scheme stimulus-response, from reflexology). > > > > This relationship, that Vygotsky calls primitive psychological > > > > functions, would be basically biological. However, in human > beings > > > > this relationship is mediated by cultural means: signs and > tools; or > > > > primary, secondary and terciary artifacts. These cultural means > > > > reorganize the primitive functions (dialectic S-O relationship), > which > > > > become then higher psychological functions (S-M-O) (see for > example, > > > > The problem of the cultural development of the child, in The > Vygotsky > > > > Reader). Now, the subject, the cultural mediators, and the > object form > > > > an inseparable dialectical unit, so that the subject acts on > > > > (transforms) the object through the prism of the cultural > mediators, > > > > the object acts on (transforms) the subject also through the > prism of > > > > the cultural mediators, and the cultural means are themselves > also > > > > transformed as a consequence of their mediation in this > continuous > > > > dynamic dialectical tension. Here, for me, it is important the > idea > > > > that the cultural means are as material (if we assume a > materialist > > > > monism) as all the rest of the world; in fact, are parts of the > > > > material world which become signs or tools (and can be therefore > > > > socially distributed). This permits the introduction of the > scientific > > > > study of mind-consciousness (as mediating systems of signs), > because > > > > mind is not anymore something immaterial and unobservable, but > it is > > > > as material and observable as the rest of the natural world. It > is > > > > from this view that, for me, the idea of cultural mediation is > the > > > > keystone of a monist psychology that includes mind. Thus, when I > speak > > > > of mediators, I refer to the cultural means which mediate in the > S-O > > > > dialectics; I am especially interested in signs/secondary > artifacts. > > > > Here, it is perhaps necessary to insist that when I talk of > studying > > > > mediators (and their semantic structure), this doesn't mean that > they > > > > are taken out from the activity (the flux of live) in which they > > > > mediate (since out of activity they are not signs anymore); > here, I > > > > think Vygotsky tries again to overcome another old dichotomy, the > > > > functionalism-structuralism one. I hope that all this makes also > clear the difference between this view and that of computational > psychologies (which in general are profoundly and explicitly dualist and > not dialectic). > > > > Back to perezhivanie, I'm not obviously trying to deny the > influence > > > > of Spinoza on Vygotsky's thinking (this is explicit in Vygotsky's > > > > writings, especially in ?The teaching about emotions?, in the > Vol.6 of > > > > the Collected Works). But I have doubts that Vygotsky's > introduction > > > > of the concept of perezhivanie is to be regarded primarily as a > > > > movement towards monism (from a previous cartesian dualism), and > that > > > > this movement questions the concept of cultural mediation. > Instead, > > > > and I think that this is in line with some of Gonz?lez-Rey > > > > observations in his paper, my impression is that the > introduction of > > > > the concept of perezhivanie responds more to a movement (a > further > > > > step) towards holism (something that, in my understanding, can > also be > > > > found in Spinoza). Thus, I think that the word meaning is still > the > > > > unit of analysis in the last Vygotsky -and therefore, the idea of > > > > cultural mediation is still crucial (in fact, in The problem of > the > > > > environment, he connects the concept of perezhivanie, which has > just > > > > introduced, to the development of word meaning [p.345-346, also > cited > > > > in my paper]). However, in my view, in the last Vygotsky the > focus is > > > > not anymore primarily on the word-meaning as formed for things > (or > > > > collections of things, as in the ontogenetic research with > Sakharov), but the focus is now in the formation of meaning for holistic > situations. > > > > Best regards, > > > > Marc. > > > > 2017-01-03 19:16 GMT+01:00 Alfredo Jornet Gil< > a.j.gil@iped.uio.no> : > > > > Hi Marc, all, > > > > thanks for joining and for your interesting work, which I > follow > > > > since I became aware of it. I appreciate the way in your > paper you > > > > show careful and honest attention to the texts of the authors > > > > involved, but perhaps most of all I appreciate that the > paper makes > > > > the transformational dimension related to struggle and change > > > > salient, a dimension all papers deemed central to > perezhivanie. And I > > > > have learned more about Vasilyuk by reading your paper. But > I also > > > > see that we have approached the question of perezhivanie > differently > > > > and I think that addressing the questions that you raise > concerning > > > > our article may be a good way to both respond and discuss > your paper. > > > > I am aware that our use of the term monism may be > problematic to > > > > some, and N. Veresov, who has recently written about this > (see > > > > attached article), warns against the dangers of simply > moving from > > > > dualism into an undifferentiating monism that relativizes > everything, > > > > making development un-studiable. This seems to be the way in > which > > > > you have understood our argument, and of course this is not > what we are or want to be doing. > > > > Probably many will think that *dialectical materialism* > rather than > > > > monism is the proper term, and I could agree with them; we > do in fact > > > > use dialectical materialism there and elsewhere. Yet, we > wanted to > > > > emphasise the Spinozist influence (an influence that also > runs > > > > through Marx) and so we found it appropriate to use the term > monism, > > > > a term that Vygotsky uses before arguing that Spinoza > "develops an essentially materialistic view" > > > > (Collected Works, Vol. 6, p. 124). For us, the aim is > working out > > > > ways to empirically examine and formulate problems in ways > that do > > > > not reify a mind-body dualism. > > > > Although overcoming dualism is foundational to the CHAT > paradigm, I > > > > would however not say that Vygotsky did get to solve all of > the > > > > problems that Cartesian dualism had created for psychology, > even > > > > though he recognised those problems brilliantly as early as > in the > > > > "Crisis". It should suffice to cite Vygotsky's own remarks, > which we quote in the paper (and which A.N. > > > > Leont'ev mentions in the introduction to the collected > works), where > > > > Vygotsky explicitly critiques some of his own prior ideas > for failing > > > > to overcome dualism. We agree with those who, like F. G. > Rey, see > > > > Vygotsky's project as a developing rather than as a > finalised one. > > > > The fact is that Vygotsky was building a theory on the unity > of the > > > > affect and the intellect that was to be grounded on Spinoza, > and what > > > > we try to do is to explore how perezhivanie, as a concept > being > > > > developed during the same period (but not finalised or > totally > > > > settled!), could be seen from the perspective of the > Spinozist Vygotsky. > > > > As you note, in our article we argue that, if one takes the > Spinozist > > > > one-substance approach, classical concepts used in > non-classical > > > > psychology, at least in the way they are commonly used in > the current > > > > literature, should be revised. One such concept is > mediation. And I > > > > personally do not have much of a problem when mediation is > used to > > > > denote the fundamental fact that every thing exists always > through > > > > *another*, never in and of itself. But I do think that it is > > > > problematic to identify MEDIATORS, such as "a meaning", as a > means to > > > > account for or explain developmental processes and learning > events, > > > > precisely because it is there, at least in my view, that > dualism creeps in. > > > > For example, I find it paradoxical that you are concerned > that our > > > > monist approach risks turning perezhivanie into a useless > category > > > > because it may be used to explain everything and nothing, > and yet you > > > > do not seem to have a problem using the term mediation to > account for > > > > the transformation of perezhivanie without clearly > elaborating on how > > > > mediation does change anything or what it looks like as a > real > > > > process. How is it different saying that a perezhivanie > mediates the > > > > experiencing-as-struggle from simply saying that it > "affects" or > > > > "determines" it? Indeed, if perezhivanie mediates > > > > experiencing-as-struggle, does not experiencing-as-struglgle > too > > > > mediate perezhivanie? And do not both may be said to mediate > development, or development mediate them? Is not this explaining everything > and nothing? > > > > I do believe you can argue that there is a difference between > > > > mediation and classical psychology's cause-effect relations, > but to > > > > show this you need to dig into the dialectical underpinnings > of the > > > > theory. In your paper, you offer a nice analysis of a lovely > case of > > > > a teacher who, in dealing with a challenge with one of her > students, > > > > changes her perezhivanie. I think you can rightly argue that > there is > > > > a semiotic transformation, and I fully support your > statement that by > > > > studying discourse we can empirically approach questions of > > > > psychological development. The contradictions you show as > being > > > > involved and resolved resonate really well with what I > experience as > > > > a parent or as a teacher in the classroom. Yet, without > unpacking > > > > what this "mediation" taking place between one perezhivanie > and the > > > > next one means as a concrete and real, the same analysis > could be done taking an information processing approach: > > > > there is an situation that is processed (represented?) in > one way, > > > > which then leads to a (cognitive) dissonance, and then there > is a > > > > cognitive resolution by means of which the situation is > presented > > > > differently in consciousness (indeed, when seen in this way, > the term > > > > perezhivanie and the term "representation" become almost > > > > indistinguishable). How is mediation, as an analytical > concept, > > > > helping here? And most importantly to the question of > perezhivanie, > > > > how is this analysis going to show the internal connection > between > > > > intellect and affect that Vygotsky formulates as > constitutive of the notion of perezhivanie? > > > > I believe that the key lies in understanding what Vygotsky > means when > > > > he says that perezhivanie is a unit of analysis. I will not > repeat > > > > here what already is written in at least a couple of the > articles in > > > > the special issue (Blunden, ours), that is the difference > between > > > > analysis by elements and unit analysis (Vygotsky 1987). A > unit > > > > analysis approach is consistent with Spinoza, for whom > cause-effect > > > > explanations were not adequate, requiring instead an > understanding of > > > > self-development, perezhivanie as a kernel cell for the > development > > > > of personality. And I think you may be after this in your > article in > > > > suggesting a form of continuous movement from perezhivanie to > > > > experiencing-as-struggle. But perhaps the major difficulty I > find is that, in positing Vygotsky's perezhivanie as "a type of meaning" > > > > and Vasilyuk's perezhivanie (or experiencing-as-struggle) as > a "type > > > > of activity," it is difficult not to see here a division > between > > > > product and process, a division that then is analytically > bridged by > > > > the addition of a third term, mediation, that should bring > back the > > > > real movement between the product and the process. > > > > A different approach involves considering the concrete > extension of > > > > actual living and lived social relations, and look at them as > > > > generative phenomena. What is there in the encounter between > Carla > > > > and the child that leads to change? For it is not inside the > mind, > > > > but in real life, in consciousness as the real relation > between people, that Carla is changed. > > > > How is the semantic structure that you nicely present and > attribute > > > > to Carla a product of the social relation between her and > the child? > > > > I think that to rightfully situate perezhivanie as a concept > in a > > > > Vygotskian framework, we ought to address its relation to > the genetic > > > > law of development. > > > > There is much more to disentangle, but this is long enough. > I hope I > > > > have succeeded in making clear these ideas. Thanks so much > for > > > > engaging in the discussion! > > > > Alfredo > > > > ________________________________________ > > > > From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > > > > on behalf of Marc > Clar? > > > > > > > > > > Sent: 02 January 2017 22:14 > > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > > > Hi, all, and thank you so much, Alfredo, for your kind > invitation to > > > > participate in this discussion. My paper in the MCA special > issue > > > > focuses on a distinction between a type of activity, which I > argue > > > > that is what Vasilyuk called *perezhivanie* (experiencing) > and a type > > > > of semiotic mediator, which I argue that is what Vygotsky, > in The > > > > Problem of the Environment, called *perezhivanie.* I argue, > following > > > > Vasilyuk, that in experiencing activities (Vasilyuk's > perezhivanie), > > > > this type of mediator is profoundly transformed ? in fact, > that > > > > experiencing activities consist of the semiotic > transformation of this type of mediator. > > > > As Veresov and Fleer argue in their commentary, perezhivanie > (as a > > > > type of > > > > mediator) is for me a psychological phenomenon, one which is > of > > > > course conceptualized from a specific theoretical framework. > But the > > > > phenomenon is also visible from other theoretical frameworks > as well, > > > > as I mention in the paper. This phenomenon is my main > interest, and > > > > it is from this interest that I arrived at the concept of > perezhivanie (not the other way around). > > > > Now, the phenomenon is that at least emotion, reasoning, and > volition > > > > (formation of conscious purposes) seem to be decisively > mediated by > > > > holistic situational meaning. My current research concern is > trying > > > > to find ways to study and understand how this mediation > occurs and > > > > how these semiotic mediators are transformed and > distributed. From > > > > this view, I think that experiencing activities (Vasilyuk's > > > > perezhivanie) may provide a good terrain to study these > issues > > > > (especially regarding the mediation of emotion), as I tried > to exemplify in the paper. > > > > Studying semiotic mediation, however, is of course not easy. > > > > Following Vygotsky, I assume that extended discourse is the > > > > manifestation of thinking within certain psychological > conditions > > > > (Vygotsky's Thinking and Speech, chapter 7), and I also > assume the > > > > Vygotsky's law of the unity of the structure and function of > thinking > > > > (Vygotsky's Thinking and Speech, chapter 6). From these two > > > > assumptions, I propose that meaning (and its functions in > human > > > > activity) can be scientifically studied by structurally > analyzing the > > > > narratives generated by subjects, considering that the > discourse > > > > produced in the narrative is the point of departure of this > study, > > > > but that considerable analytical work must be done to move > from this > > > > discourse to the full characterization of meaning. It is in > that > > > > point where I find useful the work developed by Greimas, the > usefulness of which I only suggest in the paper. > > > > >From this background, I found many interesting ideas and > questions > > > > in the > > > > other papers of the special issue. In this first post I will > propose > > > > two of them for possible discussion. The first one was > raised by > > > > Gonz?lez-Rey, when he introduces, in connection with > perezhivanie, > > > > the concepts of personality, and especially, of sense. So, > which is > > > > the conceptual (and-or > > > > phenomenal) relation between perezhivanie and sense? > Gonz?lez-Rey > > > > suggests that both concepts are somewhat similar (and > overcome by the > > > > concept of ?subjective sense?); my opinion, partly expressed > in my > > > > commentary, is that perezhivanie is a type of meaning, which > includes > > > > different levels of depth, and that sense corresponds to the > deepest > > > > level of meaning (which can be characterized as a system of > semic > > > > oppositions). Therefore, sense wouldn't be in opposition to > meaning > > > > (as ?a microcosm of human consciousness?, as Kozulin > remembers in his > > > > commentary), although it would be in opposition to > manifested meaning (the surface level of meaning). > > > > The second issue was raised by Roth and Jornet, and I think > it goes > > > > beyond the issue of perezhivanie itself. If I understand > them well, > > > > they argue that Vygotsky's core proposal of cultural > mediation is > > > > influenced by the Cartesian dualism (mind-matter), and that a > > > > promising approach to Cultural Psychology would be a > Spinozist > > > > monism. I am actually very interested on the issue of which > > > > epistemological position can best substantiate the > construction of a > > > > cultural psychology, and that's why I feel inclined to take > the > > > > opportunity to ask for your opinions about that. About the > proposal > > > > of Roth and Jornet, I have some doubts. First, I don't see > why > > > > Vygotsky's proposals can be seen as dualist (in the > Cartesian sense) > > > > -I suspect that it is because of the analytical > distinctions?. > > > > Anyway, in my understanding, Vygotsky explicitly assumes a > > > > materialist monism (for example in The Crisis), and in fact > he constructs his proposal on mediation upon reflexology, which also > explicitly assumed a materialist monism (e.g. > > > > Sechenov). Would a Spinozist monism be a better point of > departure? I > > > > don't know, in my understanding it is a more idealist > monism, and I > > > > don't clearly see what could be gained. In my opinion, a > scientific > > > > psychology which includes the study of mind is only possible > if any > > > > type of monism is assumed. However, in my view, for a > scientific > > > > psychology, the ontological nature of the world is perhaps > less > > > > important (it is an issue for metaphysics?), and I am > inclined to assume a neutral monism (e.g. Russell). > > > > So from this view, a materialist monism and a Spinozist > monism > > > > wouldn't be so different, so from both views it could be > assumed that > > > > all is of the same nature and all is similarly knowable > (including > > > > mind) [which is the ontological nature of the world and to > what > > > > degree it is knowable are issues that can be left to > philosophy]. > > > > However, in my opinion, this does not mean that, while > assuming a > > > > monism, analytical distinctions cannot be done when studying > the > > > > world. In that sense, I had the impression that Roth and > Jornet > > > > tended to dilute analytical distinctions in the name of > monism; I > > > > repeat that I don't know if I understood them well, but if > this was > > > > the case, in my opinion, analysis would be impossible within > the new > > > > psychology suggested by Roth and Jornet, and, regarding > perezhivanie, > > > > there would be the danger, noted by Vygotsky in The Crisis > and > > > > cautioned by Kozulin in his commentary, that by meaning > everything, perezhivanie ends by meaning nothing. > > > > Best regards and happy new year, > > > > Marc. > > > > 2017-01-02 9:12 GMT+01:00 Alfredo Jornet Gil< > a.j.gil@iped.uio.no> : > > > > Dear all, > > > > I would like to join David, Luisa, Ana, Henry and the > others to wish > > > > you all a Happy New Year! May it be full of joy, peace, > and opportunity. > > > > I also would like to begin the year announcing our first > ?MCA > > > > article discussion, ?although in fact corresponds to the > last issue > > > > of the year > > > > we > > > > just passed, Issue 4 on Perezhivanie. This is a very > special > > > > *special* issue, not only because its topic has raised > lots of > > > > interest lately in > > > > the > > > > CHAT community but also because, greatly coordinated by > Andy Blunden > > > > and the rest of the editorial team, the issue takes the > form of a > > > > symposium where authors get the chance to present and > respond to > > > > each others' ideas on the subject. In my view, this > allows having a > > > > rich and > > > > multidimensional > > > > approach to a subject as important as perezhivanie. > > > > Following with the dialogical spirit in which the > special issue was > > > > assembled, we will focus on one lead article, but hoping > to also > > > > engage ideas and insights present in or relevant to other > > > > contributions in the issue. ?Marc Clar?'s "Vygotsky and > Vasilyuk on > > > > Perezhivanie: Two Notions and One Word" will be our > focus. The > > > > article very nicely engages the lead work of Vygotsky, > but also the > > > > less known ??(?in educational literature) but totally > relevant works > > > > of psychologist ?F. Vasilyuk and semiotician > > > > A. > > > > J. Greimas, mobilising a number of key concepts > including those of > > > > semiotic > > > > mediation and transformation. > > > > ?In addition to Marc, who will soon join us, I have > encouraged some > > > > of > > > > the > > > > other authors in the special issue to also join as > "relevant > > > > others," if time and circumstances allow them. Let's > hope that this > > > > will help keeping the symposium spirit up. > > > > Marc's article is attached to this e-mail and will be > made open > > > > access at the T&F pages as soon as people is back from > the holidays. > > > > The T&F link > > > > is > > > > this: > > > > http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039. > 2016.1186194 > > > > The link to the MCA Forum pages, where we announce our > discussions > > > > and other xmca things, is here:http://lchc.ucsd.edu/MCA/ > > > > I wish us all a very productive and interesting > discussion. > > > > Alfredo > > > > From ablunden@mira.net Sat Jan 7 15:07:23 2017 From: ablunden@mira.net (Andy Blunden) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2017 10:07:23 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! In-Reply-To: References: <1483344752182.40904@iped.uio.no> <1483467423798.57819@iped.uio.no> <1483601196884.31418@iped.uio.no> <5df5e870-3ef8-70d6-0c17-f8647ba17e62@mira.net> <587124d9.d957620a.4a5a8.bd56@mx.google.com> <1483820996800.91513@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: David: "Are words really units?" Well, firstly, "units" is a *relative* term. That is, the question is: are words units of something, some complex process subject to analysis. And which? Secondly, according to Vygotsky, "no." The concept Vygotsky proposes as a unit is "word meaning" which he says is a unity of sound and meaning. The sound is an artefact, which, detached from its meaningful utterance in a transactional context is just a thing, viz., a word. Whereas "word meaning" is an arrtefact-mediated action, a unit of human social activity. It is true that words can be countable or mass according to context, but I wasn't talking about words was I? I was talking about word meaning. Andy ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making On 8/01/2017 7:59 AM, David Kellogg wrote: > Are words really units? When we look at their ideational meaning (that is, > their logical and experiential content--their capacity for representing and > linking together human experiences) they seem to fall into two very > different categories: lexical words like "perezhivanie" or "sense" or > "personality" of "individual" and grammatical words like "of", or "might", > or "is". The lexical words seem to behave like units--they are bounded, > discrete, and, as Andy would say, "countable" (the problem is that almost > all nouns are both countable and uncountable depending on the context you > put them in, so this distinction is really not as essential as Andy seems > to assume). But the more grammatical words seem to be elements of some > larger unit, which we can call wording. > > Veresov and Fleer come up against this problem with "edintsvo" and > "edintsa". Of course, as they say, the two words are distinct. But this > doesn't necessarily mean that the former always corresponds to "unity" in > English and the latter is always "unit". If you look at the paragraph they > translate on 330, you can see that Vygotsky starts with an idea that is > quite "synoptic" and is well expressed by "unit". But in the last sentence > there is a sense that "perezhivanie" is a meta-stable unit--one that > remains self-similar only through a process of thorough change, like a > bicycle whose every part is replaced--and in English is it is better to > express this idea with "unity". The problem is that the differences between > "edintsvo" and "edintsva" in Russian is a matter of gender (I think) and > not simply abstractness, and as a result the English version, which cannot > use the resource of gender,has to rely on abstractness, so the words > "unity" and "unit" are somewhat more distinct and less linked than > "edintsvo" and "edintsva". > > There are other problems that are similar. When Gonzalez Rey uses the word > "final moment" to refer to the final period of Vygotsky's thinking, he > leaves the anglophone reader the impression that he is referring to > Vygotsky's deathbed thoughts. On the other hand, when Veresov and Fleer use > "factor" to translate the same Russian word that Gonzalez Rey is using, > they are giving us something more quantitative than Vygotsky intended, and > their translation of "dalee nerazloshim'im chastyami etava edinstva" > into "vital and further indivisible part of the whole" is quite opaque in > English (notice that here Veresov and Fleer use "whole" to translate > "edinstva" rather than "unit"!) At some point you have to accept that you > can change Russian words into English words as if you were exchanging > rubles for dollars, but you still won't be able to buy a samovar at Walmart. > > David Kellogg > Macquarie University > > > > On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 5:21 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > wrote: > >> Larry, all, >> >> our arguments in the 2014 address a science education literature in which >> the constructivist perspective is the leading perspective; We note that the >> assertion that people learn from experience is everywhere taken for granted >> but nowhere accounted for. We resort to pragmatist and phenomenological >> literature along with Vygotsky's insights to point out the need to account >> for learning as something that cannot be the result of an individual's >> construction; in experience there is always something in excess of what you >> intended, and this is a basic feature of doing, of performing. I take that >> to be your "trans" in the trans/zhivanie word, Larry, which already is >> denoted in the word PERezhivanie. >> >> But I do not wish to move our discussion too far away from Marc's paper >> and the Perezhivanie special issue. We also risk disengaging many that have >> not have the privilege we've had to have the time to read so many articles >> in just few days into the new year. I think we are a point in the >> discussion where a pretty clear point of agreement/disagreement, and >> therefore of possibility for growth, has been reached with regard to the >> view of perezhivanie as "an experience" and as the "working over it". I >> think that to allow as many as possible to follow, and hopefully also >> engage, I think it will be helpful to bring the diverse perspectives and >> theoretical accounts to matter in accounting for some actual material. And >> there are a number of cases described in the articles, including Marc's >> case of a teacher, as well as everyday facts, such as those brought by >> Beth, and in Beth's article... >> >> I take the task for myself too, but Saturday morning need to attend to >> other things! >> A >> >> >> >> ________________________________________ >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com >> Sent: 07 January 2017 18:26 >> To: Andy Blunden; Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; >> Larry Purss >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! >> >> Andy, Peter, i hope the intention to move beyond politeness to struggle >> with this topic materializes. >> In this vein i want to introduce exploration of the ?excess? of actual >> over intended meaning as he sketched his introduction to ?experience?. >> >> Citing Dewey, Alfredo says that this excess of actual learning over >> intended learning INCLUDES what Dewey refers to as ?attitudes? and these >> ?attitudes? are FUNDAMENTALLY what count in the future. >> Alfredo and Roth then add this summary statement : >> >> There is therefore, a need to theorize experience in terms that do not >> assume control and rationality as the sine qua non of learning. It also >> implies a need to develop analytical accounts that retain the ?uncertainty? >> that is an ?integral part? of human experience. >> >> Where are Alfredo and Roth leading us with this sketch of experience? To >> highlight ?attitudes? that occur in the excess of actual over intended >> learning? The word ?attitudes? generates images of (atmosphere) and (moods) >> that ?flow? like cascading waterfalls that can be imaged as (force) or as >> (receptive). Attitudes that flow to places where they are received within a >> certain attitude of care and concern. Not as forceful an image as moving >> only with control and rationality. Describing ?weaker? thought that >> remains uncertain but that also opens us to the other?s peril and plight. >> Possibly a post-analytic motion that exceeds the intended by living-through >> the actual that develops ?attitudes? that are fundamentally what count for >> the future. >> >> >> Sent from my Windows 10 phone >> >> From: Andy Blunden >> Sent: January 7, 2017 5:00 AM >> To: Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! >> >> OK Peter, what you say is all very true I am sure, but it >> entails conflating activity and action (as mass nouns) and >> context and mediation, and makes the required distinction >> much like one could find multiple meanings for the word >> "and" by listing the different phrases and clauses which can >> be linked by "and." >> >> Andy >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------ >> Andy Blunden >> http://home.mira.net/~andy >> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making >> >> On 7/01/2017 11:42 PM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: >>> Let me try to illustrate. >>> >>> Reading as mediated action: The cultural-historical >>> context of reading mediates how one?s attention and >>> response are channeled in socially constructed ways. So, >>> in one setting, say at home or reading in the company of >>> friends, a novel might bring a reader to tears, or invite >>> readers to share personal stories that parallel those of >>> the plot lines, or laugh out loud. But another setting, a >>> formal school or university class, would have historical >>> values and practices that mute emotional and personal >>> responses, and promote a more sober, analytic way of >>> reading and talking that fits with specific historical >>> critical conventions and genres, and discourages others. >>> >>> Reading as mediating action: The act of reading can be >>> transformational. In reading about an talking about a >>> character?s actions, a reader might reconsider a value >>> system, become more sympathetic to real people who >>> resemble oppressed characters, etc. In other words, >>> reading a text may serve a mediational process in which >>> textual ideas and exemplars enable a reader to think >>> differently. >>> >>> *From:*Andy Blunden [mailto:ablunden@mira.net] >>> *Sent:* Saturday, January 7, 2017 6:28 AM >>> *To:* Peter Smagorinsky ; eXtended Mind, >>> Culture, Activity >>> *Subject:* Re: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! >>> >>> Can you explain in a paragraph or two,. Peter, rather than >>> asking us all to read 10,000 words to extract an answer? >>> >>> Andy >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>> >>> Andy Blunden >>> http://home.mira.net/~andy >>> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making >>> >>> >>> On 7/01/2017 11:23 PM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: >>> >>> Andy and others, I tried to work out the mediated/mediating question >> in the area of reading....see if this helps. >>> Smagorinsky, P., & O'Donnell-Allen, C. (1998). Reading as mediated >> and mediating action: Composing meaning for literature through multimedia >> interpretive texts. Reading Research Quarterly, 33, 198-226. Available >> athttp://www.petersmagorinsky.net/About/PDF/RRQ/RRQ1998.pdf >>> -----Original Message----- >>> >>> From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ >> mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden >>> Sent: Friday, January 6, 2017 7:12 PM >>> >>> To:xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu >>> >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! >>> >>> I have never understood this supposed distinction, Alfredo, between >> "mediated activity" and "mediating activity" given that all activity is >> mediated and all activity mediates. >>> Also, could you spell out what you mean by the "tension" >>> >>> between perezhivanie as meaning and perezhivanie as struggle. >>> >>> Andy >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>> >>> Andy Blunden >>> >>> http://home.mira.net/~andy >>> >>> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective- >> decision-making >>> On 5/01/2017 6:26 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: >>> >>> Thanks Marc for your careful response. >>> >>> I am familiar to Vygotsky's notion of cultural mediation and I >> am aware and acknowledge that it was elaborated as a means to overcome >> dualism, and that it is not analog to a computational approach. >>> When I brought the computing analogy, I did so with regard not >> to the concept of cultural mediation in general, but to the way it can be >> (and is) deployed analytically. I react to what it seems to me a dichotomy >> between a "meaning" as something that is static (thereby a form of >> "representation" or reflection of the relation with the environment instead >> of?refraction)?? and the experiencing-as-struggling, which is described >> as?transformation or change. If so, mediation here would seem to be part of >> a methodological device that first dissects "a type of meaning" from "a >> type of activity" (or a given state from the process that changes that >> state), and then unites it by adding the term "mediation." And this may be >> my misreading, but in that (mis)reading (which perhaps is mostly due to the >> fact that in your empirical illustration only the initial and end product, >> i.e., perezhivanie, are described, but not the experiencing-as-struggle, >> that is, the moving between the two), mediation here seems to do as >> analytical concept precisely what you were afraid our monism was doing: >> explaining nothing. Only the end products but not the process of producing >> perezhivanie are revealed. This may be problematic if one attends to what >> Veresov argues in the paper I shared yesterday, where he defends the notion >> of mediation but also specifies that Vygotsky speaks of *mediating >> activity* (as opposed to *mediated* activity). That is, not mediation by >> signs as products, but mediating activity as the activity of producing >> signs (which again is an activity of producing social relations, perhaps >> what you refer as "holistic meanings"?). What do you think? >>> I did not think you were trying to deny the influence of >> Spinoza, and I do not think we ever said that Perezhivanie was primarily a >> move from Cartesian Dualism to Monism, as you suggest in your post. I copy >> and paste from my prior post: "The fact is that Vygotsky was building a >> theory on the unity of the affect and the intellect that was to be grounded >> on Spinoza, and what we try to do is to explore how perezhivanie, as a >> concept being developed during the same period (but not finalised or >> totally settled!), could be seen from the perspective of the Spinozist >> Vygotsky." >>> I totally believe that bringing the distinction between >> perezhivanie as meaning, and perezhivanie as struggle, is totally relevant, >> and Beth Ferholt's vignettes of Where the Wild Things Are do indeed >> illustrate this. We really need to address this tension, which as Beth's >> examples and as our own everyday experience shows, is a tension that >> matters not just to books and to theories but to living persons (children, >> teachers), a tension that moreover is present and mentioned in all the >> articles of the symposium. The papers offer different proposals, and I >> think is so great we have the chance to discuss them! I too, as you, am >> very interesting in hearing others about the questions you had concerning >> sense and meaning. >>> Alfredo >>> >>> From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>> >>> >>> >>> on behalf of Marc >> Clar? >>> >>> >>> Sent: 04 January 2017 22:31 >>> >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>> >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! >>> >>> Thank you very much, Alfredo, for sharing this excellent paper by >>> >>> Veresov, and thanks also for your responses, which really helped >> me to >>> better understand your points. My main doubt about your proposal >>> >>> was/is caused by the statement that the idea of cultural >>> >>> mediation/mediator implies a cartesian dualism. This shocks me >>> >>> because, to me, the idea of cultural mediation is absolutely >> crucial >>> (in fact, the keystone) for the construction of a monist (and >>> >>> scientific) psychology that does not forget mind ?that is, a >> cultural >>> psychology. From your response, however, I realized that we may >> be >>> approaching the idea of mediation in different ways. I talk of >>> >>> mediation and mediators in a quite restricted way. The starting >> point >>> of my understanding of mediation is a dialectical relationship >>> >>> (organic, transactional) between the subject and the world >> (Vygotsky departs from the scheme stimulus-response, from reflexology). >>> This relationship, that Vygotsky calls primitive psychological >>> >>> functions, would be basically biological. However, in human >> beings >>> this relationship is mediated by cultural means: signs and >> tools; or >>> primary, secondary and terciary artifacts. These cultural means >>> >>> reorganize the primitive functions (dialectic S-O relationship), >> which >>> become then higher psychological functions (S-M-O) (see for >> example, >>> The problem of the cultural development of the child, in The >> Vygotsky >>> Reader). Now, the subject, the cultural mediators, and the >> object form >>> an inseparable dialectical unit, so that the subject acts on >>> >>> (transforms) the object through the prism of the cultural >> mediators, >>> the object acts on (transforms) the subject also through the >> prism of >>> the cultural mediators, and the cultural means are themselves >> also >>> transformed as a consequence of their mediation in this >> continuous >>> dynamic dialectical tension. Here, for me, it is important the >> idea >>> that the cultural means are as material (if we assume a >> materialist >>> monism) as all the rest of the world; in fact, are parts of the >>> >>> material world which become signs or tools (and can be therefore >>> >>> socially distributed). This permits the introduction of the >> scientific >>> study of mind-consciousness (as mediating systems of signs), >> because >>> mind is not anymore something immaterial and unobservable, but >> it is >>> as material and observable as the rest of the natural world. It >> is >>> from this view that, for me, the idea of cultural mediation is >> the >>> keystone of a monist psychology that includes mind. Thus, when I >> speak >>> of mediators, I refer to the cultural means which mediate in the >> S-O >>> dialectics; I am especially interested in signs/secondary >> artifacts. >>> Here, it is perhaps necessary to insist that when I talk of >> studying >>> mediators (and their semantic structure), this doesn't mean that >> they >>> are taken out from the activity (the flux of live) in which they >>> >>> mediate (since out of activity they are not signs anymore); >> here, I >>> think Vygotsky tries again to overcome another old dichotomy, the >>> >>> functionalism-structuralism one. I hope that all this makes also >> clear the difference between this view and that of computational >> psychologies (which in general are profoundly and explicitly dualist and >> not dialectic). >>> Back to perezhivanie, I'm not obviously trying to deny the >> influence >>> of Spinoza on Vygotsky's thinking (this is explicit in Vygotsky's >>> >>> writings, especially in ?The teaching about emotions?, in the >> Vol.6 of >>> the Collected Works). But I have doubts that Vygotsky's >> introduction >>> of the concept of perezhivanie is to be regarded primarily as a >>> >>> movement towards monism (from a previous cartesian dualism), and >> that >>> this movement questions the concept of cultural mediation. >> Instead, >>> and I think that this is in line with some of Gonz?lez-Rey >>> >>> observations in his paper, my impression is that the >> introduction of >>> the concept of perezhivanie responds more to a movement (a >> further >>> step) towards holism (something that, in my understanding, can >> also be >>> found in Spinoza). Thus, I think that the word meaning is still >> the >>> unit of analysis in the last Vygotsky -and therefore, the idea of >>> >>> cultural mediation is still crucial (in fact, in The problem of >> the >>> environment, he connects the concept of perezhivanie, which has >> just >>> introduced, to the development of word meaning [p.345-346, also >> cited >>> in my paper]). However, in my view, in the last Vygotsky the >> focus is >>> not anymore primarily on the word-meaning as formed for things >> (or >>> collections of things, as in the ontogenetic research with >> Sakharov), but the focus is now in the formation of meaning for holistic >> situations. >>> Best regards, >>> >>> Marc. >>> >>> 2017-01-03 19:16 GMT+01:00 Alfredo Jornet Gil< >> a.j.gil@iped.uio.no> : >>> Hi Marc, all, >>> >>> thanks for joining and for your interesting work, which I >> follow >>> since I became aware of it. I appreciate the way in your >> paper you >>> show careful and honest attention to the texts of the authors >>> >>> involved, but perhaps most of all I appreciate that the >> paper makes >>> the transformational dimension related to struggle and change >>> >>> salient, a dimension all papers deemed central to >> perezhivanie. And I >>> have learned more about Vasilyuk by reading your paper. But >> I also >>> see that we have approached the question of perezhivanie >> differently >>> and I think that addressing the questions that you raise >> concerning >>> our article may be a good way to both respond and discuss >> your paper. >>> I am aware that our use of the term monism may be >> problematic to >>> some, and N. Veresov, who has recently written about this >> (see >>> attached article), warns against the dangers of simply >> moving from >>> dualism into an undifferentiating monism that relativizes >> everything, >>> making development un-studiable. This seems to be the way in >> which >>> you have understood our argument, and of course this is not >> what we are or want to be doing. >>> Probably many will think that *dialectical materialism* >> rather than >>> monism is the proper term, and I could agree with them; we >> do in fact >>> use dialectical materialism there and elsewhere. Yet, we >> wanted to >>> emphasise the Spinozist influence (an influence that also >> runs >>> through Marx) and so we found it appropriate to use the term >> monism, >>> a term that Vygotsky uses before arguing that Spinoza >> "develops an essentially materialistic view" >>> (Collected Works, Vol. 6, p. 124). For us, the aim is >> working out >>> ways to empirically examine and formulate problems in ways >> that do >>> not reify a mind-body dualism. >>> >>> Although overcoming dualism is foundational to the CHAT >> paradigm, I >>> would however not say that Vygotsky did get to solve all of >> the >>> problems that Cartesian dualism had created for psychology, >> even >>> though he recognised those problems brilliantly as early as >> in the >>> "Crisis". It should suffice to cite Vygotsky's own remarks, >> which we quote in the paper (and which A.N. >>> Leont'ev mentions in the introduction to the collected >> works), where >>> Vygotsky explicitly critiques some of his own prior ideas >> for failing >>> to overcome dualism. We agree with those who, like F. G. >> Rey, see >>> Vygotsky's project as a developing rather than as a >> finalised one. >>> The fact is that Vygotsky was building a theory on the unity >> of the >>> affect and the intellect that was to be grounded on Spinoza, >> and what >>> we try to do is to explore how perezhivanie, as a concept >> being >>> developed during the same period (but not finalised or >> totally >>> settled!), could be seen from the perspective of the >> Spinozist Vygotsky. >>> As you note, in our article we argue that, if one takes the >> Spinozist >>> one-substance approach, classical concepts used in >> non-classical >>> psychology, at least in the way they are commonly used in >> the current >>> literature, should be revised. One such concept is >> mediation. And I >>> personally do not have much of a problem when mediation is >> used to >>> denote the fundamental fact that every thing exists always >> through >>> *another*, never in and of itself. But I do think that it is >>> >>> problematic to identify MEDIATORS, such as "a meaning", as a >> means to >>> account for or explain developmental processes and learning >> events, >>> precisely because it is there, at least in my view, that >> dualism creeps in. >>> For example, I find it paradoxical that you are concerned >> that our >>> monist approach risks turning perezhivanie into a useless >> category >>> because it may be used to explain everything and nothing, >> and yet you >>> do not seem to have a problem using the term mediation to >> account for >>> the transformation of perezhivanie without clearly >> elaborating on how >>> mediation does change anything or what it looks like as a >> real >>> process. How is it different saying that a perezhivanie >> mediates the >>> experiencing-as-struggle from simply saying that it >> "affects" or >>> "determines" it? Indeed, if perezhivanie mediates >>> >>> experiencing-as-struggle, does not experiencing-as-struglgle >> too >>> mediate perezhivanie? And do not both may be said to mediate >> development, or development mediate them? Is not this explaining everything >> and nothing? >>> I do believe you can argue that there is a difference between >>> >>> mediation and classical psychology's cause-effect relations, >> but to >>> show this you need to dig into the dialectical underpinnings >> of the >>> theory. In your paper, you offer a nice analysis of a lovely >> case of >>> a teacher who, in dealing with a challenge with one of her >> students, >>> changes her perezhivanie. I think you can rightly argue that >> there is >>> a semiotic transformation, and I fully support your >> statement that by >>> studying discourse we can empirically approach questions of >>> >>> psychological development. The contradictions you show as >> being >>> involved and resolved resonate really well with what I >> experience as >>> a parent or as a teacher in the classroom. Yet, without >> unpacking >>> what this "mediation" taking place between one perezhivanie >> and the >>> next one means as a concrete and real, the same analysis >> could be done taking an information processing approach: >>> there is an situation that is processed (represented?) in >> one way, >>> which then leads to a (cognitive) dissonance, and then there >> is a >>> cognitive resolution by means of which the situation is >> presented >>> differently in consciousness (indeed, when seen in this way, >> the term >>> perezhivanie and the term "representation" become almost >>> >>> indistinguishable). How is mediation, as an analytical >> concept, >>> helping here? And most importantly to the question of >> perezhivanie, >>> how is this analysis going to show the internal connection >> between >>> intellect and affect that Vygotsky formulates as >> constitutive of the notion of perezhivanie? >>> I believe that the key lies in understanding what Vygotsky >> means when >>> he says that perezhivanie is a unit of analysis. I will not >> repeat >>> here what already is written in at least a couple of the >> articles in >>> the special issue (Blunden, ours), that is the difference >> between >>> analysis by elements and unit analysis (Vygotsky 1987). A >> unit >>> analysis approach is consistent with Spinoza, for whom >> cause-effect >>> explanations were not adequate, requiring instead an >> understanding of >>> self-development, perezhivanie as a kernel cell for the >> development >>> of personality. And I think you may be after this in your >> article in >>> suggesting a form of continuous movement from perezhivanie to >>> >>> experiencing-as-struggle. But perhaps the major difficulty I >> find is that, in positing Vygotsky's perezhivanie as "a type of meaning" >>> and Vasilyuk's perezhivanie (or experiencing-as-struggle) as >> a "type >>> of activity," it is difficult not to see here a division >> between >>> product and process, a division that then is analytically >> bridged by >>> the addition of a third term, mediation, that should bring >> back the >>> real movement between the product and the process. >>> >>> A different approach involves considering the concrete >> extension of >>> actual living and lived social relations, and look at them as >>> >>> generative phenomena. What is there in the encounter between >> Carla >>> and the child that leads to change? For it is not inside the >> mind, >>> but in real life, in consciousness as the real relation >> between people, that Carla is changed. >>> How is the semantic structure that you nicely present and >> attribute >>> to Carla a product of the social relation between her and >> the child? >>> I think that to rightfully situate perezhivanie as a concept >> in a >>> Vygotskian framework, we ought to address its relation to >> the genetic >>> law of development. >>> >>> There is much more to disentangle, but this is long enough. >> I hope I >>> have succeeded in making clear these ideas. Thanks so much >> for >>> engaging in the discussion! >>> >>> Alfredo >>> >>> ________________________________________ >>> >>> From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>> >>> >>> >>> on behalf of Marc >> Clar? >>> >>> >>> >>> Sent: 02 January 2017 22:14 >>> >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>> >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! >>> >>> Hi, all, and thank you so much, Alfredo, for your kind >> invitation to >>> participate in this discussion. My paper in the MCA special >> issue >>> focuses on a distinction between a type of activity, which I >> argue >>> that is what Vasilyuk called *perezhivanie* (experiencing) >> and a type >>> of semiotic mediator, which I argue that is what Vygotsky, >> in The >>> Problem of the Environment, called *perezhivanie.* I argue, >> following >>> Vasilyuk, that in experiencing activities (Vasilyuk's >> perezhivanie), >>> this type of mediator is profoundly transformed ? in fact, >> that >>> experiencing activities consist of the semiotic >> transformation of this type of mediator. >>> As Veresov and Fleer argue in their commentary, perezhivanie >> (as a >>> type of >>> >>> mediator) is for me a psychological phenomenon, one which is >> of >>> course conceptualized from a specific theoretical framework. >> But the >>> phenomenon is also visible from other theoretical frameworks >> as well, >>> as I mention in the paper. This phenomenon is my main >> interest, and >>> it is from this interest that I arrived at the concept of >> perezhivanie (not the other way around). >>> Now, the phenomenon is that at least emotion, reasoning, and >> volition >>> (formation of conscious purposes) seem to be decisively >> mediated by >>> holistic situational meaning. My current research concern is >> trying >>> to find ways to study and understand how this mediation >> occurs and >>> how these semiotic mediators are transformed and >> distributed. From >>> this view, I think that experiencing activities (Vasilyuk's >>> >>> perezhivanie) may provide a good terrain to study these >> issues >>> (especially regarding the mediation of emotion), as I tried >> to exemplify in the paper. >>> Studying semiotic mediation, however, is of course not easy. >>> >>> Following Vygotsky, I assume that extended discourse is the >>> >>> manifestation of thinking within certain psychological >> conditions >>> (Vygotsky's Thinking and Speech, chapter 7), and I also >> assume the >>> Vygotsky's law of the unity of the structure and function of >> thinking >>> (Vygotsky's Thinking and Speech, chapter 6). From these two >>> >>> assumptions, I propose that meaning (and its functions in >> human >>> activity) can be scientifically studied by structurally >> analyzing the >>> narratives generated by subjects, considering that the >> discourse >>> produced in the narrative is the point of departure of this >> study, >>> but that considerable analytical work must be done to move >> from this >>> discourse to the full characterization of meaning. It is in >> that >>> point where I find useful the work developed by Greimas, the >> usefulness of which I only suggest in the paper. >>> >From this background, I found many interesting ideas and >> questions >>> in the >>> >>> other papers of the special issue. In this first post I will >> propose >>> two of them for possible discussion. The first one was >> raised by >>> Gonz?lez-Rey, when he introduces, in connection with >> perezhivanie, >>> the concepts of personality, and especially, of sense. So, >> which is >>> the conceptual (and-or >>> >>> phenomenal) relation between perezhivanie and sense? >> Gonz?lez-Rey >>> suggests that both concepts are somewhat similar (and >> overcome by the >>> concept of ?subjective sense?); my opinion, partly expressed >> in my >>> commentary, is that perezhivanie is a type of meaning, which >> includes >>> different levels of depth, and that sense corresponds to the >> deepest >>> level of meaning (which can be characterized as a system of >> semic >>> oppositions). Therefore, sense wouldn't be in opposition to >> meaning >>> (as ?a microcosm of human consciousness?, as Kozulin >> remembers in his >>> commentary), although it would be in opposition to >> manifested meaning (the surface level of meaning). >>> The second issue was raised by Roth and Jornet, and I think >> it goes >>> beyond the issue of perezhivanie itself. If I understand >> them well, >>> they argue that Vygotsky's core proposal of cultural >> mediation is >>> influenced by the Cartesian dualism (mind-matter), and that a >>> >>> promising approach to Cultural Psychology would be a >> Spinozist >>> monism. I am actually very interested on the issue of which >>> >>> epistemological position can best substantiate the >> construction of a >>> cultural psychology, and that's why I feel inclined to take >> the >>> opportunity to ask for your opinions about that. About the >> proposal >>> of Roth and Jornet, I have some doubts. First, I don't see >> why >>> Vygotsky's proposals can be seen as dualist (in the >> Cartesian sense) >>> -I suspect that it is because of the analytical >> distinctions?. >>> Anyway, in my understanding, Vygotsky explicitly assumes a >>> >>> materialist monism (for example in The Crisis), and in fact >> he constructs his proposal on mediation upon reflexology, which also >> explicitly assumed a materialist monism (e.g. >>> Sechenov). Would a Spinozist monism be a better point of >> departure? I >>> don't know, in my understanding it is a more idealist >> monism, and I >>> don't clearly see what could be gained. In my opinion, a >> scientific >>> psychology which includes the study of mind is only possible >> if any >>> type of monism is assumed. However, in my view, for a >> scientific >>> psychology, the ontological nature of the world is perhaps >> less >>> important (it is an issue for metaphysics?), and I am >> inclined to assume a neutral monism (e.g. Russell). >>> So from this view, a materialist monism and a Spinozist >> monism >>> wouldn't be so different, so from both views it could be >> assumed that >>> all is of the same nature and all is similarly knowable >> (including >>> mind) [which is the ontological nature of the world and to >> what >>> degree it is knowable are issues that can be left to >> philosophy]. >>> However, in my opinion, this does not mean that, while >> assuming a >>> monism, analytical distinctions cannot be done when studying >> the >>> world. In that sense, I had the impression that Roth and >> Jornet >>> tended to dilute analytical distinctions in the name of >> monism; I >>> repeat that I don't know if I understood them well, but if >> this was >>> the case, in my opinion, analysis would be impossible within >> the new >>> psychology suggested by Roth and Jornet, and, regarding >> perezhivanie, >>> there would be the danger, noted by Vygotsky in The Crisis >> and >>> cautioned by Kozulin in his commentary, that by meaning >> everything, perezhivanie ends by meaning nothing. >>> Best regards and happy new year, >>> >>> Marc. >>> >>> 2017-01-02 9:12 GMT+01:00 Alfredo Jornet Gil< >> a.j.gil@iped.uio.no> : >>> Dear all, >>> >>> I would like to join David, Luisa, Ana, Henry and the >> others to wish >>> you all a Happy New Year! May it be full of joy, peace, >> and opportunity. >>> I also would like to begin the year announcing our first >> ?MCA >>> article discussion, ?although in fact corresponds to the >> last issue >>> of the year >>> >>> we >>> >>> just passed, Issue 4 on Perezhivanie. This is a very >> special >>> *special* issue, not only because its topic has raised >> lots of >>> interest lately in >>> >>> the >>> >>> CHAT community but also because, greatly coordinated by >> Andy Blunden >>> and the rest of the editorial team, the issue takes the >> form of a >>> symposium where authors get the chance to present and >> respond to >>> each others' ideas on the subject. In my view, this >> allows having a >>> rich and >>> >>> multidimensional >>> >>> approach to a subject as important as perezhivanie. >>> >>> Following with the dialogical spirit in which the >> special issue was >>> assembled, we will focus on one lead article, but hoping >> to also >>> engage ideas and insights present in or relevant to other >>> >>> contributions in the issue. ?Marc Clar?'s "Vygotsky and >> Vasilyuk on >>> Perezhivanie: Two Notions and One Word" will be our >> focus. The >>> article very nicely engages the lead work of Vygotsky, >> but also the >>> less known ??(?in educational literature) but totally >> relevant works >>> of psychologist ?F. Vasilyuk and semiotician >>> >>> A. >>> >>> J. Greimas, mobilising a number of key concepts >> including those of >>> semiotic >>> >>> mediation and transformation. >>> >>> ?In addition to Marc, who will soon join us, I have >> encouraged some >>> of >>> >>> the >>> >>> other authors in the special issue to also join as >> "relevant >>> others," if time and circumstances allow them. Let's >> hope that this >>> will help keeping the symposium spirit up. >>> >>> Marc's article is attached to this e-mail and will be >> made open >>> access at the T&F pages as soon as people is back from >> the holidays. >>> The T&F link >>> >>> is >>> >>> this: >>> >>> http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039. >> 2016.1186194 >>> The link to the MCA Forum pages, where we announce our >> discussions >>> and other xmca things, is here:http://lchc.ucsd.edu/MCA/ >>> >>> I wish us all a very productive and interesting >> discussion. >>> Alfredo >>> >> > From mcole@ucsd.edu Sat Jan 7 15:57:00 2017 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2017 15:57:00 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: <1483765928130.37293@iped.uio.no> References: <586ae645.475a620a.84afb.9951@mx.google.com> <25cde5c9-9e15-b7f4-6f4c-18f763423cbc@open.ac.uk> <1483715539761.38866@iped.uio.no> <586fd3be.45da620a.2a730.8da3@mx.google.com> <1483724630007.83825@iped.uio.no> <58703d02.8bc2620a.7ee11.cf9b@mx.google.com> <58706a47.5ba0620a.a5c6a.1799@mx.google.com> <1483765928130.37293@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: Thanks for adding Reijo's paper, Alfredo. Yes, Larry, there are too many papers circulating at once! mike On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 9:11 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > ?The Garrison paper reads best in company of its commentary by Miettinem, > who defends CHAT's dialectical premises. > > Alfredo > > > ------------------------------ > *From:* lpscholar2@gmail.com > *Sent:* 07 January 2017 05:10 > *To:* mike cole; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > *Cc:* Alfredo Jornet Gil > > *Subject:* RE: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie > > > Thanks Mike, > > Will take some time to digest these mutiple documents that are now > circulating around the topics of experience & learning & development and > their relations to perezhivanie. A vital topic to open the new year. > > > > > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > *From: *mike cole > *Sent: *January 6, 2017 5:29 PM > *To: *eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > *Cc: *Alfredo Jornet Gil > *Subject: *[Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie > > > > Here is the Garrison article. A search of the lchc site turned up a > > discussion of his work in 2007. And earlier, with an interruption for > > Garrison Keiler. :-) > > mike > > > > On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 4:57 PM, wrote: > > > > > Alfredo, > > > I have started reading through the article you have attached that you > and > > > Wolf-Michael Roth wrote together. I noticed an article referenced by J. > > > Garrison [An Introduction to Dewey?s Theory of Functional ?trans-action?: > > > An alternative paradigm for Activity Theory] in Mind Culture and Activity > > > 2001. Is this article archived as open access? > > > I believe Garrison may also contribute to my growing understanding of > > > [experience and learning]. You reference this at a point in your paper > > > [page 108] where you are discussing experience is in EXCESS of cognitive > > > construction. [a tremendous excess of experience over intellectual > subject > > > matter]. This is a path worth travrlling along. > > > > > > Sent from Mail for Windows 10 > > > > > > From: Alfredo Jornet Gilthat experience is always in > > > Sent: January 6, 2017 9:43 AM > > > To: lpscholar2@gmail.com; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > Subject: Re: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie > > > > > > Larry, great additions, but why writing "trans/hivanie" when we have a > > > number of resources to be aware of the etymological roots of > perezhivanie? > > > One such resource is in Andy Blunden's article in the special issue. > > > Another is an earlier paper Michael and myself co-authored a few years > ago > > > and which you can find attached. I quote from the paper: > > > > > > "Experience (perezhivanie) in its original sense?in English and Russian > as > > > well as in the French exp?er ience or the German equivalent Erfahr > > > ung?suggests that in contrast to the repetition of something, experience > is > > > related to travel, traversal, peril, risk, and change. The > > > Proto-Indo-European root per(e) -denotes the verbs to try, dare, and > risk, > > > put oneself in danger; as such, it also made it into suchwords as exper > > > iment (Greek pe??rama, experiment) and perilous." > > > > > > Alfredo > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: lpscholar2@gmail.com > > > Sent: 06 January 2017 18:27 > > > To: Alfredo Jornet Gil; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > Subject: RE: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie > > > > > > Rob, and Christopher, and Alfreda, and Marc, > > > This is an interesting reference to Nozick and achieving an experience > > > without struggle. I want to refocus us on how this insight is an > extension > > > to Christopher?s posting. In particular the opening paragraph. The image > of > > > smashing to bits the bricks is wrapped up in the end moment of > > > trans/hivanie. > > > SO the focus on what occurs before this end point central to > Christopher?s > > > question : > > > ?but is this how trans/hivanie works?? > > > AND Christopher answers by focusing on the : > > > ?extended back and forth, the REPEATED back and forth, the > > > (living-through) that seems to be exemplary of trans/hivanie. > > > > > > Marc says it is ?this? phenomena that brought him to trans/hivanie and > not > > > the other way around. > > > What is occurring within the ?repetition? being lived through. > > > As an aside Nozick turned to eastern philosophy from the Indian > > > subcontinent for deeper inspiration. I could add more if interest > warrants > > > (possibly another thread). > > > > > > ALSO, i recommend going to page 27 of Bella?s article (that Peter posted) > > > to get a sense of Vygotsky?s extended repeated (living through) of the > > > Jewish question that he was writing extensively about in 1916. On that > page > > > Bella refers to two articles Vygotsky wrote on this theme. One was in a > > > (literary) mode while the other was written in a (psychological) mode. > > > Trans/hivanie at work implicitly as formative of the later Vygotsky. > > > This topic, as Bella images as spaghetti tangles. In Vygotsky?s own words > > > from 1916 on the incomprehensible riddle-like companion of Jewish > > > history as : > > > > > > ?riddle-like, inexplicability, the MYSTERY of Isreal .... eternal > fellow > > > traveler of the eternal people, the SECRET of the eternity of the Jewish > > > people? > > > > > > To further this strand we should possibly keep distinct from this month?s > > > article. However the theme of ?repetition? that had the mood of profound > > > struggle or at a deeper level a mood of no movement and closed off, is > the > > > process occuring which maybat some point in time erupt as smashing 2016 > to > > > bits and bricks scattering as an act of ?deconstruction? that i believe > can > > > loose the reality of what came before, starting with Bella?s zero stage > > > that is (existential). A time when the person traversing the zero stage > > > should be ?recognized? through moral/ethical care and concern. Not a > > > journey of (mineness) through Heidegger which is a protesting protestant > > > approach, but through mitsein as living-through. > > > I hope my referencing multiple speakers but trying to stay within strands > > > is clear? > > > Perezhivanie as trans/hivanie as Marc says is approached through multiple > > > pluaristic traditions that are psychological, literary, and philosophical > > > and extend through historical consciousness as the living-through > > > repetitive back and forth traversal that INCLUDES as central the PAUSE or > > > MA or INTERVAL or GAP. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > > > From: Alfredo Jornet Gil > > > Sent: January 6, 2017 7:17 AM > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie > > > > > > Rob, how appropriate the thought experiment! > > > Alfredo > > > > > > ________________________________________ > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > on behalf of R.J.S.Parsons > > > Sent: 06 January 2017 15:41 > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: New Year's Perezhivanie > > > > > > In thinking about "experience as struggle", I found myself considering > > > Nozick's thought experiment of the experience machine, which he uses to > > > explore the issue of ethical hedonism.* Consider a machine which could > > > stimulate a person's brain to induce pleasurable experiences that the > > > subject could not distinguish from those he would have apart from the > > > machine. Nozick then asks, if given the choice, would we prefer the > > > machine to real life? (this description from Wikipedia). It strikes me > > > that the experience delivered by the machine is experience without > > > struggle. There is no activity from the subject, meaning making is not > > > necessary, and therefore there is no development. > > > > > > Clara quotes Vygotsky "A perezhivanie is a unit where, on the one hand, > > > in an indivisible state, the environment is represented, i.e. that which > > > is being experienced?a perezhivanie is always related to something which > > > is found outside the person?and on the other hand, what is represented > > > is how I, myself, am experiencing this," - the thought experiment breaks > > > the unit, and in doing so, I think, demonstrates how important its > > > existence as a unit is. > > > > > > *Also brilliantly explored in the "Total Immersion Video game" in Red > > > Dwarf Season 5 episode 6 Back To Reality. > > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2IzX6b1YJHI > > > > > > Rob > > > > > > On 03/01/2017 17:37, Christopher Schuck wrote: > > > > It's an interesting question (about the brick and perezhivanie), partly > > > > because that extended, "living-through", repeated doubling-back process > > > > evoked by the Vygotskian sense of the concept would seem to be at odds > > > with > > > > a single, discrete act of "smashing" that is immediate, forceful and > even > > > > violent. It would suggest that part of what perezhivanie means is > wrapped > > > > up in the symbolic marking of its end - and that this end, when it > comes, > > > > can be forceful. Certainly, the image could not be more unified and > > > > embodying of a particular set of meaningful experiences. But is that > how > > > > perezhivanie works? This leads me to ask: > > > > > > > > 1) what are the problems and contradictions encountered in using > > > particular > > > > metaphors to depict perezhivanie, where perezhivanie is itself so > defined > > > > by imagination and narrativity? Part of this might also be a question > of > > > > what it means to describe and represent one's own perezhivanie > > > > figuratively/narratively (whether to others, or to oneself), as opposed > > > to > > > > living that perezhivanie. Especially if the attempt to > capture/represent > > > > one's own perezhivanie is, perhaps, also central to the living of it? > > > > > > > > 2) What is the nature of the relationship between perezhivanie and > > > force, > > > > either in terms of the internal process or in terms of how it finally > > > > "ends"? (Not to mention, how it begins). It would seem that in both > > > > conceptions discussed in the article there is a certain intensity > > > required. > > > > But does this in some cases require something more explosive - and does > > > > Vasilyuk's conception of perezhivanie as activity speak more to this > > > > possibility? And how do we reconcile this with the less "forceful" > notion > > > > of enduring, revisiting, and working through? > > > > > > > > On Monday, January 2, 2017, mike cole wrote: > > > > > > > >> The pieces of brick thrown up by this political hammering have not yet > > > >> fallen and made the devastation personally experienced by the > > > nation/world. > > > >> > > > >> Still, genuinely, we can wish all of us 7.3 billion well in the new > > > year. > > > >> > > > >> So what do you think chuck, is this a good representation of > > > perezhivanie? > > > >> :-) > > > >> Mike > > > >> > > > >> On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 11:24 AM Charles Bazerman < > > > >> bazerman@education.ucsb.edu> wrote: > > > >> > > > >>> So you think 2017 has any hope of being any better? > > > >>> > > > >>> Chuck > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> ----- Original Message ----- > > > >>> > > > >>> From: mike cole > > > >>> > > > >>> Date: Monday, January 2, 2017 11:01 am > > > >>> > > > >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] New Year's Perezhivanie > > > >>> > > > >>> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>>> With the New Year, as our Russian colleagues put it! > > > >>>> This image forwarded from a friend more or less sums up my > experience > > > >>>> of > > > >>>> the past year. Thought you might find it interesting too. > > > >>>> Vis a vis the discussion of perezhivanie: Does this image provide us > > > >> with > > > >>>> used (re-presented) behavioral evidence of a person undergoing > > > >>> perezhivanie? > > > >>> > > > >>>> Looking forward to the discussion. > > > >>>> Feliz a?o nuevo! > > > >>>> Mike > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From lpscholar2@gmail.com Sat Jan 7 16:25:07 2017 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2017 16:25:07 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! In-Reply-To: <1483820996800.91513@iped.uio.no> References: <1483344752182.40904@iped.uio.no> <1483467423798.57819@iped.uio.no> <1483601196884.31418@iped.uio.no> <5df5e870-3ef8-70d6-0c17-f8647ba17e62@mira.net> , <587124d9.d957620a.4a5a8.bd56@mx.google.com> <1483820996800.91513@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <58718707.4270630a.c8bff.94c9@mx.google.com> Alfredo, i will attempt to stay within ?an experience? and as the ?working over an experience?. If i may, i will borrow your word meaning where you use the word (perfuse) as it helps me listen into David and Andy explore the contrast of ?word? and ?word meaning? as units. On page 113 of your and Roth?s article you focus in on affect. In your words you say?: Affect is neither something separate from the unit nor a factor that influences or characterizes a part of this unit?: It PERFUSES the unit. The unit you refer to is experience/perezivanie. This minimal unit includes all individuals, their social/material setting, and the TRANS-actional relations that BIND them into a whole. I hope this is staying within the bounds of exploring having AN experience as a unit ; -) Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Alfredo Jornet Gil Sent: January 7, 2017 12:24 PM To: Andy Blunden; Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; Larry Purss Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! Larry, all, our arguments in the 2014 address a science education literature in which the constructivist perspective is the leading perspective; We note that the assertion that people learn from experience is everywhere taken for granted but nowhere accounted for. We resort to pragmatist and phenomenological literature along with Vygotsky's insights to point out the need to account for learning as something that cannot be the result of an individual's construction; in experience there is always something in excess of what you intended, and this is a basic feature of doing, of performing. I take that to be your "trans" in the trans/zhivanie word, Larry, which already is denoted in the word PERezhivanie. But I do not wish to move our discussion too far away from Marc's paper and the Perezhivanie special issue. We also risk disengaging many that have not have the privilege we've had to have the time to read so many articles in just few days into the new year. I think we are a point in the discussion where a pretty clear point of agreement/disagreement, and therefore of possibility for growth, has been reached with regard to the view of perezhivanie as "an experience" and as the "working over it". I think that to allow as many as possible to follow, and hopefully also engage, I think it will be helpful to bring the diverse perspectives and theoretical accounts to matter in accounting for some actual material. And there are a number of cases described in the articles, including Marc's case of a teacher, as well as everyday facts, such as those brought by Beth, and in Beth's article... I take the task for myself too, but Saturday morning need to attend to other things! A ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com Sent: 07 January 2017 18:26 To: Andy Blunden; Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; Larry Purss Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! Andy, Peter, i hope the intention to move beyond politeness to struggle with this topic materializes. In this vein i want to introduce exploration of the ?excess? of actual over intended meaning as he sketched his introduction to ?experience?. Citing Dewey, Alfredo says that this excess of actual learning over intended learning INCLUDES what Dewey refers to as ?attitudes? and these ?attitudes? are FUNDAMENTALLY what count in the future. Alfredo and Roth then add this summary statement : There is therefore, a need to theorize experience in terms that do not assume control and rationality as the sine qua non of learning. It also implies a need to develop analytical accounts that retain the ?uncertainty? that is an ?integral part? of human experience. Where are Alfredo and Roth leading us with this sketch of experience? To highlight ?attitudes? that occur in the excess of actual over intended learning? The word ?attitudes? generates images of (atmosphere) and (moods) that ?flow? like cascading waterfalls that can be imaged as (force) or as (receptive). Attitudes that flow to places where they are received within a certain attitude of care and concern. Not as forceful an image as moving only with control and rationality. Describing ?weaker? thought that remains uncertain but that also opens us to the other?s peril and plight. Possibly a post-analytic motion that exceeds the intended by living-through the actual that develops ?attitudes? that are fundamentally what count for the future. Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Andy Blunden Sent: January 7, 2017 5:00 AM To: Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! OK Peter, what you say is all very true I am sure, but it entails conflating activity and action (as mass nouns) and context and mediation, and makes the required distinction much like one could find multiple meanings for the word "and" by listing the different phrases and clauses which can be linked by "and." Andy ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making On 7/01/2017 11:42 PM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > > Let me try to illustrate. > > Reading as mediated action: The cultural-historical > context of reading mediates how one?s attention and > response are channeled in socially constructed ways. So, > in one setting, say at home or reading in the company of > friends, a novel might bring a reader to tears, or invite > readers to share personal stories that parallel those of > the plot lines, or laugh out loud. But another setting, a > formal school or university class, would have historical > values and practices that mute emotional and personal > responses, and promote a more sober, analytic way of > reading and talking that fits with specific historical > critical conventions and genres, and discourages others. > > Reading as mediating action: The act of reading can be > transformational. In reading about an talking about a > character?s actions, a reader might reconsider a value > system, become more sympathetic to real people who > resemble oppressed characters, etc. In other words, > reading a text may serve a mediational process in which > textual ideas and exemplars enable a reader to think > differently. > > *From:*Andy Blunden [mailto:ablunden@mira.net] > *Sent:* Saturday, January 7, 2017 6:28 AM > *To:* Peter Smagorinsky ; eXtended Mind, > Culture, Activity > *Subject:* Re: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > Can you explain in a paragraph or two,. Peter, rather than > asking us all to read 10,000 words to extract an answer? > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > Andy Blunden > http://home.mira.net/~andy > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > > On 7/01/2017 11:23 PM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > > Andy and others, I tried to work out the mediated/mediating question in the area of reading....see if this helps. > > Smagorinsky, P., & O'Donnell-Allen, C. (1998). Reading as mediated and mediating action: Composing meaning for literature through multimedia interpretive texts. Reading Research Quarterly, 33, 198-226. Available athttp://www.petersmagorinsky.net/About/PDF/RRQ/RRQ1998.pdf > > -----Original Message----- > > From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden > > Sent: Friday, January 6, 2017 7:12 PM > > To:xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > I have never understood this supposed distinction, Alfredo, between "mediated activity" and "mediating activity" given that all activity is mediated and all activity mediates. > > Also, could you spell out what you mean by the "tension" > > between perezhivanie as meaning and perezhivanie as struggle. > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > Andy Blunden > > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > On 5/01/2017 6:26 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > > Thanks Marc for your careful response. > > I am familiar to Vygotsky's notion of cultural mediation and I am aware and acknowledge that it was elaborated as a means to overcome dualism, and that it is not analog to a computational approach. > > When I brought the computing analogy, I did so with regard not to the concept of cultural mediation in general, but to the way it can be (and is) deployed analytically. I react to what it seems to me a dichotomy between a "meaning" as something that is static (thereby a form of "representation" or reflection of the relation with the environment instead of?refraction)?? and the experiencing-as-struggling, which is described as?transformation or change. If so, mediation here would seem to be part of a methodological device that first dissects "a type of meaning" from "a type of activity" (or a given state from the process that changes that state), and then unites it by adding the term "mediation." And this may be my misreading, but in that (mis)reading (which perhaps is mostly due to the fact that in your empirical illustration only the initial and end product, i.e., perezhivanie, are described, but not the experiencing-as-struggle, that is, the moving between the two), mediation here seems to do as analytical concept precisely what you were afraid our monism was doing: explaining nothing. Only the end products but not the process of producing perezhivanie are revealed. This may be problematic if one attends to what Veresov argues in the paper I shared yesterday, where he defends the notion of mediation but also specifies that Vygotsky speaks of *mediating activity* (as opposed to *mediated* activity). That is, not mediation by signs as products, but mediating activity as the activity of producing signs (which again is an activity of producing social relations, perhaps what you refer as "holistic meanings"?). What do you think? > > I did not think you were trying to deny the influence of Spinoza, and I do not think we ever said that Perezhivanie was primarily a move from Cartesian Dualism to Monism, as you suggest in your post. I copy and paste from my prior post: "The fact is that Vygotsky was building a theory on the unity of the affect and the intellect that was to be grounded on Spinoza, and what we try to do is to explore how perezhivanie, as a concept being developed during the same period (but not finalised or totally settled!), could be seen from the perspective of the Spinozist Vygotsky." > > I totally believe that bringing the distinction between perezhivanie as meaning, and perezhivanie as struggle, is totally relevant, and Beth Ferholt's vignettes of Where the Wild Things Are do indeed illustrate this. We really need to address this tension, which as Beth's examples and as our own everyday experience shows, is a tension that matters not just to books and to theories but to living persons (children, teachers), a tension that moreover is present and mentioned in all the articles of the symposium. The papers offer different proposals, and I think is so great we have the chance to discuss them! I too, as you, am very interesting in hearing others about the questions you had concerning sense and meaning. > > Alfredo > > From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > on behalf of Marc Clar? > > > > Sent: 04 January 2017 22:31 > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > Thank you very much, Alfredo, for sharing this excellent paper by > > Veresov, and thanks also for your responses, which really helped me to > > better understand your points. My main doubt about your proposal > > was/is caused by the statement that the idea of cultural > > mediation/mediator implies a cartesian dualism. This shocks me > > because, to me, the idea of cultural mediation is absolutely crucial > > (in fact, the keystone) for the construction of a monist (and > > scientific) psychology that does not forget mind ?that is, a cultural > > psychology. From your response, however, I realized that we may be > > approaching the idea of mediation in different ways. I talk of > > mediation and mediators in a quite restricted way. The starting point > > of my understanding of mediation is a dialectical relationship > > (organic, transactional) between the subject and the world (Vygotsky departs from the scheme stimulus-response, from reflexology). > > This relationship, that Vygotsky calls primitive psychological > > functions, would be basically biological. However, in human beings > > this relationship is mediated by cultural means: signs and tools; or > > primary, secondary and terciary artifacts. These cultural means > > reorganize the primitive functions (dialectic S-O relationship), which > > become then higher psychological functions (S-M-O) (see for example, > > The problem of the cultural development of the child, in The Vygotsky > > Reader). Now, the subject, the cultural mediators, and the object form > > an inseparable dialectical unit, so that the subject acts on > > (transforms) the object through the prism of the cultural mediators, > > the object acts on (transforms) the subject also through the prism of > > the cultural mediators, and the cultural means are themselves also > > transformed as a consequence of their mediation in this continuous > > dynamic dialectical tension. Here, for me, it is important the idea > > that the cultural means are as material (if we assume a materialist > > monism) as all the rest of the world; in fact, are parts of the > > material world which become signs or tools (and can be therefore > > socially distributed). This permits the introduction of the scientific > > study of mind-consciousness (as mediating systems of signs), because > > mind is not anymore something immaterial and unobservable, but it is > > as material and observable as the rest of the natural world. It is > > from this view that, for me, the idea of cultural mediation is the > > keystone of a monist psychology that includes mind. Thus, when I speak > > of mediators, I refer to the cultural means which mediate in the S-O > > dialectics; I am especially interested in signs/secondary artifacts. > > Here, it is perhaps necessary to insist that when I talk of studying > > mediators (and their semantic structure), this doesn't mean that they > > are taken out from the activity (the flux of live) in which they > > mediate (since out of activity they are not signs anymore); here, I > > think Vygotsky tries again to overcome another old dichotomy, the > > functionalism-structuralism one. I hope that all this makes also clear the difference between this view and that of computational psychologies (which in general are profoundly and explicitly dualist and not dialectic). > > Back to perezhivanie, I'm not obviously trying to deny the influence > > of Spinoza on Vygotsky's thinking (this is explicit in Vygotsky's > > writings, especially in ?The teaching about emotions?, in the Vol.6 of > > the Collected Works). But I have doubts that Vygotsky's introduction > > of the concept of perezhivanie is to be regarded primarily as a > > movement towards monism (from a previous cartesian dualism), and that > > this movement questions the concept of cultural mediation. Instead, > > and I think that this is in line with some of Gonz?lez-Rey > > observations in his paper, my impression is that the introduction of > > the concept of perezhivanie responds more to a movement (a further > > step) towards holism (something that, in my understanding, can also be > > found in Spinoza). Thus, I think that the word meaning is still the > > unit of analysis in the last Vygotsky -and therefore, the idea of > > cultural mediation is still crucial (in fact, in The problem of the > > environment, he connects the concept of perezhivanie, which has just > > introduced, to the development of word meaning [p.345-346, also cited > > in my paper]). However, in my view, in the last Vygotsky the focus is > > not anymore primarily on the word-meaning as formed for things (or > > collections of things, as in the ontogenetic research with Sakharov), but the focus is now in the formation of meaning for holistic situations. > > Best regards, > > Marc. > > 2017-01-03 19:16 GMT+01:00 Alfredo Jornet Gil : > > Hi Marc, all, > > thanks for joining and for your interesting work, which I follow > > since I became aware of it. I appreciate the way in your paper you > > show careful and honest attention to the texts of the authors > > involved, but perhaps most of all I appreciate that the paper makes > > the transformational dimension related to struggle and change > > salient, a dimension all papers deemed central to perezhivanie. And I > > have learned more about Vasilyuk by reading your paper. But I also > > see that we have approached the question of perezhivanie differently > > and I think that addressing the questions that you raise concerning > > our article may be a good way to both respond and discuss your paper. > > I am aware that our use of the term monism may be problematic to > > some, and N. Veresov, who has recently written about this (see > > attached article), warns against the dangers of simply moving from > > dualism into an undifferentiating monism that relativizes everything, > > making development un-studiable. This seems to be the way in which > > you have understood our argument, and of course this is not what we are or want to be doing. > > Probably many will think that *dialectical materialism* rather than > > monism is the proper term, and I could agree with them; we do in fact > > use dialectical materialism there and elsewhere. Yet, we wanted to > > emphasise the Spinozist influence (an influence that also runs > > through Marx) and so we found it appropriate to use the term monism, > > a term that Vygotsky uses before arguing that Spinoza "develops an essentially materialistic view" > > (Collected Works, Vol. 6, p. 124). For us, the aim is working out > > ways to empirically examine and formulate problems in ways that do > > not reify a mind-body dualism. > > Although overcoming dualism is foundational to the CHAT paradigm, I > > would however not say that Vygotsky did get to solve all of the > > problems that Cartesian dualism had created for psychology, even > > though he recognised those problems brilliantly as early as in the > > "Crisis". It should suffice to cite Vygotsky's own remarks, which we quote in the paper (and which A.N. > > Leont'ev mentions in the introduction to the collected works), where > > Vygotsky explicitly critiques some of his own prior ideas for failing > > to overcome dualism. We agree with those who, like F. G. Rey, see > > Vygotsky's project as a developing rather than as a finalised one. > > The fact is that Vygotsky was building a theory on the unity of the > > affect and the intellect that was to be grounded on Spinoza, and what > > we try to do is to explore how perezhivanie, as a concept being > > developed during the same period (but not finalised or totally > > settled!), could be seen from the perspective of the Spinozist Vygotsky. > > As you note, in our article we argue that, if one takes the Spinozist > > one-substance approach, classical concepts used in non-classical > > psychology, at least in the way they are commonly used in the current > > literature, should be revised. One such concept is mediation. And I > > personally do not have much of a problem when mediation is used to > > denote the fundamental fact that every thing exists always through > > *another*, never in and of itself. But I do think that it is > > problematic to identify MEDIATORS, such as "a meaning", as a means to > > account for or explain developmental processes and learning events, > > precisely because it is there, at least in my view, that dualism creeps in. > > For example, I find it paradoxical that you are concerned that our > > monist approach risks turning perezhivanie into a useless category > > because it may be used to explain everything and nothing, and yet you > > do not seem to have a problem using the term mediation to account for > > the transformation of perezhivanie without clearly elaborating on how > > mediation does change anything or what it looks like as a real > > process. How is it different saying that a perezhivanie mediates the > > experiencing-as-struggle from simply saying that it "affects" or > > "determines" it? Indeed, if perezhivanie mediates > > experiencing-as-struggle, does not experiencing-as-struglgle too > > mediate perezhivanie? And do not both may be said to mediate development, or development mediate them? Is not this explaining everything and nothing? > > I do believe you can argue that there is a difference between > > mediation and classical psychology's cause-effect relations, but to > > show this you need to dig into the dialectical underpinnings of the > > theory. In your paper, you offer a nice analysis of a lovely case of > > a teacher who, in dealing with a challenge with one of her students, > > changes her perezhivanie. I think you can rightly argue that there is > > a semiotic transformation, and I fully support your statement that by > > studying discourse we can empirically approach questions of > > psychological development. The contradictions you show as being > > involved and resolved resonate really well with what I experience as > > a parent or as a teacher in the classroom. Yet, without unpacking > > what this "mediation" taking place between one perezhivanie and the > > next one means as a concrete and real, the same analysis could be done taking an information processing approach: > > there is an situation that is processed (represented?) in one way, > > which then leads to a (cognitive) dissonance, and then there is a > > cognitive resolution by means of which the situation is presented > > differently in consciousness (indeed, when seen in this way, the term > > perezhivanie and the term "representation" become almost > > indistinguishable). How is mediation, as an analytical concept, > > helping here? And most importantly to the question of perezhivanie, > > how is this analysis going to show the internal connection between > > intellect and affect that Vygotsky formulates as constitutive of the notion of perezhivanie? > > I believe that the key lies in understanding what Vygotsky means when > > he says that perezhivanie is a unit of analysis. I will not repeat > > here what already is written in at least a couple of the articles in > > the special issue (Blunden, ours), that is the difference between > > analysis by elements and unit analysis (Vygotsky 1987). A unit > > analysis approach is consistent with Spinoza, for whom cause-effect > > explanations were not adequate, requiring instead an understanding of > > self-development, perezhivanie as a kernel cell for the development > > of personality. And I think you may be after this in your article in > > suggesting a form of continuous movement from perezhivanie to > > experiencing-as-struggle. But perhaps the major difficulty I find is that, in positing Vygotsky's perezhivanie as "a type of meaning" > > and Vasilyuk's perezhivanie (or experiencing-as-struggle) as a "type > > of activity," it is difficult not to see here a division between > > product and process, a division that then is analytically bridged by > > the addition of a third term, mediation, that should bring back the > > real movement between the product and the process. > > A different approach involves considering the concrete extension of > > actual living and lived social relations, and look at them as > > generative phenomena. What is there in the encounter between Carla > > and the child that leads to change? For it is not inside the mind, > > but in real life, in consciousness as the real relation between people, that Carla is changed. > > How is the semantic structure that you nicely present and attribute > > to Carla a product of the social relation between her and the child? > > I think that to rightfully situate perezhivanie as a concept in a > > Vygotskian framework, we ought to address its relation to the genetic > > law of development. > > There is much more to disentangle, but this is long enough. I hope I > > have succeeded in making clear these ideas. Thanks so much for > > engaging in the discussion! > > Alfredo > > ________________________________________ > > From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > on behalf of Marc Clar? > > > > > Sent: 02 January 2017 22:14 > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > Hi, all, and thank you so much, Alfredo, for your kind invitation to > > participate in this discussion. My paper in the MCA special issue > > focuses on a distinction between a type of activity, which I argue > > that is what Vasilyuk called *perezhivanie* (experiencing) and a type > > of semiotic mediator, which I argue that is what Vygotsky, in The > > Problem of the Environment, called *perezhivanie.* I argue, following > > Vasilyuk, that in experiencing activities (Vasilyuk's perezhivanie), > > this type of mediator is profoundly transformed ? in fact, that > > experiencing activities consist of the semiotic transformation of this type of mediator. > > As Veresov and Fleer argue in their commentary, perezhivanie (as a > > type of > > mediator) is for me a psychological phenomenon, one which is of > > course conceptualized from a specific theoretical framework. But the > > phenomenon is also visible from other theoretical frameworks as well, > > as I mention in the paper. This phenomenon is my main interest, and > > it is from this interest that I arrived at the concept of perezhivanie (not the other way around). > > Now, the phenomenon is that at least emotion, reasoning, and volition > > (formation of conscious purposes) seem to be decisively mediated by > > holistic situational meaning. My current research concern is trying > > to find ways to study and understand how this mediation occurs and > > how these semiotic mediators are transformed and distributed. From > > this view, I think that experiencing activities (Vasilyuk's > > perezhivanie) may provide a good terrain to study these issues > > (especially regarding the mediation of emotion), as I tried to exemplify in the paper. > > Studying semiotic mediation, however, is of course not easy. > > Following Vygotsky, I assume that extended discourse is the > > manifestation of thinking within certain psychological conditions > > (Vygotsky's Thinking and Speech, chapter 7), and I also assume the > > Vygotsky's law of the unity of the structure and function of thinking > > (Vygotsky's Thinking and Speech, chapter 6). From these two > > assumptions, I propose that meaning (and its functions in human > > activity) can be scientifically studied by structurally analyzing the > > narratives generated by subjects, considering that the discourse > > produced in the narrative is the point of departure of this study, > > but that considerable analytical work must be done to move from this > > discourse to the full characterization of meaning. It is in that > > point where I find useful the work developed by Greimas, the usefulness of which I only suggest in the paper. > > >From this background, I found many interesting ideas and questions > > in the > > other papers of the special issue. In this first post I will propose > > two of them for possible discussion. The first one was raised by > > Gonz?lez-Rey, when he introduces, in connection with perezhivanie, > > the concepts of personality, and especially, of sense. So, which is > > the conceptual (and-or > > phenomenal) relation between perezhivanie and sense? Gonz?lez-Rey > > suggests that both concepts are somewhat similar (and overcome by the > > concept of ?subjective sense?); my opinion, partly expressed in my > > commentary, is that perezhivanie is a type of meaning, which includes > > different levels of depth, and that sense corresponds to the deepest > > level of meaning (which can be characterized as a system of semic > > oppositions). Therefore, sense wouldn't be in opposition to meaning > > (as ?a microcosm of human consciousness?, as Kozulin remembers in his > > commentary), although it would be in opposition to manifested meaning (the surface level of meaning). > > The second issue was raised by Roth and Jornet, and I think it goes > > beyond the issue of perezhivanie itself. If I understand them well, > > they argue that Vygotsky's core proposal of cultural mediation is > > influenced by the Cartesian dualism (mind-matter), and that a > > promising approach to Cultural Psychology would be a Spinozist > > monism. I am actually very interested on the issue of which > > epistemological position can best substantiate the construction of a > > cultural psychology, and that's why I feel inclined to take the > > opportunity to ask for your opinions about that. About the proposal > > of Roth and Jornet, I have some doubts. First, I don't see why > > Vygotsky's proposals can be seen as dualist (in the Cartesian sense) > > -I suspect that it is because of the analytical distinctions?. > > Anyway, in my understanding, Vygotsky explicitly assumes a > > materialist monism (for example in The Crisis), and in fact he constructs his proposal on mediation upon reflexology, which also explicitly assumed a materialist monism (e.g. > > Sechenov). Would a Spinozist monism be a better point of departure? I > > don't know, in my understanding it is a more idealist monism, and I > > don't clearly see what could be gained. In my opinion, a scientific > > psychology which includes the study of mind is only possible if any > > type of monism is assumed. However, in my view, for a scientific > > psychology, the ontological nature of the world is perhaps less > > important (it is an issue for metaphysics?), and I am inclined to assume a neutral monism (e.g. Russell). > > So from this view, a materialist monism and a Spinozist monism > > wouldn't be so different, so from both views it could be assumed that > > all is of the same nature and all is similarly knowable (including > > mind) [which is the ontological nature of the world and to what > > degree it is knowable are issues that can be left to philosophy]. > > However, in my opinion, this does not mean that, while assuming a > > monism, analytical distinctions cannot be done when studying the > > world. In that sense, I had the impression that Roth and Jornet > > tended to dilute analytical distinctions in the name of monism; I > > repeat that I don't know if I understood them well, but if this was > > the case, in my opinion, analysis would be impossible within the new > > psychology suggested by Roth and Jornet, and, regarding perezhivanie, > > there would be the danger, noted by Vygotsky in The Crisis and > > cautioned by Kozulin in his commentary, that by meaning everything, perezhivanie ends by meaning nothing. > > Best regards and happy new year, > > Marc. > > 2017-01-02 9:12 GMT+01:00 Alfredo Jornet Gil : > > Dear all, > > I would like to join David, Luisa, Ana, Henry and the others to wish > > you all a Happy New Year! May it be full of joy, peace, and opportunity. > > I also would like to begin the year announcing our first ?MCA > > article discussion, ?although in fact corresponds to the last issue > > of the year > > we > > just passed, Issue 4 on Perezhivanie. This is a very special > > *special* issue, not only because its topic has raised lots of > > interest lately in > > the > > CHAT community but also because, greatly coordinated by Andy Blunden > > and the rest of the editorial team, the issue takes the form of a > > symposium where authors get the chance to present and respond to > > each others' ideas on the subject. In my view, this allows having a > > rich and > > multidimensional > > approach to a subject as important as perezhivanie. > > Following with the dialogical spirit in which the special issue was > > assembled, we will focus on one lead article, but hoping to also > > engage ideas and insights present in or relevant to other > > contributions in the issue. ?Marc Clar?'s "Vygotsky and Vasilyuk on > > Perezhivanie: Two Notions and One Word" will be our focus. The > > article very nicely engages the lead work of Vygotsky, but also the > > less known ??(?in educational literature) but totally relevant works > > of psychologist ?F. Vasilyuk and semiotician > > A. > > J. Greimas, mobilising a number of key concepts including those of > > semiotic > > mediation and transformation. > > ?In addition to Marc, who will soon join us, I have encouraged some > > of > > the > > other authors in the special issue to also join as "relevant > > others," if time and circumstances allow them. Let's hope that this > > will help keeping the symposium spirit up. > > Marc's article is attached to this e-mail and will be made open > > access at the T&F pages as soon as people is back from the holidays. > > The T&F link > > is > > this: > > http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039.2016.1186194 > > The link to the MCA Forum pages, where we announce our discussions > > and other xmca things, is here:http://lchc.ucsd.edu/MCA/ > > I wish us all a very productive and interesting discussion. > > Alfredo > From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Sat Jan 7 16:42:56 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2017 00:42:56 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! In-Reply-To: <58718707.4270630a.c8bff.94c9@mx.google.com> References: <1483344752182.40904@iped.uio.no> <1483467423798.57819@iped.uio.no> <1483601196884.31418@iped.uio.no> <5df5e870-3ef8-70d6-0c17-f8647ba17e62@mira.net> , <587124d9.d957620a.4a5a8.bd56@mx.google.com> <1483820996800.91513@iped.uio.no>, <58718707.4270630a.c8bff.94c9@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <1483836706132.31367@iped.uio.no> Thanks Larry; I also think our current understanding as elaborated in the MCA 2016 special issue is more nuanced; ?and less susceptible of Marc's critique of it becoming an undifferentiated whole that becomes un-studiable. Alfredo ________________________________ From: lpscholar2@gmail.com Sent: 08 January 2017 01:25 To: Alfredo Jornet Gil; Andy Blunden; Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; Larry Purss Subject: RE: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! Alfredo, i will attempt to stay within ?an experience? and as the ?working over an experience?. If i may, i will borrow your word meaning where you use the word (perfuse) as it helps me listen into David and Andy explore the contrast of ?word? and ?word meaning? as units. On page 113 of your and Roth?s article you focus in on affect. In your words you say : Affect is neither something separate from the unit nor a factor that influences or characterizes a part of this unit : It PERFUSES the unit. The unit you refer to is experience/perezivanie. This minimal unit includes all individuals, their social/material setting, and the TRANS-actional relations that BIND them into a whole. I hope this is staying within the bounds of exploring having AN experience as a unit ; -) Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Alfredo Jornet Gil Sent: January 7, 2017 12:24 PM To: Andy Blunden; Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; Larry Purss Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! Larry, all, our arguments in the 2014 address a science education literature in which the constructivist perspective is the leading perspective; We note that the assertion that people learn from experience is everywhere taken for granted but nowhere accounted for. We resort to pragmatist and phenomenological literature along with Vygotsky's insights to point out the need to account for learning as something that cannot be the result of an individual's construction; in experience there is always something in excess of what you intended, and this is a basic feature of doing, of performing. I take that to be your "trans" in the trans/zhivanie word, Larry, which already is denoted in the word PERezhivanie. But I do not wish to move our discussion too far away from Marc's paper and the Perezhivanie special issue. We also risk disengaging many that have not have the privilege we've had to have the time to read so many articles in just few days into the new year. I think we are a point in the discussion where a pretty clear point of agreement/disagreement, and therefore of possibility for growth, has been reached with regard to the view of perezhivanie as "an experience" and as the "working over it". I think that to allow as many as possible to follow, and hopefully also engage, I think it will be helpful to bring the diverse perspectives and theoretical accounts to matter in accounting for some actual material. And there are a number of cases described in the articles, including Marc's case of a teacher, as well as everyday facts, such as those brought by Beth, and in Beth's article... I take the task for myself too, but Saturday morning need to attend to other things! A ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com Sent: 07 January 2017 18:26 To: Andy Blunden; Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; Larry Purss Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! Andy, Peter, i hope the intention to move beyond politeness to struggle with this topic materializes. In this vein i want to introduce exploration of the ?excess? of actual over intended meaning as he sketched his introduction to ?experience?. Citing Dewey, Alfredo says that this excess of actual learning over intended learning INCLUDES what Dewey refers to as ?attitudes? and these ?attitudes? are FUNDAMENTALLY what count in the future. Alfredo and Roth then add this summary statement : There is therefore, a need to theorize experience in terms that do not assume control and rationality as the sine qua non of learning. It also implies a need to develop analytical accounts that retain the ?uncertainty? that is an ?integral part? of human experience. Where are Alfredo and Roth leading us with this sketch of experience? To highlight ?attitudes? that occur in the excess of actual over intended learning? The word ?attitudes? generates images of (atmosphere) and (moods) that ?flow? like cascading waterfalls that can be imaged as (force) or as (receptive). Attitudes that flow to places where they are received within a certain attitude of care and concern. Not as forceful an image as moving only with control and rationality. Describing ?weaker? thought that remains uncertain but that also opens us to the other?s peril and plight. Possibly a post-analytic motion that exceeds the intended by living-through the actual that develops ?attitudes? that are fundamentally what count for the future. Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Andy Blunden Sent: January 7, 2017 5:00 AM To: Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! OK Peter, what you say is all very true I am sure, but it entails conflating activity and action (as mass nouns) and context and mediation, and makes the required distinction much like one could find multiple meanings for the word "and" by listing the different phrases and clauses which can be linked by "and." Andy ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making On 7/01/2017 11:42 PM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > > Let me try to illustrate. > > Reading as mediated action: The cultural-historical > context of reading mediates how one?s attention and > response are channeled in socially constructed ways. So, > in one setting, say at home or reading in the company of > friends, a novel might bring a reader to tears, or invite > readers to share personal stories that parallel those of > the plot lines, or laugh out loud. But another setting, a > formal school or university class, would have historical > values and practices that mute emotional and personal > responses, and promote a more sober, analytic way of > reading and talking that fits with specific historical > critical conventions and genres, and discourages others. > > Reading as mediating action: The act of reading can be > transformational. In reading about an talking about a > character?s actions, a reader might reconsider a value > system, become more sympathetic to real people who > resemble oppressed characters, etc. In other words, > reading a text may serve a mediational process in which > textual ideas and exemplars enable a reader to think > differently. > > *From:*Andy Blunden [mailto:ablunden@mira.net] > *Sent:* Saturday, January 7, 2017 6:28 AM > *To:* Peter Smagorinsky ; eXtended Mind, > Culture, Activity > *Subject:* Re: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > Can you explain in a paragraph or two,. Peter, rather than > asking us all to read 10,000 words to extract an answer? > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > Andy Blunden > http://home.mira.net/~andy > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > > On 7/01/2017 11:23 PM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > > Andy and others, I tried to work out the mediated/mediating question in the area of reading....see if this helps. > > Smagorinsky, P., & O'Donnell-Allen, C. (1998). Reading as mediated and mediating action: Composing meaning for literature through multimedia interpretive texts. Reading Research Quarterly, 33, 198-226. Available athttp://www.petersmagorinsky.net/About/PDF/RRQ/RRQ1998.pdf > > -----Original Message----- > > From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden > > Sent: Friday, January 6, 2017 7:12 PM > > To:xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > I have never understood this supposed distinction, Alfredo, between "mediated activity" and "mediating activity" given that all activity is mediated and all activity mediates. > > Also, could you spell out what you mean by the "tension" > > between perezhivanie as meaning and perezhivanie as struggle. > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > Andy Blunden > > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > On 5/01/2017 6:26 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > > Thanks Marc for your careful response. > > I am familiar to Vygotsky's notion of cultural mediation and I am aware and acknowledge that it was elaborated as a means to overcome dualism, and that it is not analog to a computational approach. > > When I brought the computing analogy, I did so with regard not to the concept of cultural mediation in general, but to the way it can be (and is) deployed analytically. I react to what it seems to me a dichotomy between a "meaning" as something that is static (thereby a form of "representation" or reflection of the relation with the environment instead of?refraction)?? and the experiencing-as-struggling, which is described as?transformation or change. If so, mediation here would seem to be part of a methodological device that first dissects "a type of meaning" from "a type of activity" (or a given state from the process that changes that state), and then unites it by adding the term "mediation." And this may be my misreading, but in that (mis)reading (which perhaps is mostly due to the fact that in your empirical illustration only the initial and end product, i.e., perezhivanie, are described, but not the experiencing-as-struggle, that is, the moving between the two), mediation here seems to do as analytical concept precisely what you were afraid our monism was doing: explaining nothing. Only the end products but not the process of producing perezhivanie are revealed. This may be problematic if one attends to what Veresov argues in the paper I shared yesterday, where he defends the notion of mediation but also specifies that Vygotsky speaks of *mediating activity* (as opposed to *mediated* activity). That is, not mediation by signs as products, but mediating activity as the activity of producing signs (which again is an activity of producing social relations, perhaps what you refer as "holistic meanings"?). What do you think? > > I did not think you were trying to deny the influence of Spinoza, and I do not think we ever said that Perezhivanie was primarily a move from Cartesian Dualism to Monism, as you suggest in your post. I copy and paste from my prior post: "The fact is that Vygotsky was building a theory on the unity of the affect and the intellect that was to be grounded on Spinoza, and what we try to do is to explore how perezhivanie, as a concept being developed during the same period (but not finalised or totally settled!), could be seen from the perspective of the Spinozist Vygotsky." > > I totally believe that bringing the distinction between perezhivanie as meaning, and perezhivanie as struggle, is totally relevant, and Beth Ferholt's vignettes of Where the Wild Things Are do indeed illustrate this. We really need to address this tension, which as Beth's examples and as our own everyday experience shows, is a tension that matters not just to books and to theories but to living persons (children, teachers), a tension that moreover is present and mentioned in all the articles of the symposium. The papers offer different proposals, and I think is so great we have the chance to discuss them! I too, as you, am very interesting in hearing others about the questions you had concerning sense and meaning. > > Alfredo > > From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > on behalf of Marc Clar? > > > > Sent: 04 January 2017 22:31 > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > Thank you very much, Alfredo, for sharing this excellent paper by > > Veresov, and thanks also for your responses, which really helped me to > > better understand your points. My main doubt about your proposal > > was/is caused by the statement that the idea of cultural > > mediation/mediator implies a cartesian dualism. This shocks me > > because, to me, the idea of cultural mediation is absolutely crucial > > (in fact, the keystone) for the construction of a monist (and > > scientific) psychology that does not forget mind ?that is, a cultural > > psychology. From your response, however, I realized that we may be > > approaching the idea of mediation in different ways. I talk of > > mediation and mediators in a quite restricted way. The starting point > > of my understanding of mediation is a dialectical relationship > > (organic, transactional) between the subject and the world (Vygotsky departs from the scheme stimulus-response, from reflexology). > > This relationship, that Vygotsky calls primitive psychological > > functions, would be basically biological. However, in human beings > > this relationship is mediated by cultural means: signs and tools; or > > primary, secondary and terciary artifacts. These cultural means > > reorganize the primitive functions (dialectic S-O relationship), which > > become then higher psychological functions (S-M-O) (see for example, > > The problem of the cultural development of the child, in The Vygotsky > > Reader). Now, the subject, the cultural mediators, and the object form > > an inseparable dialectical unit, so that the subject acts on > > (transforms) the object through the prism of the cultural mediators, > > the object acts on (transforms) the subject also through the prism of > > the cultural mediators, and the cultural means are themselves also > > transformed as a consequence of their mediation in this continuous > > dynamic dialectical tension. Here, for me, it is important the idea > > that the cultural means are as material (if we assume a materialist > > monism) as all the rest of the world; in fact, are parts of the > > material world which become signs or tools (and can be therefore > > socially distributed). This permits the introduction of the scientific > > study of mind-consciousness (as mediating systems of signs), because > > mind is not anymore something immaterial and unobservable, but it is > > as material and observable as the rest of the natural world. It is > > from this view that, for me, the idea of cultural mediation is the > > keystone of a monist psychology that includes mind. Thus, when I speak > > of mediators, I refer to the cultural means which mediate in the S-O > > dialectics; I am especially interested in signs/secondary artifacts. > > Here, it is perhaps necessary to insist that when I talk of studying > > mediators (and their semantic structure), this doesn't mean that they > > are taken out from the activity (the flux of live) in which they > > mediate (since out of activity they are not signs anymore); here, I > > think Vygotsky tries again to overcome another old dichotomy, the > > functionalism-structuralism one. I hope that all this makes also clear the difference between this view and that of computational psychologies (which in general are profoundly and explicitly dualist and not dialectic). > > Back to perezhivanie, I'm not obviously trying to deny the influence > > of Spinoza on Vygotsky's thinking (this is explicit in Vygotsky's > > writings, especially in ?The teaching about emotions?, in the Vol.6 of > > the Collected Works). But I have doubts that Vygotsky's introduction > > of the concept of perezhivanie is to be regarded primarily as a > > movement towards monism (from a previous cartesian dualism), and that > > this movement questions the concept of cultural mediation. Instead, > > and I think that this is in line with some of Gonz?lez-Rey > > observations in his paper, my impression is that the introduction of > > the concept of perezhivanie responds more to a movement (a further > > step) towards holism (something that, in my understanding, can also be > > found in Spinoza). Thus, I think that the word meaning is still the > > unit of analysis in the last Vygotsky -and therefore, the idea of > > cultural mediation is still crucial (in fact, in The problem of the > > environment, he connects the concept of perezhivanie, which has just > > introduced, to the development of word meaning [p.345-346, also cited > > in my paper]). However, in my view, in the last Vygotsky the focus is > > not anymore primarily on the word-meaning as formed for things (or > > collections of things, as in the ontogenetic research with Sakharov), but the focus is now in the formation of meaning for holistic situations. > > Best regards, > > Marc. > > 2017-01-03 19:16 GMT+01:00 Alfredo Jornet Gil : > > Hi Marc, all, > > thanks for joining and for your interesting work, which I follow > > since I became aware of it. I appreciate the way in your paper you > > show careful and honest attention to the texts of the authors > > involved, but perhaps most of all I appreciate that the paper makes > > the transformational dimension related to struggle and change > > salient, a dimension all papers deemed central to perezhivanie. And I > > have learned more about Vasilyuk by reading your paper. But I also > > see that we have approached the question of perezhivanie differently > > and I think that addressing the questions that you raise concerning > > our article may be a good way to both respond and discuss your paper. > > I am aware that our use of the term monism may be problematic to > > some, and N. Veresov, who has recently written about this (see > > attached article), warns against the dangers of simply moving from > > dualism into an undifferentiating monism that relativizes everything, > > making development un-studiable. This seems to be the way in which > > you have understood our argument, and of course this is not what we are or want to be doing. > > Probably many will think that *dialectical materialism* rather than > > monism is the proper term, and I could agree with them; we do in fact > > use dialectical materialism there and elsewhere. Yet, we wanted to > > emphasise the Spinozist influence (an influence that also runs > > through Marx) and so we found it appropriate to use the term monism, > > a term that Vygotsky uses before arguing that Spinoza "develops an essentially materialistic view" > > (Collected Works, Vol. 6, p. 124). For us, the aim is working out > > ways to empirically examine and formulate problems in ways that do > > not reify a mind-body dualism. > > Although overcoming dualism is foundational to the CHAT paradigm, I > > would however not say that Vygotsky did get to solve all of the > > problems that Cartesian dualism had created for psychology, even > > though he recognised those problems brilliantly as early as in the > > "Crisis". It should suffice to cite Vygotsky's own remarks, which we quote in the paper (and which A.N. > > Leont'ev mentions in the introduction to the collected works), where > > Vygotsky explicitly critiques some of his own prior ideas for failing > > to overcome dualism. We agree with those who, like F. G. Rey, see > > Vygotsky's project as a developing rather than as a finalised one. > > The fact is that Vygotsky was building a theory on the unity of the > > affect and the intellect that was to be grounded on Spinoza, and what > > we try to do is to explore how perezhivanie, as a concept being > > developed during the same period (but not finalised or totally > > settled!), could be seen from the perspective of the Spinozist Vygotsky. > > As you note, in our article we argue that, if one takes the Spinozist > > one-substance approach, classical concepts used in non-classical > > psychology, at least in the way they are commonly used in the current > > literature, should be revised. One such concept is mediation. And I > > personally do not have much of a problem when mediation is used to > > denote the fundamental fact that every thing exists always through > > *another*, never in and of itself. But I do think that it is > > problematic to identify MEDIATORS, such as "a meaning", as a means to > > account for or explain developmental processes and learning events, > > precisely because it is there, at least in my view, that dualism creeps in. > > For example, I find it paradoxical that you are concerned that our > > monist approach risks turning perezhivanie into a useless category > > because it may be used to explain everything and nothing, and yet you > > do not seem to have a problem using the term mediation to account for > > the transformation of perezhivanie without clearly elaborating on how > > mediation does change anything or what it looks like as a real > > process. How is it different saying that a perezhivanie mediates the > > experiencing-as-struggle from simply saying that it "affects" or > > "determines" it? Indeed, if perezhivanie mediates > > experiencing-as-struggle, does not experiencing-as-struglgle too > > mediate perezhivanie? And do not both may be said to mediate development, or development mediate them? Is not this explaining everything and nothing? > > I do believe you can argue that there is a difference between > > mediation and classical psychology's cause-effect relations, but to > > show this you need to dig into the dialectical underpinnings of the > > theory. In your paper, you offer a nice analysis of a lovely case of > > a teacher who, in dealing with a challenge with one of her students, > > changes her perezhivanie. I think you can rightly argue that there is > > a semiotic transformation, and I fully support your statement that by > > studying discourse we can empirically approach questions of > > psychological development. The contradictions you show as being > > involved and resolved resonate really well with what I experience as > > a parent or as a teacher in the classroom. Yet, without unpacking > > what this "mediation" taking place between one perezhivanie and the > > next one means as a concrete and real, the same analysis could be done taking an information processing approach: > > there is an situation that is processed (represented?) in one way, > > which then leads to a (cognitive) dissonance, and then there is a > > cognitive resolution by means of which the situation is presented > > differently in consciousness (indeed, when seen in this way, the term > > perezhivanie and the term "representation" become almost > > indistinguishable). How is mediation, as an analytical concept, > > helping here? And most importantly to the question of perezhivanie, > > how is this analysis going to show the internal connection between > > intellect and affect that Vygotsky formulates as constitutive of the notion of perezhivanie? > > I believe that the key lies in understanding what Vygotsky means when > > he says that perezhivanie is a unit of analysis. I will not repeat > > here what already is written in at least a couple of the articles in > > the special issue (Blunden, ours), that is the difference between > > analysis by elements and unit analysis (Vygotsky 1987). A unit > > analysis approach is consistent with Spinoza, for whom cause-effect > > explanations were not adequate, requiring instead an understanding of > > self-development, perezhivanie as a kernel cell for the development > > of personality. And I think you may be after this in your article in > > suggesting a form of continuous movement from perezhivanie to > > experiencing-as-struggle. But perhaps the major difficulty I find is that, in positing Vygotsky's perezhivanie as "a type of meaning" > > and Vasilyuk's perezhivanie (or experiencing-as-struggle) as a "type > > of activity," it is difficult not to see here a division between > > product and process, a division that then is analytically bridged by > > the addition of a third term, mediation, that should bring back the > > real movement between the product and the process. > > A different approach involves considering the concrete extension of > > actual living and lived social relations, and look at them as > > generative phenomena. What is there in the encounter between Carla > > and the child that leads to change? For it is not inside the mind, > > but in real life, in consciousness as the real relation between people, that Carla is changed. > > How is the semantic structure that you nicely present and attribute > > to Carla a product of the social relation between her and the child? > > I think that to rightfully situate perezhivanie as a concept in a > > Vygotskian framework, we ought to address its relation to the genetic > > law of development. > > There is much more to disentangle, but this is long enough. I hope I > > have succeeded in making clear these ideas. Thanks so much for > > engaging in the discussion! > > Alfredo > > ________________________________________ > > From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > on behalf of Marc Clar? > > > > > Sent: 02 January 2017 22:14 > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > Hi, all, and thank you so much, Alfredo, for your kind invitation to > > participate in this discussion. My paper in the MCA special issue > > focuses on a distinction between a type of activity, which I argue > > that is what Vasilyuk called *perezhivanie* (experiencing) and a type > > of semiotic mediator, which I argue that is what Vygotsky, in The > > Problem of the Environment, called *perezhivanie.* I argue, following > > Vasilyuk, that in experiencing activities (Vasilyuk's perezhivanie), > > this type of mediator is profoundly transformed ? in fact, that > > experiencing activities consist of the semiotic transformation of this type of mediator. > > As Veresov and Fleer argue in their commentary, perezhivanie (as a > > type of > > mediator) is for me a psychological phenomenon, one which is of > > course conceptualized from a specific theoretical framework. But the > > phenomenon is also visible from other theoretical frameworks as well, > > as I mention in the paper. This phenomenon is my main interest, and > > it is from this interest that I arrived at the concept of perezhivanie (not the other way around). > > Now, the phenomenon is that at least emotion, reasoning, and volition > > (formation of conscious purposes) seem to be decisively mediated by > > holistic situational meaning. My current research concern is trying > > to find ways to study and understand how this mediation occurs and > > how these semiotic mediators are transformed and distributed. From > > this view, I think that experiencing activities (Vasilyuk's > > perezhivanie) may provide a good terrain to study these issues > > (especially regarding the mediation of emotion), as I tried to exemplify in the paper. > > Studying semiotic mediation, however, is of course not easy. > > Following Vygotsky, I assume that extended discourse is the > > manifestation of thinking within certain psychological conditions > > (Vygotsky's Thinking and Speech, chapter 7), and I also assume the > > Vygotsky's law of the unity of the structure and function of thinking > > (Vygotsky's Thinking and Speech, chapter 6). From these two > > assumptions, I propose that meaning (and its functions in human > > activity) can be scientifically studied by structurally analyzing the > > narratives generated by subjects, considering that the discourse > > produced in the narrative is the point of departure of this study, > > but that considerable analytical work must be done to move from this > > discourse to the full characterization of meaning. It is in that > > point where I find useful the work developed by Greimas, the usefulness of which I only suggest in the paper. > > >From this background, I found many interesting ideas and questions > > in the > > other papers of the special issue. In this first post I will propose > > two of them for possible discussion. The first one was raised by > > Gonz?lez-Rey, when he introduces, in connection with perezhivanie, > > the concepts of personality, and especially, of sense. So, which is > > the conceptual (and-or > > phenomenal) relation between perezhivanie and sense? Gonz?lez-Rey > > suggests that both concepts are somewhat similar (and overcome by the > > concept of ?subjective sense?); my opinion, partly expressed in my > > commentary, is that perezhivanie is a type of meaning, which includes > > different levels of depth, and that sense corresponds to the deepest > > level of meaning (which can be characterized as a system of semic > > oppositions). Therefore, sense wouldn't be in opposition to meaning > > (as ?a microcosm of human consciousness?, as Kozulin remembers in his > > commentary), although it would be in opposition to manifested meaning (the surface level of meaning). > > The second issue was raised by Roth and Jornet, and I think it goes > > beyond the issue of perezhivanie itself. If I understand them well, > > they argue that Vygotsky's core proposal of cultural mediation is > > influenced by the Cartesian dualism (mind-matter), and that a > > promising approach to Cultural Psychology would be a Spinozist > > monism. I am actually very interested on the issue of which > > epistemological position can best substantiate the construction of a > > cultural psychology, and that's why I feel inclined to take the > > opportunity to ask for your opinions about that. About the proposal > > of Roth and Jornet, I have some doubts. First, I don't see why > > Vygotsky's proposals can be seen as dualist (in the Cartesian sense) > > -I suspect that it is because of the analytical distinctions?. > > Anyway, in my understanding, Vygotsky explicitly assumes a > > materialist monism (for example in The Crisis), and in fact he constructs his proposal on mediation upon reflexology, which also explicitly assumed a materialist monism (e.g. > > Sechenov). Would a Spinozist monism be a better point of departure? I > > don't know, in my understanding it is a more idealist monism, and I > > don't clearly see what could be gained. In my opinion, a scientific > > psychology which includes the study of mind is only possible if any > > type of monism is assumed. However, in my view, for a scientific > > psychology, the ontological nature of the world is perhaps less > > important (it is an issue for metaphysics?), and I am inclined to assume a neutral monism (e.g. Russell). > > So from this view, a materialist monism and a Spinozist monism > > wouldn't be so different, so from both views it could be assumed that > > all is of the same nature and all is similarly knowable (including > > mind) [which is the ontological nature of the world and to what > > degree it is knowable are issues that can be left to philosophy]. > > However, in my opinion, this does not mean that, while assuming a > > monism, analytical distinctions cannot be done when studying the > > world. In that sense, I had the impression that Roth and Jornet > > tended to dilute analytical distinctions in the name of monism; I > > repeat that I don't know if I understood them well, but if this was > > the case, in my opinion, analysis would be impossible within the new > > psychology suggested by Roth and Jornet, and, regarding perezhivanie, > > there would be the danger, noted by Vygotsky in The Crisis and > > cautioned by Kozulin in his commentary, that by meaning everything, perezhivanie ends by meaning nothing. > > Best regards and happy new year, > > Marc. > > 2017-01-02 9:12 GMT+01:00 Alfredo Jornet Gil : > > Dear all, > > I would like to join David, Luisa, Ana, Henry and the others to wish > > you all a Happy New Year! May it be full of joy, peace, and opportunity. > > I also would like to begin the year announcing our first ?MCA > > article discussion, ?although in fact corresponds to the last issue > > of the year > > we > > just passed, Issue 4 on Perezhivanie. This is a very special > > *special* issue, not only because its topic has raised lots of > > interest lately in > > the > > CHAT community but also because, greatly coordinated by Andy Blunden > > and the rest of the editorial team, the issue takes the form of a > > symposium where authors get the chance to present and respond to > > each others' ideas on the subject. In my view, this allows having a > > rich and > > multidimensional > > approach to a subject as important as perezhivanie. > > Following with the dialogical spirit in which the special issue was > > assembled, we will focus on one lead article, but hoping to also > > engage ideas and insights present in or relevant to other > > contributions in the issue. ?Marc Clar?'s "Vygotsky and Vasilyuk on > > Perezhivanie: Two Notions and One Word" will be our focus. The > > article very nicely engages the lead work of Vygotsky, but also the > > less known ??(?in educational literature) but totally relevant works > > of psychologist ?F. Vasilyuk and semiotician > > A. > > J. Greimas, mobilising a number of key concepts including those of > > semiotic > > mediation and transformation. > > ?In addition to Marc, who will soon join us, I have encouraged some > > of > > the > > other authors in the special issue to also join as "relevant > > others," if time and circumstances allow them. Let's hope that this > > will help keeping the symposium spirit up. > > Marc's article is attached to this e-mail and will be made open > > access at the T&F pages as soon as people is back from the holidays. > > The T&F link > > is > > this: > > http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039.2016.1186194 > > The link to the MCA Forum pages, where we announce our discussions > > and other xmca things, is here:http://lchc.ucsd.edu/MCA/ > > I wish us all a very productive and interesting discussion. > > Alfredo > From ablunden@mira.net Sat Jan 7 17:13:41 2017 From: ablunden@mira.net (Andy Blunden) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2017 12:13:41 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! In-Reply-To: <58718707.4270630a.c8bff.94c9@mx.google.com> References: <1483344752182.40904@iped.uio.no> <1483467423798.57819@iped.uio.no> <1483601196884.31418@iped.uio.no> <5df5e870-3ef8-70d6-0c17-f8647ba17e62@mira.net> <587124d9.d957620a.4a5a8.bd56@mx.google.com> <1483820996800.91513@iped.uio.no> <58718707.4270630a.c8bff.94c9@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <6390ec7c-a536-a45b-fbb0-ca94ea349d63@mira.net> Larry, you quote from p. 113 ... of what? Are you introducing an article from a different issue of MCA to shed light on perezhivanie? Andy ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making On 8/01/2017 11:25 AM, lpscholar2@gmail.com wrote: > > Alfredo, i will attempt to stay within ?an experience? and > as the ?working over an experience?. > > If i may, i will borrow your word meaning where you use > the word (perfuse) as it helps me listen into David and > Andy explore the contrast of ?word? and ?word meaning? as > units. > > On page 113 of your and Roth?s article you focus in on > affect. In your words you say : > > Affect is neither something separate from the unit nor a > factor that influences or characterizes a part of this > unit : It PERFUSES the unit. The unit you refer to is > experience/perezivanie. This minimal unit includes all > individuals, their social/material setting, and the > TRANS-actional relations that BIND them into a whole. > > I hope this is staying within the bounds of exploring > having AN experience as a unit ; -) > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > *From: *Alfredo Jornet Gil > *Sent: *January 7, 2017 12:24 PM > *To: *Andy Blunden ; Peter > Smagorinsky ; eXtended Mind, > Culture, Activity ; Larry > Purss > *Subject: *[Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > Larry, all, > > our arguments in the 2014 address a science education > literature in which the constructivist perspective is the > leading perspective; We note that the assertion that > people learn from experience is everywhere taken for > granted but nowhere accounted for. We resort to pragmatist > and phenomenological literature along with Vygotsky's > insights to point out the need to account for learning as > something that cannot be the result of an individual's > construction; in experience there is always something in > excess of what you intended, and this is a basic feature > of doing, of performing. I take that to be your "trans" in > the trans/zhivanie word, Larry, which already is denoted > in the word PERezhivanie. > > But I do not wish to move our discussion too far away from > Marc's paper and the Perezhivanie special issue. We also > risk disengaging many that have not have the privilege > we've had to have the time to read so many articles in > just few days into the new year. I think we are a point in > the discussion where a pretty clear point of > agreement/disagreement, and therefore of possibility for > growth, has been reached with regard to the view of > perezhivanie as "an experience" and as the "working over > it". I think that to allow as many as possible to follow, > and hopefully also engage, I think it will be helpful to > bring the diverse perspectives and theoretical accounts to > matter in accounting for some actual material. And there > are a number of cases described in the articles, including > Marc's case of a teacher, as well as everyday facts, such > as those brought by Beth, and in Beth's article... > > I take the task for myself too, but Saturday morning need > to attend to other things! > > A > > ________________________________________ > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of > lpscholar2@gmail.com > > Sent: 07 January 2017 18:26 > > To: Andy Blunden; Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended Mind, > Culture, Activity; Larry Purss > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > Andy, Peter, i hope the intention to move beyond > politeness to struggle with this topic materializes. > > In this vein i want to introduce exploration of the > ?excess? of actual over intended meaning as he sketched > his introduction to ?experience?. > > Citing Dewey, Alfredo says that this excess of actual > learning over intended learning INCLUDES what Dewey refers > to as ?attitudes? and these ?attitudes? are FUNDAMENTALLY > what count in the future. > > Alfredo and Roth then add this summary statement : > > There is therefore, a need to theorize experience in terms > that do not assume control and rationality as the sine qua > non of learning. It also implies a need to develop > analytical accounts that retain the ?uncertainty? that is > an ?integral part? of human experience. > > Where are Alfredo and Roth leading us with this sketch of > experience? To highlight ?attitudes? that occur in the > excess of actual over intended learning? The word > ?attitudes? generates images of (atmosphere) and (moods) > that ?flow? like cascading waterfalls that can be imaged > as (force) or as (receptive). Attitudes that flow to > places where they are received within a certain attitude > of care and concern. Not as forceful an image as moving > only with control and rationality. Describing ?weaker? > thought that remains uncertain but that also opens us to > the other?s peril and plight. Possibly a post-analytic > motion that exceeds the intended by living-through the > actual that develops ?attitudes? that are fundamentally > what count for the future. > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > From: Andy Blunden > > Sent: January 7, 2017 5:00 AM > > To: Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > OK Peter, what you say is all very true I am sure, but it > > entails conflating activity and action (as mass nouns) and > > context and mediation, and makes the required distinction > > much like one could find multiple meanings for the word > > "and" by listing the different phrases and clauses which can > > be linked by "and." > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > Andy Blunden > > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > On 7/01/2017 11:42 PM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > > > > > > Let me try to illustrate. > > > > > > Reading as mediated action: The cultural-historical > > > context of reading mediates how one?s attention and > > > response are channeled in socially constructed ways. So, > > > in one setting, say at home or reading in the company of > > > friends, a novel might bring a reader to tears, or invite > > > readers to share personal stories that parallel those of > > > the plot lines, or laugh out loud. But another setting, a > > > formal school or university class, would have historical > > > values and practices that mute emotional and personal > > > responses, and promote a more sober, analytic way of > > > reading and talking that fits with specific historical > > > critical conventions and genres, and discourages others. > > > > > > Reading as mediating action: The act of reading can be > > > transformational. In reading about an talking about a > > > character?s actions, a reader might reconsider a value > > > system, become more sympathetic to real people who > > > resemble oppressed characters, etc. In other words, > > > reading a text may serve a mediational process in which > > > textual ideas and exemplars enable a reader to think > > > differently. > > > > > > *From:*Andy Blunden [mailto:ablunden@mira.net] > > > *Sent:* Saturday, January 7, 2017 6:28 AM > > > *To:* Peter Smagorinsky ; eXtended Mind, > > > Culture, Activity > > > *Subject:* Re: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > > > > > Can you explain in a paragraph or two,. Peter, rather than > > > asking us all to read 10,000 words to extract an answer? > > > > > > Andy > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > Andy Blunden > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > > > > > > > > On 7/01/2017 11:23 PM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > > > > > > Andy and others, I tried to work out the > mediated/mediating question in the area of reading....see > if this helps. > > > > > > Smagorinsky, P., & O'Donnell-Allen, C. (1998). > Reading as mediated and mediating action: Composing > meaning for literature through multimedia interpretive > texts. Reading Research Quarterly, 33, 198-226. Available > athttp://www.petersmagorinsky.net/About/PDF/RRQ/RRQ1998.pdf > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy > Blunden > > > > > > Sent: Friday, January 6, 2017 7:12 PM > > > > > > To:xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > > > > > I have never understood this supposed distinction, > Alfredo, between "mediated activity" and "mediating > activity" given that all activity is mediated and all > activity mediates. > > > > > > Also, could you spell out what you mean by the "tension" > > > > > > between perezhivanie as meaning and perezhivanie as > struggle. > > > > > > Andy > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > Andy Blunden > > > > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > > > > > > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > > > > > On 5/01/2017 6:26 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > > > > > > Thanks Marc for your careful response. > > > > > > I am familiar to Vygotsky's notion of cultural > mediation and I am aware and acknowledge that it was > elaborated as a means to overcome dualism, and that it is > not analog to a computational approach. > > > > > > When I brought the computing analogy, I did so > with regard not to the concept of cultural mediation in > general, but to the way it can be (and is) deployed > analytically. I react to what it seems to me a dichotomy > between a "meaning" as something that is static (thereby a > form of "representation" or reflection of the relation > with the environment instead of?refraction)?? and the > experiencing-as-struggling, which is described > as?transformation or change. If so, mediation here would > seem to be part of a methodological device that first > dissects "a type of meaning" from "a type of activity" (or > a given state from the process that changes that state), > and then unites it by adding the term "mediation." And > this may be my misreading, but in that (mis)reading (which > perhaps is mostly due to the fact that in your empirical > illustration only the initial and end product, i.e., > perezhivanie, are described, but not the > experiencing-as-struggle, that is, the moving between the > two), mediation here seems to do as analytical concept > precisely what you were afraid our monism was doing: > explaining nothing. Only the end products but not the > process of producing perezhivanie are revealed. This may > be problematic if one attends to what Veresov argues in > the paper I shared yesterday, where he defends the notion > of mediation but also specifies that Vygotsky speaks of > *mediating activity* (as opposed to *mediated* activity). > That is, not mediation by signs as products, but mediating > activity as the activity of producing signs (which again > is an activity of producing social relations, perhaps what > you refer as "holistic meanings"?). What do you think? > > > > > > I did not think you were trying to deny the > influence of Spinoza, and I do not think we ever said that > Perezhivanie was primarily a move from Cartesian Dualism > to Monism, as you suggest in your post. I copy and paste > from my prior post: "The fact is that Vygotsky was > building a theory on the unity of the affect and the > intellect that was to be grounded on Spinoza, and what we > try to do is to explore how perezhivanie, as a concept > being developed during the same period (but not finalised > or totally settled!), could be seen from the perspective > of the Spinozist Vygotsky." > > > > > > I totally believe that bringing the distinction > between perezhivanie as meaning, and perezhivanie as > struggle, is totally relevant, and Beth Ferholt's > vignettes of Where the Wild Things Are do indeed > illustrate this. We really need to address this tension, > which as Beth's examples and as our own everyday > experience shows, is a tension that matters not just to > books and to theories but to living persons (children, > teachers), a tension that moreover is present and > mentioned in all the articles of the symposium. The papers > offer different proposals, and I think is so great we have > the chance to discuss them! I too, as you, am very > interesting in hearing others about the questions you had > concerning sense and meaning. > > > > > > Alfredo > > > > > > From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > > > > > > > > on behalf of > Marc Clar? > > > > > > > > > > > > Sent: 04 January 2017 22:31 > > > > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and > Perezhivanie! > > > > > > Thank you very much, Alfredo, for sharing this > excellent paper by > > > > > > Veresov, and thanks also for your responses, > which really helped me to > > > > > > better understand your points. My main doubt > about your proposal > > > > > > was/is caused by the statement that the idea of > cultural > > > > > > mediation/mediator implies a cartesian dualism. > This shocks me > > > > > > because, to me, the idea of cultural mediation > is absolutely crucial > > > > > > (in fact, the keystone) for the construction of > a monist (and > > > > > > scientific) psychology that does not forget mind > ?that is, a cultural > > > > > > psychology. From your response, however, I > realized that we may be > > > > > > approaching the idea of mediation in different > ways. I talk of > > > > > > mediation and mediators in a quite restricted > way. The starting point > > > > > > of my understanding of mediation is a > dialectical relationship > > > > > > (organic, transactional) between the subject and > the world (Vygotsky departs from the scheme > stimulus-response, from reflexology). > > > > > > This relationship, that Vygotsky calls primitive > psychological > > > > > > functions, would be basically biological. > However, in human beings > > > > > > this relationship is mediated by cultural means: > signs and tools; or > > > > > > primary, secondary and terciary artifacts. These > cultural means > > > > > > reorganize the primitive functions (dialectic > S-O relationship), which > > > > > > become then higher psychological functions > (S-M-O) (see for example, > > > > > > The problem of the cultural development of the > child, in The Vygotsky > > > > > > Reader). Now, the subject, the cultural > mediators, and the object form > > > > > > an inseparable dialectical unit, so that the > subject acts on > > > > > > (transforms) the object through the prism of the > cultural mediators, > > > > > > the object acts on (transforms) the subject also > through the prism of > > > > > > the cultural mediators, and the cultural means > are themselves also > > > > > > transformed as a consequence of their mediation > in this continuous > > > > > > dynamic dialectical tension. Here, for me, it is > important the idea > > > > > > that the cultural means are as material (if we > assume a materialist > > > > > > monism) as all the rest of the world; in fact, > are parts of the > > > > > > material world which become signs or tools (and > can be therefore > > > > > > socially distributed). This permits the > introduction of the scientific > > > > > > study of mind-consciousness (as mediating > systems of signs), because > > > > > > mind is not anymore something immaterial and > unobservable, but it is > > > > > > as material and observable as the rest of the > natural world. It is > > > > > > from this view that, for me, the idea of > cultural mediation is the > > > > > > keystone of a monist psychology that includes > mind. Thus, when I speak > > > > > > of mediators, I refer to the cultural means > which mediate in the S-O > > > > > > dialectics; I am especially interested in > signs/secondary artifacts. > > > > > > Here, it is perhaps necessary to insist that > when I talk of studying > > > > > > mediators (and their semantic structure), this > doesn't mean that they > > > > > > are taken out from the activity (the flux of > live) in which they > > > > > > mediate (since out of activity they are not > signs anymore); here, I > > > > > > think Vygotsky tries again to overcome another > old dichotomy, the > > > > > > functionalism-structuralism one. I hope that all > this makes also clear the difference between this view and > that of computational psychologies (which in general are > profoundly and explicitly dualist and not dialectic). > > > > > > Back to perezhivanie, I'm not obviously trying > to deny the influence > > > > > > of Spinoza on Vygotsky's thinking (this is > explicit in Vygotsky's > > > > > > writings, especially in ?The teaching about > emotions?, in the Vol.6 of > > > > > > the Collected Works). But I have doubts that > Vygotsky's introduction > > > > > > of the concept of perezhivanie is to be regarded > primarily as a > > > > > > movement towards monism (from a previous > cartesian dualism), and that > > > > > > this movement questions the concept of cultural > mediation. Instead, > > > > > > and I think that this is in line with some of > Gonz?lez-Rey > > > > > > observations in his paper, my impression is that > the introduction of > > > > > > the concept of perezhivanie responds more to a > movement (a further > > > > > > step) towards holism (something that, in my > understanding, can also be > > > > > > found in Spinoza). Thus, I think that the word > meaning is still the > > > > > > unit of analysis in the last Vygotsky -and > therefore, the idea of > > > > > > cultural mediation is still crucial (in fact, in > The problem of the > > > > > > environment, he connects the concept of > perezhivanie, which has just > > > > > > introduced, to the development of word meaning > [p.345-346, also cited > > > > > > in my paper]). However, in my view, in the last > Vygotsky the focus is > > > > > > not anymore primarily on the word-meaning as > formed for things (or > > > > > > collections of things, as in the ontogenetic > research with Sakharov), but the focus is now in the > formation of meaning for holistic situations. > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > > Marc. > > > > > > 2017-01-03 19:16 GMT+01:00 Alfredo Jornet > Gil : > > > > > > Hi Marc, all, > > > > > > thanks for joining and for your interesting > work, which I follow > > > > > > since I became aware of it. I appreciate the > way in your paper you > > > > > > show careful and honest attention to the > texts of the authors > > > > > > involved, but perhaps most of all I > appreciate that the paper makes > > > > > > the transformational dimension related to > struggle and change > > > > > > salient, a dimension all papers deemed > central to perezhivanie. And I > > > > > > have learned more about Vasilyuk by reading > your paper. But I also > > > > > > see that we have approached the question of > perezhivanie differently > > > > > > and I think that addressing the questions > that you raise concerning > > > > > > our article may be a good way to both > respond and discuss your paper. > > > > > > I am aware that our use of the term monism > may be problematic to > > > > > > some, and N. Veresov, who has recently > written about this (see > > > > > > attached article), warns against the dangers > of simply moving from > > > > > > dualism into an undifferentiating monism > that relativizes everything, > > > > > > making development un-studiable. This seems > to be the way in which > > > > > > you have understood our argument, and of > course this is not what we are or want to be doing. > > > > > > Probably many will think that *dialectical > materialism* rather than > > > > > > monism is the proper term, and I could agree > with them; we do in fact > > > > > > use dialectical materialism there and > elsewhere. Yet, we wanted to > > > > > > emphasise the Spinozist influence (an > influence that also runs > > > > > > through Marx) and so we found it appropriate > to use the term monism, > > > > > > a term that Vygotsky uses before arguing > that Spinoza "develops an essentially materialistic view" > > > > > > (Collected Works, Vol. 6, p. 124). For us, > the aim is working out > > > > > > ways to empirically examine and formulate > problems in ways that do > > > > > > not reify a mind-body dualism. > > > > > > Although overcoming dualism is foundational > to the CHAT paradigm, I > > > > > > would however not say that Vygotsky did get > to solve all of the > > > > > > problems that Cartesian dualism had created > for psychology, even > > > > > > though he recognised those problems > brilliantly as early as in the > > > > > > "Crisis". It should suffice to cite > Vygotsky's own remarks, which we quote in the paper (and > which A.N. > > > > > > Leont'ev mentions in the introduction to the > collected works), where > > > > > > Vygotsky explicitly critiques some of his > own prior ideas for failing > > > > > > to overcome dualism. We agree with those > who, like F. G. Rey, see > > > > > > Vygotsky's project as a developing rather > than as a finalised one. > > > > > > The fact is that Vygotsky was building a > theory on the unity of the > > > > > > affect and the intellect that was to be > grounded on Spinoza, and what > > > > > > we try to do is to explore how perezhivanie, > as a concept being > > > > > > developed during the same period (but not > finalised or totally > > > > > > settled!), could be seen from the > perspective of the Spinozist Vygotsky. > > > > > > As you note, in our article we argue that, > if one takes the Spinozist > > > > > > one-substance approach, classical concepts > used in non-classical > > > > > > psychology, at least in the way they are > commonly used in the current > > > > > > literature, should be revised. One such > concept is mediation. And I > > > > > > personally do not have much of a problem > when mediation is used to > > > > > > denote the fundamental fact that every thing > exists always through > > > > > > *another*, never in and of itself. But I do > think that it is > > > > > > problematic to identify MEDIATORS, such as > "a meaning", as a means to > > > > > > account for or explain developmental > processes and learning events, > > > > > > precisely because it is there, at least in > my view, that dualism creeps in. > > > > > > For example, I find it paradoxical that you > are concerned that our > > > > > > monist approach risks turning perezhivanie > into a useless category > > > > > > because it may be used to explain everything > and nothing, and yet you > > > > > > do not seem to have a problem using the term > mediation to account for > > > > > > the transformation of perezhivanie without > clearly elaborating on how > > > > > > mediation does change anything or what it > looks like as a real > > > > > > process. How is it different saying that a > perezhivanie mediates the > > > > > > experiencing-as-struggle from simply saying > that it "affects" or > > > > > > "determines" it? Indeed, if perezhivanie > mediates > > > > > > experiencing-as-struggle, does not > experiencing-as-struglgle too > > > > > > mediate perezhivanie? And do not both may be > said to mediate development, or development mediate them? > Is not this explaining everything and nothing? > > > > > > I do believe you can argue that there is a > difference between > > > > > > mediation and classical psychology's > cause-effect relations, but to > > > > > > show this you need to dig into the > dialectical underpinnings of the > > > > > > theory. In your paper, you offer a nice > analysis of a lovely case of > > > > > > a teacher who, in dealing with a challenge > with one of her students, > > > > > > changes her perezhivanie. I think you can > rightly argue that there is > > > > > > a semiotic transformation, and I fully > support your statement that by > > > > > > studying discourse we can empirically > approach questions of > > > > > > psychological development. The > contradictions you show as being > > > > > > involved and resolved resonate really well > with what I experience as > > > > > > a parent or as a teacher in the classroom. > Yet, without unpacking > > > > > > what this "mediation" taking place between > one perezhivanie and the > > > > > > next one means as a concrete and real, the > same analysis could be done taking an information > processing approach: > > > > > > there is an situation that is processed > (represented?) in one way, > > > > > > which then leads to a (cognitive) > dissonance, and then there is a > > > > > > cognitive resolution by means of which the > situation is presented > > > > > > differently in consciousness (indeed, when > seen in this way, the term > > > > > > perezhivanie and the term "representation" > become almost > > > > > > indistinguishable). How is mediation, as an > analytical concept, > > > > > > helping here? And most importantly to the > question of perezhivanie, > > > > > > how is this analysis going to show the > internal connection between > > > > > > intellect and affect that Vygotsky > formulates as constitutive of the notion of perezhivanie? > > > > > > I believe that the key lies in understanding > what Vygotsky means when > > > > > > he says that perezhivanie is a unit of > analysis. I will not repeat > > > > > > here what already is written in at least a > couple of the articles in > > > > > > the special issue (Blunden, ours), that is > the difference between > > > > > > analysis by elements and unit analysis > (Vygotsky 1987). A unit > > > > > > analysis approach is consistent with > Spinoza, for whom cause-effect > > > > > > explanations were not adequate, requiring > instead an understanding of > > > > > > self-development, perezhivanie as a kernel > cell for the development > > > > > > of personality. And I think you may be after > this in your article in > > > > > > suggesting a form of continuous movement > from perezhivanie to > > > > > > experiencing-as-struggle. But perhaps the > major difficulty I find is that, in positing Vygotsky's > perezhivanie as "a type of meaning" > > > > > > and Vasilyuk's perezhivanie (or > experiencing-as-struggle) as a "type > > > > > > of activity," it is difficult not to see > here a division between > > > > > > product and process, a division that then is > analytically bridged by > > > > > > the addition of a third term, mediation, > that should bring back the > > > > > > real movement between the product and the > process. > > > > > > A different approach involves considering > the concrete extension of > > > > > > actual living and lived social relations, > and look at them as > > > > > > generative phenomena. What is there in the > encounter between Carla > > > > > > and the child that leads to change? For it > is not inside the mind, > > > > > > but in real life, in consciousness as the > real relation between people, that Carla is changed. > > > > > > How is the semantic structure that you > nicely present and attribute > > > > > > to Carla a product of the social relation > between her and the child? > > > > > > I think that to rightfully situate > perezhivanie as a concept in a > > > > > > Vygotskian framework, we ought to address > its relation to the genetic > > > > > > law of development. > > > > > > There is much more to disentangle, but this > is long enough. I hope I > > > > > > have succeeded in making clear these ideas. > Thanks so much for > > > > > > engaging in the discussion! > > > > > > Alfredo > > > > > > ________________________________________ > > > > > > From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > > > > > > > > on behalf of > Marc Clar? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sent: 02 January 2017 22:14 > > > > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and > Perezhivanie! > > > > > > Hi, all, and thank you so much, Alfredo, for > your kind invitation to > > > > > > participate in this discussion. My paper in > the MCA special issue > > > > > > focuses on a distinction between a type of > activity, which I argue > > > > > > that is what Vasilyuk called *perezhivanie* > (experiencing) and a type > > > > > > of semiotic mediator, which I argue that is > what Vygotsky, in The > > > > > > Problem of the Environment, called > *perezhivanie.* I argue, following > > > > > > Vasilyuk, that in experiencing activities > (Vasilyuk's perezhivanie), > > > > > > this type of mediator is profoundly > transformed ? in fact, that > > > > > > experiencing activities consist of the > semiotic transformation of this type of mediator. > > > > > > As Veresov and Fleer argue in their > commentary, perezhivanie (as a > > > > > > type of > > > > > > mediator) is for me a psychological > phenomenon, one which is of > > > > > > course conceptualized from a specific > theoretical framework. But the > > > > > > phenomenon is also visible from other > theoretical frameworks as well, > > > > > > as I mention in the paper. This phenomenon > is my main interest, and > > > > > > it is from this interest that I arrived at > the concept of perezhivanie (not the other way around). > > > > > > Now, the phenomenon is that at least > emotion, reasoning, and volition > > > > > > (formation of conscious purposes) seem to be > decisively mediated by > > > > > > holistic situational meaning. My current > research concern is trying > > > > > > to find ways to study and understand how > this mediation occurs and > > > > > > how these semiotic mediators are transformed > and distributed. From > > > > > > this view, I think that experiencing > activities (Vasilyuk's > > > > > > perezhivanie) may provide a good terrain to > study these issues > > > > > > (especially regarding the mediation of > emotion), as I tried to exemplify in the paper. > > > > > > Studying semiotic mediation, however, is of > course not easy. > > > > > > Following Vygotsky, I assume that extended > discourse is the > > > > > > manifestation of thinking within certain > psychological conditions > > > > > > (Vygotsky's Thinking and Speech, chapter 7), > and I also assume the > > > > > > Vygotsky's law of the unity of the structure > and function of thinking > > > > > > (Vygotsky's Thinking and Speech, chapter 6). > From these two > > > > > > assumptions, I propose that meaning (and its > functions in human > > > > > > activity) can be scientifically studied by > structurally analyzing the > > > > > > narratives generated by subjects, > considering that the discourse > > > > > > produced in the narrative is the point of > departure of this study, > > > > > > but that considerable analytical work must > be done to move from this > > > > > > discourse to the full characterization of > meaning. It is in that > > > > > > point where I find useful the work developed > by Greimas, the usefulness of which I only suggest in the > paper. > > > > > > >From this background, I found many > interesting ideas and questions > > > > > > in the > > > > > > other papers of the special issue. In this > first post I will propose > > > > > > two of them for possible discussion. The > first one was raised by > > > > > > Gonz?lez-Rey, when he introduces, in > connection with perezhivanie, > > > > > > the concepts of personality, and especially, > of sense. So, which is > > > > > > the conceptual (and-or > > > > > > phenomenal) relation between perezhivanie > and sense? Gonz?lez-Rey > > > > > > suggests that both concepts are somewhat > similar (and overcome by the > > > > > > concept of ?subjective sense?); my opinion, > partly expressed in my > > > > > > commentary, is that perezhivanie is a type > of meaning, which includes > > > > > > different levels of depth, and that sense > corresponds to the deepest > > > > > > level of meaning (which can be characterized > as a system of semic > > > > > > oppositions). Therefore, sense wouldn't be > in opposition to meaning > > > > > > (as ?a microcosm of human consciousness?, as > Kozulin remembers in his > > > > > > commentary), although it would be in > opposition to manifested meaning (the surface level of > meaning). > > > > > > The second issue was raised by Roth and > Jornet, and I think it goes > > > > > > beyond the issue of perezhivanie itself. If > I understand them well, > > > > > > they argue that Vygotsky's core proposal of > cultural mediation is > > > > > > influenced by the Cartesian dualism > (mind-matter), and that a > > > > > > promising approach to Cultural Psychology > would be a Spinozist > > > > > > monism. I am actually very interested on the > issue of which > > > > > > epistemological position can best > substantiate the construction of a > > > > > > cultural psychology, and that's why I feel > inclined to take the > > > > > > opportunity to ask for your opinions about > that. About the proposal > > > > > > of Roth and Jornet, I have some doubts. > First, I don't see why > > > > > > Vygotsky's proposals can be seen as dualist > (in the Cartesian sense) > > > > > > -I suspect that it is because of the > analytical distinctions?. > > > > > > Anyway, in my understanding, Vygotsky > explicitly assumes a > > > > > > materialist monism (for example in The > Crisis), and in fact he constructs his proposal on > mediation upon reflexology, which also explicitly assumed > a materialist monism (e.g. > > > > > > Sechenov). Would a Spinozist monism be a > better point of departure? I > > > > > > don't know, in my understanding it is a more > idealist monism, and I > > > > > > don't clearly see what could be gained. In > my opinion, a scientific > > > > > > psychology which includes the study of mind > is only possible if any > > > > > > type of monism is assumed. However, in my > view, for a scientific > > > > > > psychology, the ontological nature of the > world is perhaps less > > > > > > important (it is an issue for metaphysics?), > and I am inclined to assume a neutral monism (e.g. Russell). > > > > > > So from this view, a materialist monism and > a Spinozist monism > > > > > > wouldn't be so different, so from both views > it could be assumed that > > > > > > all is of the same nature and all is > similarly knowable (including > > > > > > mind) [which is the ontological nature of > the world and to what > > > > > > degree it is knowable are issues that can be > left to philosophy]. > > > > > > However, in my opinion, this does not mean > that, while assuming a > > > > > > monism, analytical distinctions cannot be > done when studying the > > > > > > world. In that sense, I had the impression > that Roth and Jornet > > > > > > tended to dilute analytical distinctions in > the name of monism; I > > > > > > repeat that I don't know if I understood > them well, but if this was > > > > > > the case, in my opinion, analysis would be > impossible within the new > > > > > > psychology suggested by Roth and Jornet, > and, regarding perezhivanie, > > > > > > there would be the danger, noted by Vygotsky > in The Crisis and > > > > > > cautioned by Kozulin in his commentary, that > by meaning everything, perezhivanie ends by meaning nothing. > > > > > > Best regards and happy new year, > > > > > > Marc. > > > > > > 2017-01-02 9:12 GMT+01:00 Alfredo Jornet > Gil : > > > > > > Dear all, > > > > > > I would like to join David, Luisa, Ana, > Henry and the others to wish > > > > > > you all a Happy New Year! May it be full > of joy, peace, and opportunity. > > > > > > I also would like to begin the year > announcing our first ?MCA > > > > > > article discussion, ?although in fact > corresponds to the last issue > > > > > > of the year > > > > > > we > > > > > > just passed, Issue 4 on Perezhivanie. > This is a very special > > > > > > *special* issue, not only because its > topic has raised lots of > > > > > > interest lately in > > > > > > the > > > > > > CHAT community but also because, greatly > coordinated by Andy Blunden > > > > > > and the rest of the editorial team, the > issue takes the form of a > > > > > > symposium where authors get the chance > to present and respond to > > > > > > each others' ideas on the subject. In my > view, this allows having a > > > > > > rich and > > > > > > multidimensional > > > > > > approach to a subject as important as > perezhivanie. > > > > > > Following with the dialogical spirit in > which the special issue was > > > > > > assembled, we will focus on one lead > article, but hoping to also > > > > > > engage ideas and insights present in or > relevant to other > > > > > > contributions in the issue. ?Marc > Clar?'s "Vygotsky and Vasilyuk on > > > > > > Perezhivanie: Two Notions and One Word" > will be our focus. The > > > > > > article very nicely engages the lead > work of Vygotsky, but also the > > > > > > less known ??(?in educational > literature) but totally relevant works > > > > > > of psychologist ?F. Vasilyuk and semiotician > > > > > > A. > > > > > > J. Greimas, mobilising a number of key > concepts including those of > > > > > > semiotic > > > > > > mediation and transformation. > > > > > > ?In addition to Marc, who will soon join > us, I have encouraged some > > > > > > of > > > > > > the > > > > > > other authors in the special issue to > also join as "relevant > > > > > > others," if time and circumstances allow > them. Let's hope that this > > > > > > will help keeping the symposium spirit up. > > > > > > Marc's article is attached to this > e-mail and will be made open > > > > > > access at the T&F pages as soon as > people is back from the holidays. > > > > > > The T&F link > > > > > > is > > > > > > this: > > > > > > > http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039.2016.1186194 > > > > > > The link to the MCA Forum pages, where > we announce our discussions > > > > > > and other xmca things, is > here:http://lchc.ucsd.edu/MCA/ > > > > > > I wish us all a very productive and > interesting discussion. > > > > > > Alfredo > > > > From lpscholar2@gmail.com Sat Jan 7 17:42:37 2017 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2017 17:42:37 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! In-Reply-To: <6390ec7c-a536-a45b-fbb0-ca94ea349d63@mira.net> References: <1483344752182.40904@iped.uio.no> <1483467423798.57819@iped.uio.no> <1483601196884.31418@iped.uio.no> <5df5e870-3ef8-70d6-0c17-f8647ba17e62@mira.net> <587124d9.d957620a.4a5a8.bd56@mx.google.com> <1483820996800.91513@iped.uio.no> <58718707.4270630a.c8bff.94c9@mx.google.com> <6390ec7c-a536-a45b-fbb0-ca94ea349d63@mira.net> Message-ID: <58719931.972a620a.999e9.0793@mx.google.com> Andy, i am referencing the article that was posted in this stream written by Wolff-Michael Roth and Alfredo Jornet ?Toward a Theory of Experience? in 2013. Alfredo was asking me why i was using the term trans/ivanie when the etymology was already clearly laid out by you and also in this article with the prefix ?per?. I am attempting to stay with the bounds demarcating the exploration of experience/perizivanie. Alfredo?s article is exploring the centrality of having ?an? experience, ?an? perizivanie that is lived through and brought to completion. This phenomena can be studied as worked through and completed by observing the use of terms such as ?that? or ?it?when referring back to having ?an? experience. Alfredo, i hope i have been faithful to your article. It helps as i navigate Marc?s article. Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Andy Blunden Sent: January 7, 2017 5:13 PM To: lpscholar2@gmail.com; Alfredo Jornet Gil; Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; Larry Purss Subject: Re: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! Larry, you quote from p. 113 ... of what? Are you introducing an article from a different issue of MCA to shed light on perezhivanie? Andy Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making On 8/01/2017 11:25 AM, lpscholar2@gmail.com wrote: Alfredo, i will attempt to stay within ?an experience? and as the ?working over an experience?. If i may, i will borrow your word meaning where you use the word (perfuse) as it helps me listen into David and Andy explore the contrast of ?word? and ?word meaning? as units. On page 113 of your and Roth?s article you focus in on affect. In your words you say?: ? Affect is neither something separate from the unit nor a factor that influences or characterizes a part of this unit?: It PERFUSES the unit. The unit you refer to is experience/perezivanie. This minimal unit includes all individuals, their social/material setting, and the TRANS-actional relations that BIND them into a whole. ? I hope this is staying within the bounds of exploring having AN experience as a unit ; -) ? Sent from my Windows 10 phone ? From: Alfredo Jornet Gil Sent: January 7, 2017 12:24 PM To: Andy Blunden; Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; Larry Purss Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! ? Larry, all, ? our arguments in the 2014 address a science education literature in which the constructivist perspective is the leading perspective; We note that the assertion that people learn from experience is everywhere taken for granted but nowhere accounted for. We resort to pragmatist and phenomenological literature along with Vygotsky's insights to point out the need to account for learning as something that cannot be the result of an individual's construction; in experience there is always something in excess of what you intended, and this is a basic feature of doing, of performing. I take that to be your "trans" in the trans/zhivanie word, Larry, which already is denoted in the word PERezhivanie. ? But I do not wish to move our discussion too far away from Marc's paper and the Perezhivanie special issue. We also risk disengaging many that have not have the privilege we've had to have the time to read so many articles in just few days into the new year. I think we are a point in the discussion where a pretty clear point of agreement/disagreement, and therefore of possibility for growth, has been reached with regard to the view of perezhivanie as "an experience" and as the "working over it". I think that to allow as many as possible to follow, and hopefully also engage, I think it will be helpful to bring the diverse perspectives and theoretical accounts to matter in accounting for some actual material. And there are a number of cases described in the articles, including Marc's case of a teacher, as well as everyday facts, such as those brought by Beth, and in Beth's article... ? I take the task for myself too, but Saturday morning need to attend to other things! A ? ? ? ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com Sent: 07 January 2017 18:26 To: Andy Blunden; Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; Larry Purss Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! ? Andy, Peter, i hope the intention to move beyond politeness to struggle with this topic materializes. In this vein i want to introduce exploration of the ?excess? of actual over intended meaning as he sketched his introduction to ?experience?. ? Citing Dewey, Alfredo says that this excess of actual learning over intended learning INCLUDES what Dewey refers to as ?attitudes? and these ?attitudes? are FUNDAMENTALLY what count in the future. Alfredo and Roth? then add this summary statement : ? There is therefore, a need to theorize experience in terms that do not assume control and rationality as the sine qua non of learning. It also implies a need to develop analytical accounts that retain the ?uncertainty? that is an ?integral part? of human experience. ? Where are Alfredo and Roth leading us with this sketch of experience? To highlight ?attitudes? that occur in the excess of actual over intended learning? The word ?attitudes? generates images of (atmosphere) and (moods) that ?flow? like cascading waterfalls that can be imaged as (force) or as (receptive). Attitudes that flow to places where they are received within a certain attitude of care and concern. Not as forceful an image as moving only? with control and rationality.? Describing ?weaker? thought that remains uncertain but that also opens us to the other?s peril and plight. Possibly a post-analytic motion that exceeds the intended by living-through the actual that develops ?attitudes? that are fundamentally what count for the future. ? ? Sent from my Windows 10 phone ? From: Andy Blunden Sent: January 7, 2017 5:00 AM To: Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! ? OK Peter, what you say is all very true I am sure, but it entails conflating activity and action (as mass nouns) and context and mediation, and makes the required distinction much like one could find multiple meanings for the word "and" by listing the different phrases and clauses which can be linked by "and." ? Andy ? ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making ? On 7/01/2017 11:42 PM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: >? > Let me try to illustrate. >? > Reading as mediated action: The cultural-historical > context of reading mediates how one?s attention and > response are channeled in socially constructed ways. So, > in one setting, say at home or reading in the company of > friends, a novel might bring a reader to tears, or invite > readers to share personal stories that parallel those of > the plot lines, or laugh out loud. But another setting, a > formal school or university class, would have historical > values and practices that mute emotional and personal > responses, and promote a more sober, analytic way of > reading and talking that fits with specific historical >? critical conventions and genres, and discourages others. >? > Reading as mediating action: The act of reading can be > transformational. In reading about an talking about a > character?s actions, a reader might reconsider a value > system, become more sympathetic to real people who > resemble oppressed characters, etc. In other words, > reading a text may serve a mediational process in which > textual ideas and exemplars enable a reader to think > differently. >? > *From:*Andy Blunden [mailto:ablunden@mira.net] > *Sent:* Saturday, January 7, 2017 6:28 AM > *To:* Peter Smagorinsky ; eXtended Mind, > Culture, Activity > *Subject:* Re: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! >? > Can you explain in a paragraph or two,. Peter, rather than > asking us all to read 10,000 words to extract an answer? >? > Andy >? > ------------------------------------------------------------ >? > Andy Blunden > http://home.mira.net/~andy > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making >? >? > On 7/01/2017 11:23 PM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: >? >???? Andy and others, I tried to work out the mediated/mediating question in the area of reading....see if this helps. >? >???? Smagorinsky, P., & O'Donnell-Allen, C. (1998). Reading as mediated and mediating action: Composing meaning for literature through multimedia interpretive texts. Reading Research Quarterly, 33, 198-226. Available athttp://www.petersmagorinsky.net/About/PDF/RRQ/RRQ1998.pdf >? >???? -----Original Message----- >? >???? From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >???? ? [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden >? >???? Sent: Friday, January 6, 2017 7:12 PM >? >???? To:xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu >? >???? Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! >? >???? I have never understood this supposed distinction, Alfredo, between "mediated activity" and "mediating activity" given that all activity is mediated and all activity mediates. >? >???? Also, could you spell out what you mean by the "tension" >? >???? between perezhivanie as meaning and perezhivanie as struggle. >? >???? Andy >? >???? ------------------------------------------------------------ >? >???? Andy Blunden >? >???? http://home.mira.net/~andy >? >???? http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making >? >???? On 5/01/2017 6:26 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: >? >???????? Thanks Marc for your careful response. >? >???????? I am familiar to Vygotsky's notion of cultural mediation and I am aware and acknowledge that it was elaborated as a means to overcome dualism, and that it is not analog to a computational approach. >? >???????? When I brought the computing analogy, I did so with regard not to the concept of cultural mediation in general, but to the way it can be (and is) deployed analytically. I react to what it seems to me a dichotomy between a "meaning" as something that is static (thereby a form of "representation" or reflection of the relation with the environment instead of?refraction)??? and the experiencing-as-struggling, which is described as?transformation or change. If so, mediation here would seem to be part of a methodological device that first dissects "a type of meaning" from "a type of activity" (or a given state from the process that changes that state), and then unites it by adding the term "mediation." And this may be my misreading, but in that (mis)reading (which perhaps is mostly due to the fact that in your empirical illustration only the initial and end product, i.e., perezhivanie, are described, but not the experiencing-as-struggle, that is, the moving between the two), mediation here seems to do as analytical concept precisely what you were afraid our monism was doing: explaining nothing. Only the end products but not the process of producing perezhivanie are revealed. This may be problematic if one attends to what Veresov argues in the paper I shared yesterday, where he defends the notion of mediation but also specifies that Vygotsky speaks of *mediating activity* (as opposed to *mediated* activity). That is, not mediation by signs as products, but mediating activity as the activity of producing signs (which again is an activity of producing social relations, perhaps what you refer as "holistic meanings"?). What do you think? >? >???????? I did not think you were trying to deny the influence of Spinoza, and I do not think we ever said that Perezhivanie was primarily a move from Cartesian Dualism to Monism, as you suggest in your post. I copy and paste from my prior post:? "The fact is that Vygotsky was building a theory on the unity of the affect and the intellect that was to be grounded on Spinoza, and what we try to do is to explore how perezhivanie, as a concept being developed during the same period (but not finalised or totally settled!), could be seen from the perspective of the Spinozist Vygotsky." >? >???????? I totally believe that bringing the distinction between perezhivanie as meaning, and perezhivanie as struggle, is totally relevant, and Beth Ferholt's vignettes of Where the Wild Things Are do indeed illustrate this. We really need to address this tension, which as Beth's examples and as our own everyday experience shows, is a tension that matters not just to books and to theories but to living persons (children, teachers), a tension that moreover is present and mentioned in all the articles of the symposium. The papers offer different proposals, and I think is so great we have the chance to discuss them! I too, as you, am very interesting in hearing others about the questions you had concerning sense and meaning. >? >???????? Alfredo >? >???????? From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >???????? >? >???????? >???????? ? on behalf of Marc Clar? >? >???????? >? >???????? Sent: 04 January 2017 22:31 >? >???????? To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >? >???????? Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! >? >???????? Thank you very much, Alfredo, for sharing this excellent paper by >? >???????? Veresov, and thanks also for your responses, which really helped me to >? >???????? better understand your points. My main doubt about your proposal >? >???????? was/is caused by the statement that the idea of cultural >? >???????? mediation/mediator implies a cartesian dualism. This shocks me >? >???????? because, to me, the idea of cultural mediation is absolutely crucial >? >???????? (in fact, the keystone) for the construction of a monist (and >? >???????? scientific) psychology that does not forget mind ?that is, a cultural >? >???????? psychology. From your response, however, I realized that we may be >? >? ???????approaching the idea of mediation in different ways. I talk of >? >???????? mediation and mediators in a quite restricted way. The starting point >? >???????? of my understanding of mediation is a dialectical relationship >? >???????? (organic, transactional) between the subject and the world (Vygotsky departs from the scheme stimulus-response, from reflexology). >? >???????? This relationship, that Vygotsky calls primitive psychological >? >???????? functions, would be basically biological. However, in human beings >? >???????? this relationship is mediated by cultural means: signs and tools; or >? >???????? primary, secondary and terciary artifacts. These cultural means >? >???????? reorganize the primitive functions (dialectic S-O relationship), which >? >???????? become then higher psychological functions (S-M-O) (see for example, >? >???????? The problem of the cultural development of the child, in The Vygotsky >? >???????? Reader). Now, the subject, the cultural mediators, and the object form >? >???????? an inseparable dialectical unit, so that the subject acts on >? >???????? (transforms) the object through the prism of the cultural mediators, >? >???????? the object acts on (transforms) the subject also through the prism of >? >??? ?????the cultural mediators, and the cultural means are themselves also >? >???????? transformed as a consequence of their mediation in this continuous >? >???????? dynamic dialectical tension. Here, for me, it is important the idea >? >???????? that the cultural means are as material (if we assume a materialist >? >???????? monism) as all the rest of the world; in fact, are parts of the >? >???????? material world which become signs or tools (and can be therefore >? >???????? socially distributed). This permits the introduction of the scientific >? >???????? study of mind-consciousness (as mediating systems of signs), because >? >???????? mind is not anymore something immaterial and unobservable, but it is >? >???????? as material and observable as the rest of the natural world. It is >? >???????? from this view that, for me, the idea of cultural mediation is the >? >???????? keystone of a monist psychology that includes mind. Thus, when I speak >? >???????? of mediators, I refer to the cultural means which mediate in the S-O >? >???????? dialectics; I am especially interested in signs/secondary artifacts. >? >???????? Here, it is perhaps necessary to insist that when I talk of studying >? >???????? mediators (and their semantic structure), this doesn't mean that they >? >???????? are taken out from the activity (the flux of live) in which they >? >???????? mediate (since out of activity they are not signs anymore); here, I >? >???????? think Vygotsky tries again to overcome another old dichotomy, the >? >???????? functionalism-structuralism one. I hope that all this makes also clear the difference between this view and that of computational psychologies (which in general are profoundly and explicitly dualist and not dialectic). >? >???????? Back to perezhivanie, I'm not obviously trying to deny the influence >? >???????? of Spinoza on Vygotsky's thinking (this is explicit in Vygotsky's >? >???????? writings, especially in ?The teaching about emotions?, in the Vol.6 of >? >???????? the Collected Works). But I have doubts that Vygotsky's introduction >? >???????? of the concept of perezhivanie is to be regarded primarily as a >? >???????? movement towards monism (from a previous cartesian dualism), and that >? >???????? this movement questions the concept of cultural mediation. Instead, >? >???????? and I think that this is in line with some of Gonz?lez-Rey >? >???????? observations in his paper, my impression is that the introduction of >? >???????? the concept of perezhivanie responds more to a movement (a further >? >???????? step) towards holism (something that, in my understanding, can also be >? >???????? found in Spinoza). Thus, I think that the word meaning is still the >? >???????? unit of analysis in the last Vygotsky -and therefore, the idea of >? >???????? cultural mediation is still crucial (in fact, in The problem of the >? >???????? environment, he connects the concept of perezhivanie, which has just >? >???????? introduced, to the development of word meaning [p.345-346, also cited >? >???????? in my paper]). However, in my view, in the last Vygotsky the focus is >? >???????? not anymore primarily on the word-meaning as formed for things (or >? >???????? collections of things, as in the ontogenetic research with Sakharov), but the focus is now in the formation of meaning for holistic situations. >? >???????? Best regards, >? >???????? Marc. >? >???????? 2017-01-03 19:16 GMT+01:00 Alfredo Jornet Gil : >? >???????????? Hi Marc, all, >? >???????????? thanks for joining and for your interesting work, which I follow >? >???????????? since I became aware of it. I appreciate the way in your paper you >? >???????????? show careful and honest attention to the texts of the authors >? >???????????? involved, but perhaps most of all I appreciate that the paper makes >? >???????????? the transformational dimension related to struggle and change >? >???????????? salient, a dimension all papers deemed central to perezhivanie. And I >? >?????? ??????have learned more about Vasilyuk by reading your paper. But I also >? >???????????? see that we have approached the question of perezhivanie differently >? >???????????? and I think that addressing the questions that you raise concerning >? >?????????? ??our article may be a good way to both respond and discuss your paper. >? >???????????? I am aware that our use of the term monism may be problematic to >? >???????????? some, and N. Veresov, who has recently written about this (see >? >???????????? attached article), warns against the dangers of simply moving from >? >???????????? dualism into an undifferentiating monism that relativizes everything, >? >???????????? making development un-studiable. This seems to be the way in which >? >???????????? you have understood our argument, and of course this is not what we are or want to be doing. >? >???????????? Probably many will think that *dialectical materialism* rather than >? >???????????? monism is the proper term, and I could agree with them; we do in fact >? >???????????? use dialectical materialism there and elsewhere. Yet, we wanted to >? >???????????? emphasise the Spinozist influence (an influence that also runs >? >???????????? through Marx) and so we found it appropriate to use the term monism, >? >??????? ?????a term that Vygotsky uses before arguing that Spinoza "develops an essentially materialistic view" >? >???????????? (Collected Works, Vol. 6, p. 124). For us, the aim is working out >? >???????????? ways to empirically examine and formulate problems in ways that do >? >???????????? not reify a mind-body dualism. >? >???????????? Although overcoming dualism is foundational to the CHAT paradigm, I >? >???????????? would however not say that Vygotsky did get to solve all of the >? >???????????? problems that Cartesian dualism had created for psychology, even >? >???????????? though he recognised those problems brilliantly as early as in the >? >???????????? "Crisis". It should suffice to cite Vygotsky's own remarks, which we quote in the paper (and which A.N. >? > ????????????Leont'ev mentions in the introduction to the collected works), where >? >???????????? Vygotsky explicitly critiques some of his own prior ideas for failing >? >???????????? to overcome dualism. We agree with those who, like F. G. Rey, see >? >???????????? Vygotsky's project as a developing rather than as a finalised one. >? >???????????? The fact is that Vygotsky was building a theory on the unity of the >? >???????????? affect and the intellect that was to be grounded on Spinoza, and what >? >? ???????????we try to do is to explore how perezhivanie, as a concept being >? >???????????? developed during the same period (but not finalised or totally >? >???????????? settled!), could be seen from the perspective of the Spinozist Vygotsky. >? >????????? ???As you note, in our article we argue that, if one takes the Spinozist >? >???????????? one-substance approach, classical concepts used in non-classical >? >???????????? psychology, at least in the way they are commonly used in the current >? >???????????? literature, should be revised. One such concept is mediation. And I >? >???????????? personally do not have much of a problem when mediation is used to >? >???????????? denote the fundamental fact that every thing exists always through >? >???????????? *another*, never in and of itself. But I do think that it is >? >???????????? problematic to identify MEDIATORS, such as "a meaning", as a means to >? >???????????? account for or explain developmental processes and learning events, >? >??????? ?????precisely because it is there, at least in my view, that dualism creeps in. >? >???????????? For example, I find it paradoxical that you are concerned that our >? >???????????? monist approach risks turning perezhivanie into a useless category >? >????? ???????because it may be used to explain everything and nothing, and yet you >? >???????????? do not seem to have a problem using the term mediation to account for >? >???????????? the transformation of perezhivanie without clearly elaborating on how >? >??? ?????????mediation does change anything or what it looks like as a real >? >???????????? process. How is it different saying that a perezhivanie mediates the >? >???????????? experiencing-as-struggle from simply saying that it "affects" or >? >???????????? "determines" it? Indeed, if perezhivanie mediates >? >???????????? experiencing-as-struggle, does not experiencing-as-struglgle too >? >???????????? mediate perezhivanie? And do not both may be said to mediate development, or development mediate them? Is not this explaining everything and nothing? >? >???????????? I do believe you can argue that there is a difference between >? >???????????? mediation and classical psychology's cause-effect relations, but to >? >???????????? show this you need to dig into the dialectical underpinnings of the >? >???????????? theory. In your paper, you offer a nice analysis of a lovely case of >? >???????????? a teacher who, in dealing with a challenge with one of her students, >? > ????????????changes her perezhivanie. I think you can rightly argue that there is >? >???????????? a semiotic transformation, and I fully support your statement that by >? >???????????? studying discourse we can empirically approach questions of >? >???????? ????psychological development. The contradictions you show as being >? >???????????? involved and resolved resonate really well with what I experience as >? >???????????? a parent or as a teacher in the classroom. Yet, without unpacking >? >???????????? what this "mediation" taking place between one perezhivanie and the >? >???????????? next one means as a concrete and real, the same analysis could be done taking an information processing approach: >? >???????????? there is an situation that is processed (represented?) in one way, >? >???????????? which then leads to a (cognitive) dissonance, and then there is a >? >???????????? cognitive resolution by means of which the situation is presented >? >???????????? differently in consciousness (indeed, when seen in this way, the term >? >???????????? perezhivanie and the term "representation" become almost >? >???????????? indistinguishable). How is mediation, as an analytical concept, >? >???????????? helping here? And most importantly to the question of perezhivanie, >? >???????????? how is this analysis going to show the internal connection between >? >???????????? intellect and affect that Vygotsky formulates as constitutive of the notion of perezhivanie? >? >???????????? I believe that the key lies in understanding what Vygotsky means when >? >???????????? he says that perezhivanie is a unit of analysis. I will not repeat >? >???????????? here what already is written in at least a couple of the articles in >? >???????????? the special issue (Blunden, ours), that is the difference between >? >???????????? analysis by elements and unit analysis (Vygotsky 1987). A unit >? >???????????? analysis approach is consistent with Spinoza, for whom cause-effect >? >???????? ????explanations were not adequate, requiring instead an understanding of >? >???????????? self-development, perezhivanie as a kernel cell for the development >? >???????????? of personality. And I think you may be after this in your article in >? >???????????? suggesting a form of continuous movement from perezhivanie to >? >???????????? experiencing-as-struggle. But perhaps the major difficulty I find is that, in positing Vygotsky's perezhivanie as "a type of meaning" >? >???????????? and Vasilyuk's perezhivanie (or experiencing-as-struggle) as a "type >? >???????????? of activity," it is difficult not to see here a division between >? >???????????? product and process, a division that then is analytically bridged by >? >???????????? the addition of a third term, mediation, that should bring back the >? >???????????? real movement between the product and the process. >? >???????????? A different approach involves considering the concrete extension of >? >???????????? actual living and lived social relations, and look at them as >? >???????????? generative phenomena. What is there in the encounter between Carla >? >???????????? and the child that leads to change? For it is not inside the mind, >? >???????????? but in real life, in consciousness as the real relation between people, that Carla is changed. >? >???????????? How is the semantic structure that you nicely present and attribute >? >???????????? to Carla a product of the social relation between her and the child? >? >???????????? I think that to rightfully situate perezhivanie as a concept in a >? >???????????? Vygotskian framework, we ought to address its relation to the genetic >? >???????????? law of development. >? >???????????? There is much more to disentangle, but this is long enough. I hope I >? >???????????? have succeeded in making clear these ideas. Thanks so much for >? >???????????? engaging in the discussion! >? >???????????? Alfredo >? >???????????? ________________________________________ >? >???????????? From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >???????????? >? >???????????? >???????????? ? on behalf of Marc Clar? >? >???????????? >???????????? >? >???????????? Sent: 02 January 2017 22:14 >? >???????????? To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >? >???????????? Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! >? >???????????? Hi, all, and thank you so much, Alfredo, for your kind invitation to >? >???????????? participate in this discussion. My paper in the MCA special issue >? >???????????? focuses on a distinction between a type of activity, which I argue >? >???? ????????that is what Vasilyuk called *perezhivanie* (experiencing) and a type >? >???????????? of semiotic mediator, which I argue that is what Vygotsky, in The >? >???????????? Problem of the Environment, called *perezhivanie.* I argue, following >? >?????? ??????Vasilyuk, that in experiencing activities (Vasilyuk's perezhivanie), >? >???????????? this type of mediator is profoundly transformed ? in fact, that >? >???????????? experiencing activities consist of the semiotic transformation of this type of mediator. >? >???????????? As Veresov and Fleer argue in their commentary, perezhivanie (as a >? >???????????? type of >? >???????????? mediator) is for me a psychological phenomenon, one which is of >? >???????????? course conceptualized from a specific theoretical framework. But the >? >???????????? phenomenon is also visible from other theoretical frameworks as well, >? >???????????? as I mention in the paper. This phenomenon is my main interest, and >? >???????????? it is from this interest that I arrived at the concept of perezhivanie (not the other way around). >? >???????????? Now, the phenomenon is that at least emotion, reasoning, and volition >? >???????????? (formation of conscious purposes) seem to be decisively mediated by >? >???????????? holistic situational meaning. My current research concern is trying >? >???????????? to find ways to study and understand how this mediation occurs and >? >???????????? how these semiotic mediators are transformed and distributed. From >? >???????????? this view, I think that experiencing activities (Vasilyuk's >? >???????????? perezhivanie) may provide a good terrain to study these issues >? >???????????? (especially regarding the mediation of emotion), as I tried to exemplify in the paper. >? >???????????? Studying semiotic mediation, however, is of course not easy. >? >???????????? Following Vygotsky, I assume that extended discourse is the >? >???????????? manifestation of thinking within certain psychological conditions >? >???????????? (Vygotsky's Thinking and Speech, chapter 7), and I also assume the >? >???????????? Vygotsky's law of the unity of the structure and function of thinking >? >??? ?????????(Vygotsky's Thinking and Speech, chapter 6). From these two >? >???????????? assumptions, I propose that meaning (and its functions in human >? >???????????? activity) can be scientifically studied by structurally analyzing the >? >???????????? narratives generated by subjects, considering that the discourse >? >???????????? produced in the narrative is the point of departure of this study, >? >???????????? but that considerable analytical work must be done to move from this >? >???????????? discourse to the full characterization of meaning. It is in that >? >???????????? point where I find useful the work developed by Greimas, the usefulness of which I only suggest in the paper. >? >???????????? >>From this background, I found many interesting ideas and questions >? >???????????????? in the >? >???????????? other papers of the special issue. In this first post I will propose >? >???????????? two of them for possible discussion. The first one was raised by >? >???????????? Gonz?lez-Rey, when he introduces, in connection with perezhivanie, >? >???????????? the concepts of personality, and especially, of sense. So, which is >? >???????????? the conceptual (and-or >? >???????????? phenomenal) relation between perezhivanie and sense? Gonz?lez-Rey >? >???????????? suggests that both concepts are somewhat similar (and overcome by the >? >???????????? concept of ?subjective sense?); my opinion, partly expressed in my >? >???????????? commentary, is that perezhivanie is a type of meaning, which includes >? >???????????? different levels of depth, and that sense corresponds to the deepest >? >???????????? level of meaning (which can be characterized as a system of semic >? >???????????? oppositions). Therefore, sense wouldn't be in opposition to meaning >? >???????????? (as ?a microcosm of human consciousness?, as Kozulin remembers in his >? >???????????? commentary), although it would be in opposition to manifested meaning (the surface level of meaning). >? >???????????? The second issue was raised by Roth and Jornet, and I think it goes >? >???????????? beyond the issue of perezhivanie itself. If I understand them well, >? >???????????? they argue that Vygotsky's core proposal of cultural mediation is >? >???????????? influenced by the Cartesian dualism (mind-matter), and that a >? >???????????? promising approach to Cultural Psychology would be a Spinozist >? >???????????? monism. I am actually very interested on the issue of which >? >???????????? epistemological position can best substantiate the construction of a >? >???????????? cultural psychology, and that's why I feel inclined to take the >? >???????????? opportunity to ask for your opinions about that. About the proposal >? >???????????? of Roth and Jornet, I have some doubts. First, I don't see why >? >???????????? Vygotsky's proposals can be seen as dualist (in the Cartesian sense) >? >???????????? -I suspect that it is because of the analytical distinctions?. >? >???????????? Anyway, in my understanding, Vygotsky explicitly assumes a >? >???????????? materialist monism (for example in The Crisis), and in fact he constructs his proposal on mediation upon reflexology, which also explicitly assumed a materialist monism (e.g. >? >???????????? Sechenov). Would a Spinozist monism be a better point of departure? I >? >???????????? don't know, in my understanding it is a more idealist monism, and I >? >???????????? don't clearly see what could be gained. In my opinion, a scientific >? >???????????? psychology which includes the study of mind is only possible if any >? >???????????? type of monism is assumed. However, in my view, for a scientific >? >???????????? psychology, the ontological nature of the world is perhaps less >? >????????? ???important (it is an issue for metaphysics?), and I am inclined to assume a neutral monism (e.g. Russell). >? >???????????? So from this view, a materialist monism and a Spinozist monism >? >???????????? wouldn't be so different, so from both views it could be assumed that >? >???????????? all is of the same nature and all is similarly knowable (including >? >???????????? mind) [which is the ontological nature of the world and to what >? >???????????? degree it is knowable are issues that can be left to philosophy]. >? >???????????? However, in my opinion, this does not mean that, while assuming a >? >???????????? monism, analytical distinctions cannot be done when studying the >? >???????????? world. In that sense, I had the impression that Roth and Jornet >? >?? ??????????tended to dilute analytical distinctions in the name of monism; I >? >???????????? repeat that I don't know if I understood them well, but if this was >? >???????????? the case, in my opinion, analysis would be impossible within the new >? >???????????? psychology suggested by Roth and Jornet, and, regarding perezhivanie, >? >???????????? there would be the danger, noted by Vygotsky in The Crisis and >? >???????????? cautioned by Kozulin in his commentary, that by meaning everything, perezhivanie ends by meaning nothing. >? >???????????? Best regards and happy new year, >? >???????????? Marc. >? >???????????? 2017-01-02 9:12 GMT+01:00 Alfredo Jornet Gil : >? >???????????????? Dear all, >? >?????????? ??????I would like to join David, Luisa, Ana, Henry and the others to wish >? >???????????????? you all a Happy New Year! May it be full of joy, peace, and opportunity. >? >???????????????? I also would like to begin the year announcing our first ?MCA >? >?? ??????????????article discussion, ?although in fact corresponds to the last issue >? >???????????????? of the year >? >???????????? we >? >???????????????? just passed, Issue 4 on Perezhivanie. This is a very special >? >???????????????? *special* issue, not only because its topic has raised lots of >? >???????????????? interest lately in >? >???????????? the >? >???????????????? CHAT community but also because, greatly coordinated by Andy Blunden >? >???????????????? and the rest of the editorial team, the issue takes the form of a >? >???????????????? symposium where authors get the chance to present and respond to >? >???????????????? each others' ideas on the subject. In my view, this allows having a >? >???????????????? rich and >? >???????????? multidimensional >? >???????????????? approach to a subject as important as perezhivanie. >? >???????????????? Following with the dialogical spirit in which the special issue was >? >???????????????? assembled, we will focus on one lead article, but hoping to also >? >???????????????? engage ideas and insights present in or relevant to other >? >???????????????? contributions in the issue. ?Marc Clar?'s "Vygotsky and Vasilyuk on >? >???????????????? Perezhivanie: Two Notions and One Word" will be our focus. The >? >???????????????? article very nicely engages the lead work of Vygotsky, but also the >? >???????????????? less known ??(?in educational literature) but totally relevant works >? >???????????????? of psychologist ?F. Vasilyuk and semiotician >? >???????????? A. >? >???????????????? J. Greimas, mobilising a number of key concepts including those of >? >???????????? semiotic >? >???????????????? mediation and transformation. >? >???? ?????????????In addition to Marc, who will soon join us, I have encouraged some >? >???????????????? of >? >???????????? the >? >???????????????? other authors in the special issue to also join as "relevant >? >???????????????? others," if time and circumstances allow them. Let's hope that this >? >???????????????? will help keeping the symposium spirit up. >? >???????????????? Marc's article is attached to this e-mail and will be made open >? >???????????????? access at the T&F pages as soon as people is back from the holidays. >? >???????????????? The T&F link >? >???????????? is >? >???????????????? this: >? >???????????????? http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039.2016.1186194 >? >? ???????????????The link to the MCA Forum pages, where we announce our discussions >? >???????????????? and other xmca things, is here:http://lchc.ucsd.edu/MCA/ >? >???????????????? I wish us all a very productive and interesting discussion. >? >????????????? ???Alfredo >? ? ? -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: FB66BA33444146DB86A235FB9226CE64.png Type: image/png Size: 155 bytes Desc: not available Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20170107/ac069aab/attachment.png From haydizulfei@rocketmail.com Sun Jan 8 07:56:22 2017 From: haydizulfei@rocketmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?=E2=80=AAHaydi_Zulfei=E2=80=AC_=E2=80=AA?=) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2017 15:56:22 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Xmca-l] HAPPY NEW YEAR AND PEREZHIVANIE References: <1648279449.1038449.1483890982305.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1648279449.1038449.1483890982305@mail.yahoo.com> Dear all, Marc Clara has many good things to overread in his article . He remains loyal to Vygotsky's excellency and superiority ; therefore he diminishes "struggle" for reaching a relief and catharsis to ideation , meaning transfer , transmission or telementation . Things get mixed up during reasoning and argumentation . As I'm somehow excused to work hard on so many articles , to the partial recommendation of Andy , I send my trivial scripts to the list. Hi Andy,Happy New Year and may you are all well !As you said , the problem refers to when everything worked as S====R , that is , an animal as well as a man was somehow instigated by a need , then it , he , she had to , quite automatically , automaton-like aimlessly/goallessly come to a equilibrium/catharsis for an ongoing life . They exemplify Buridan ass's case to depict the inevitability of doing something not to die out of all absurdity . This , they say , came to be called stimulus means , that is something physical was used to resolve the problem but it was not the physicality of the thing which worked for resolution of the problem ; rather , it worked as a sign and this caused the differentiation between tool and sign and then the coinage of one word as an artifact.? That's why two formulas came into being : S====sign/word/language====R ? and S====activity====R . They say : it makes no difference whether activity is carried out with a sign or with a tool and Vygotsky himself says perhaps it would be better to use the general label : mediation . They separate the two processes : sometimes this , sometimes that . Leontiev says the STRUCTURE is the same . But Ilyenko asserts the two processes are one , indeed . That is the same moment the tool is used within the real situation which we know transforms the world and ourself as well , the reflection of it within the process of action with the help of the virtual head/mind is displayed as sign . ??Now , I'm with you on the matter of believing originally that the main problem was whether we are encountering essentialism , that is the dyad , SR direct automation common to man and animal undifferentially or the triad S*R that is , either goal-directed joint activity or S*R that is , sign in between , specific to man . * seems to indicate something that needs to be DONE , not to transmit or convey hence preferable for ACTION IN HARD KNIT URGENT PARTICULAR SITUATION CONSIDERING EFFECTIVE INTERVENTION OF ALL MOMENTS OF EXTRA/INTRALINGUISTICS IN UNITY AND INTEGRATION inventing and creating on the spot urgent appropriate to the circumstances SIGN sidestepping ACT-FREE TRANSMISSION AND TELEMENTATION as fixed code or already determinate sign . As to the problem of mediating and mediated , though you are quite right in your previous remark , I wonder if we can conditionally argue this way : when we say processes , phenomena , etc. must be mediated one could ask by what thing that must be mediated and when we provide a response , that "what thing" becomes a 'mediating factor' but our problem with the colleagues is that they don't enlighten us with the vagueness created by inconsiderate ambiguity and ambivalence . Another problem also emerges : mediated activity is intervened by SIGN the superb truth of us ! ; then how is it that we let ourselves allowed to say : 'the mediating activity' because what caused the allowance to realize was the SIGN not the activity . It seems we are still fluctuating between Leontiev and Vygotsky . Though at the end of 'thinking and activity' Vygotsky stresses in fact the investigation should have gone in reverse order , that is beginning with deed rather than with word and the formation of concepts .? BestHaydi ?? Dear Peter, what I summarily take from your writing first instance is maneuvering among meaning-making , that is , sign alteration as a generic one stage phenomenon . It more resembles 'social meaning' and sense or personal meaning of Leontiev . You refer to particular settings . As far as personality formation is concerned and when you're swerving as to what way to choose out of critical points in your life either you choose out of or among different social meaning available to you which is then healing your maladies if practically carried out to the end or if not , you'll get engaged in distress , psychoses , deterioration and finally ruining your life this way or another . ?? On the second instance , again you remind us of hierarchies of motive of Leontiev . You already have gone through a 'mediational process' as the one explained in the first instance . Then , you reach a critical point and have to go astray from traversing the previous path and form "another value system" according to which you have to mount another level or layer to the previous configuration of prior action . This forms double senses and in Leontevian terms , you have to go one level higher and replace one of the three levels : motive , goal , conditions , the highest might be a sacrifice .? Best Haydi? From lpscholar2@gmail.com Sun Jan 8 09:30:01 2017 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2017 09:30:01 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! In-Reply-To: <1483836706132.31367@iped.uio.no> References: <1483344752182.40904@iped.uio.no> <1483467423798.57819@iped.uio.no> <1483601196884.31418@iped.uio.no> <5df5e870-3ef8-70d6-0c17-f8647ba17e62@mira.net> , <587124d9.d957620a.4a5a8.bd56@mx.google.com> <1483820996800.91513@iped.uio.no>, <58718707.4270630a.c8bff.94c9@mx.google.com> <1483836706132.31367@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <5872773f.19af630a.27791.0ba4@mx.google.com> So ... Moving to these more subtle nuanced shadings in this months special issue, in what ways does this months article answer Marc?s critique of having ?an? experience (as a unit) in a way that moves beyond becoming an ?undifferentiated whole?? This seems to be a key moment of ?our? thinking in the Deweyan sense?: Thinking goes on in trains of ideas, but the ideas form a train only because they are much more than what an ?analytic psychology? calls ideas. They are phases, emotionally and practically ?distinguished? of a developing underlying quality .... Subtle shadings of a PERvading and developing hue. (quoted from page 115 of your and Roth?s 2013 article). Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Alfredo Jornet Gil Sent: January 7, 2017 4:43 PM To: lpscholar2@gmail.com; Andy Blunden; Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; Larry Purss Subject: Re: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! Thanks Larry; I also think our current?understanding as elaborated in the?MCA?2016?special issue?is more nuanced;??and less?susceptible of?Marc's critique of it becoming?an undifferentiated whole that becomes un-studiable.? ? Alfredo From: lpscholar2@gmail.com Sent: 08 January 2017 01:25 To: Alfredo Jornet Gil; Andy Blunden; Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; Larry Purss Subject: RE: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! ? Alfredo, i will attempt to stay within ?an experience? and as the ?working over an experience?. If i may, i will borrow your word meaning where you use the word (perfuse) as it helps me listen into David and Andy explore the contrast of ?word? and ?word meaning? as units. On page 113 of your and Roth?s article you focus in on affect. In your words you say?: ? Affect is neither something separate from the unit nor a factor that influences or characterizes a part of this unit?: It PERFUSES the unit. The unit you refer to is experience/perezivanie. This minimal unit includes all individuals, their social/material setting, and the TRANS-actional relations that BIND them into a whole. ? I hope this is staying within the bounds of exploring having AN experience as a unit ; -) ? Sent from my Windows 10 phone ? From: Alfredo Jornet Gil Sent: January 7, 2017 12:24 PM To: Andy Blunden; Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; Larry Purss Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! ? Larry, all, ? our arguments in the 2014 address a science education literature in which the constructivist perspective is the leading perspective; We note that the assertion that people learn from experience is everywhere taken for granted but nowhere accounted for. We resort to pragmatist and phenomenological literature along with Vygotsky's insights to point out the need to account for learning as something that cannot be the result of an individual's construction; in experience there is always something in excess of what you intended, and this is a basic feature of doing, of performing. I take that to be your "trans" in the trans/zhivanie word, Larry, which already is denoted in the word PERezhivanie. ? But I do not wish to move our discussion too far away from Marc's paper and the Perezhivanie special issue. We also risk disengaging many that have not have the privilege we've had to have the time to read so many articles in just few days into the new year. I think we are a point in the discussion where a pretty clear point of agreement/disagreement, and therefore of possibility for growth, has been reached with regard to the view of perezhivanie as "an experience" and as the "working over it". I think that to allow as many as possible to follow, and hopefully also engage, I think it will be helpful to bring the diverse perspectives and theoretical accounts to matter in accounting for some actual material. And there are a number of cases described in the articles, including Marc's case of a teacher, as well as everyday facts, such as those brought by Beth, and in Beth's article... ? I take the task for myself too, but Saturday morning need to attend to other things! A ? ? ? ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com Sent: 07 January 2017 18:26 To: Andy Blunden; Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; Larry Purss Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! ? Andy, Peter, i hope the intention to move beyond politeness to struggle with this topic materializes. In this vein i want to introduce exploration of the ?excess? of actual over intended meaning as he sketched his introduction to ?experience?. ? Citing Dewey, Alfredo says that this excess of actual learning over intended learning INCLUDES what Dewey refers to as ?attitudes? and these ?attitudes? are FUNDAMENTALLY what count in the future. Alfredo and Roth? then add this summary statement : ? There is therefore, a need to theorize experience in terms that do not assume control and rationality as the sine qua non of learning. It also implies a need to develop analytical accounts that retain the ?uncertainty? that is an ?integral part? of human experience. ? Where are Alfredo and Roth leading us with this sketch of experience? To highlight ?attitudes? that occur in the excess of actual over intended learning? The word ?attitudes? generates images of (atmosphere) and (moods) that ?flow? like cascading waterfalls that can be imaged as (force) or as (receptive). Attitudes that flow to places where they are received within a certain attitude of care and concern. Not as forceful an image as moving only? with control and rationality.? Describing ?weaker? thought that remains uncertain but that also opens us to the other?s peril and plight. Possibly a post-analytic motion that exceeds the intended by living-through the actual that develops ?attitudes? that are fundamentally what count for the future. ? ? Sent from my Windows 10 phone ? From: Andy Blunden Sent: January 7, 2017 5:00 AM To: Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! ? OK Peter, what you say is all very true I am sure, but it entails conflating activity and action (as mass nouns) and context and mediation, and makes the required distinction much like one could find multiple meanings for the word "and" by listing the different phrases and clauses which can be linked by "and." ? Andy ? ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making ? On 7/01/2017 11:42 PM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: >? > Let me try to illustrate. >? > Reading as mediated action: The cultural-historical > context of reading mediates how one?s attention and > response are channeled in socially constructed ways. So, > in one setting, say at home or reading in the company of > friends, a novel might bring a reader to tears, or invite > readers to share personal stories that parallel those of > the plot lines, or laugh out loud. But another setting, a > formal school or university class, would have historical > values and practices that mute emotional and personal > responses, and promote a more sober, analytic way of > reading and talking that fits with specific historical >? critical conventions and genres, and discourages others. >? > Reading as mediating action: The act of reading can be > transformational. In reading about an talking about a > character?s actions, a reader might reconsider a value > system, become more sympathetic to real people who > resemble oppressed characters, etc. In other words, > reading a text may serve a mediational process in which > textual ideas and exemplars enable a reader to think > differently. >? > *From:*Andy Blunden [mailto:ablunden@mira.net] > *Sent:* Saturday, January 7, 2017 6:28 AM > *To:* Peter Smagorinsky ; eXtended Mind, > Culture, Activity > *Subject:* Re: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! >? > Can you explain in a paragraph or two,. Peter, rather than > asking us all to read 10,000 words to extract an answer? >? > Andy >? > ------------------------------------------------------------ >? > Andy Blunden > http://home.mira.net/~andy > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making >? >? > On 7/01/2017 11:23 PM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: >? >???? Andy and others, I tried to work out the mediated/mediating question in the area of reading....see if this helps. >? >???? Smagorinsky, P., & O'Donnell-Allen, C. (1998). Reading as mediated and mediating action: Composing meaning for literature through multimedia interpretive texts. Reading Research Quarterly, 33, 198-226. Available athttp://www.petersmagorinsky.net/About/PDF/RRQ/RRQ1998.pdf >? >???? -----Original Message----- >? >???? From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >???? ? [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden >? >???? Sent: Friday, January 6, 2017 7:12 PM >? >???? To:xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu >? >???? Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! >? >???? I have never understood this supposed distinction, Alfredo, between "mediated activity" and "mediating activity" given that all activity is mediated and all activity mediates. >? >???? Also, could you spell out what you mean by the "tension" >? >???? between perezhivanie as meaning and perezhivanie as struggle. >? >???? Andy >? >???? ------------------------------------------------------------ >? >???? Andy Blunden >? >???? http://home.mira.net/~andy >? >???? http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making >? >???? On 5/01/2017 6:26 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: >? >???????? Thanks Marc for your careful response. >? >???????? I am familiar to Vygotsky's notion of cultural mediation and I am aware and acknowledge that it was elaborated as a means to overcome dualism, and that it is not analog to a computational approach. >? >???????? When I brought the computing analogy, I did so with regard not to the concept of cultural mediation in general, but to the way it can be (and is) deployed analytically. I react to what it seems to me a dichotomy between a "meaning" as something that is static (thereby a form of "representation" or reflection of the relation with the environment instead of?refraction)??? and the experiencing-as-struggling, which is described as?transformation or change. If so, mediation here would seem to be part of a methodological device that first dissects "a type of meaning" from "a type of activity" (or a given state from the process that changes that state), and then unites it by adding the term "mediation." And this may be my misreading, but in that (mis)reading (which perhaps is mostly due to the fact that in your empirical illustration only the initial and end product, i.e., perezhivanie, are described, but not the experiencing-as-struggle, that is, the moving between the two), mediation here seems to do as analytical concept precisely what you were afraid our monism was doing: explaining nothing. Only the end products but not the process of producing perezhivanie are revealed. This may be problematic if one attends to what Veresov argues in the paper I shared yesterday, where he defends the notion of mediation but also specifies that Vygotsky speaks of *mediating activity* (as opposed to *mediated* activity). That is, not mediation by signs as products, but mediating activity as the activity of producing signs (which again is an activity of producing social relations, perhaps what you refer as "holistic meanings"?). What do you think? >? >???????? I did not think you were trying to deny the influence of Spinoza, and I do not think we ever said that Perezhivanie was primarily a move from Cartesian Dualism to Monism, as you suggest in your post. I copy and paste from my prior post:? "The fact is that Vygotsky was building a theory on the unity of the affect and the intellect that was to be grounded on Spinoza, and what we try to do is to explore how perezhivanie, as a concept being developed during the same period (but not finalised or totally settled!), could be seen from the perspective of the Spinozist Vygotsky." >? >???????? I totally believe that bringing the distinction between perezhivanie as meaning, and perezhivanie as struggle, is totally relevant, and Beth Ferholt's vignettes of Where the Wild Things Are do indeed illustrate this. We really need to address this tension, which as Beth's examples and as our own everyday experience shows, is a tension that matters not just to books and to theories but to living persons (children, teachers), a tension that moreover is present and mentioned in all the articles of the symposium. The papers offer different proposals, and I think is so great we have the chance to discuss them! I too, as you, am very interesting in hearing others about the questions you had concerning sense and meaning. >? >???????? Alfredo >? >???????? From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >???????? >? >???????? >???????? ? on behalf of Marc Clar? >? >???????? >? >???????? Sent: 04 January 2017 22:31 >? >???????? To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >? >???????? Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! >? >???????? Thank you very much, Alfredo, for sharing this excellent paper by >? >???????? Veresov, and thanks also for your responses, which really helped me to >? >???????? better understand your points. My main doubt about your proposal >? >???????? was/is caused by the statement that the idea of cultural >? >???????? mediation/mediator implies a cartesian dualism. This shocks me >? >???????? because, to me, the idea of cultural mediation is absolutely crucial >? >???????? (in fact, the keystone) for the construction of a monist (and >? >???????? scientific) psychology that does not forget mind ?that is, a cultural >? >???????? psychology. From your response, however, I realized that we may be >? >? ???????approaching the idea of mediation in different ways. I talk of >? >???????? mediation and mediators in a quite restricted way. The starting point >? >???????? of my understanding of mediation is a dialectical relationship >? >???????? (organic, transactional) between the subject and the world (Vygotsky departs from the scheme stimulus-response, from reflexology). >? >???????? This relationship, that Vygotsky calls primitive psychological >? >???????? functions, would be basically biological. However, in human beings >? >???????? this relationship is mediated by cultural means: signs and tools; or >? >???????? primary, secondary and terciary artifacts. These cultural means >? >???????? reorganize the primitive functions (dialectic S-O relationship), which >? >???????? become then higher psychological functions (S-M-O) (see for example, >? >???????? The problem of the cultural development of the child, in The Vygotsky >? >???????? Reader). Now, the subject, the cultural mediators, and the object form >? >???????? an inseparable dialectical unit, so that the subject acts on >? >???????? (transforms) the object through the prism of the cultural mediators, >? >???????? the object acts on (transforms) the subject also through the prism of >? >??? ?????the cultural mediators, and the cultural means are themselves also >? >???????? transformed as a consequence of their mediation in this continuous >? >???????? dynamic dialectical tension. Here, for me, it is important the idea >? >???????? that the cultural means are as material (if we assume a materialist >? >???????? monism) as all the rest of the world; in fact, are parts of the >? >???????? material world which become signs or tools (and can be therefore >? >???????? socially distributed). This permits the introduction of the scientific >? >???????? study of mind-consciousness (as mediating systems of signs), because >? >???????? mind is not anymore something immaterial and unobservable, but it is >? >???????? as material and observable as the rest of the natural world. It is >? >???????? from this view that, for me, the idea of cultural mediation is the >? >???????? keystone of a monist psychology that includes mind. Thus, when I speak >? >???????? of mediators, I refer to the cultural means which mediate in the S-O >? >???????? dialectics; I am especially interested in signs/secondary artifacts. >? >???????? Here, it is perhaps necessary to insist that when I talk of studying >? >???????? mediators (and their semantic structure), this doesn't mean that they >? >???????? are taken out from the activity (the flux of live) in which they >? >???????? mediate (since out of activity they are not signs anymore); here, I >? >???????? think Vygotsky tries again to overcome another old dichotomy, the >? >???????? functionalism-structuralism one. I hope that all this makes also clear the difference between this view and that of computational psychologies (which in general are profoundly and explicitly dualist and not dialectic). >? >???????? Back to perezhivanie, I'm not obviously trying to deny the influence >? >???????? of Spinoza on Vygotsky's thinking (this is explicit in Vygotsky's >? >???????? writings, especially in ?The teaching about emotions?, in the Vol.6 of >? >???????? the Collected Works). But I have doubts that Vygotsky's introduction >? >???????? of the concept of perezhivanie is to be regarded primarily as a >? >???????? movement towards monism (from a previous cartesian dualism), and that >? >???????? this movement questions the concept of cultural mediation. Instead, >? >???????? and I think that this is in line with some of Gonz?lez-Rey >? >???????? observations in his paper, my impression is that the introduction of >? >???????? the concept of perezhivanie responds more to a movement (a further >? >???????? step) towards holism (something that, in my understanding, can also be >? >???????? found in Spinoza). Thus, I think that the word meaning is still the >? >???????? unit of analysis in the last Vygotsky -and therefore, the idea of >? >???????? cultural mediation is still crucial (in fact, in The problem of the >? >???????? environment, he connects the concept of perezhivanie, which has just >? >???????? introduced, to the development of word meaning [p.345-346, also cited >? >???????? in my paper]). However, in my view, in the last Vygotsky the focus is >? >???????? not anymore primarily on the word-meaning as formed for things (or >? >???????? collections of things, as in the ontogenetic research with Sakharov), but the focus is now in the formation of meaning for holistic situations. >? >???????? Best regards, >? >???????? Marc. >? >???????? 2017-01-03 19:16 GMT+01:00 Alfredo Jornet Gil : >? >???????????? Hi Marc, all, >? >???????????? thanks for joining and for your interesting work, which I follow >? >???????????? since I became aware of it. I appreciate the way in your paper you >? >???????????? show careful and honest attention to the texts of the authors >? >???????????? involved, but perhaps most of all I appreciate that the paper makes >? >???????????? the transformational dimension related to struggle and change >? >???????????? salient, a dimension all papers deemed central to perezhivanie. And I >? >?????? ??????have learned more about Vasilyuk by reading your paper. But I also >? >???????????? see that we have approached the question of perezhivanie differently >? >???????????? and I think that addressing the questions that you raise concerning >? >?????????? ??our article may be a good way to both respond and discuss your paper. >? >???????????? I am aware that our use of the term monism may be problematic to >? >???????????? some, and N. Veresov, who has recently written about this (see >? >???????????? attached article), warns against the dangers of simply moving from >? >???????????? dualism into an undifferentiating monism that relativizes everything, >? >???????????? making development un-studiable. This seems to be the way in which >? >???????????? you have understood our argument, and of course this is not what we are or want to be doing. >? >???????????? Probably many will think that *dialectical materialism* rather than >? >???????????? monism is the proper term, and I could agree with them; we do in fact >? >???????????? use dialectical materialism there and elsewhere. Yet, we wanted to >? >???????????? emphasise the Spinozist influence (an influence that also runs >? >???????????? through Marx) and so we found it appropriate to use the term monism, >? >??????? ?????a term that Vygotsky uses before arguing that Spinoza "develops an essentially materialistic view" >? >???????????? (Collected Works, Vol. 6, p. 124). For us, the aim is working out >? >???????????? ways to empirically examine and formulate problems in ways that do >? >???????????? not reify a mind-body dualism. >? >???????????? Although overcoming dualism is foundational to the CHAT paradigm, I >? >???????????? would however not say that Vygotsky did get to solve all of the >? >???????????? problems that Cartesian dualism had created for psychology, even >? >???????????? though he recognised those problems brilliantly as early as in the >? >???????????? "Crisis". It should suffice to cite Vygotsky's own remarks, which we quote in the paper (and which A.N. >? > ????????????Leont'ev mentions in the introduction to the collected works), where >? >???????????? Vygotsky explicitly critiques some of his own prior ideas for failing >? >???????????? to overcome dualism. We agree with those who, like F. G. Rey, see >? >???????????? Vygotsky's project as a developing rather than as a finalised one. >? >???????????? The fact is that Vygotsky was building a theory on the unity of the >? >???????????? affect and the intellect that was to be grounded on Spinoza, and what >? >? ???????????we try to do is to explore how perezhivanie, as a concept being >? >???????????? developed during the same period (but not finalised or totally >? >???????????? settled!), could be seen from the perspective of the Spinozist Vygotsky. >? >????????? ???As you note, in our article we argue that, if one takes the Spinozist >? >???????????? one-substance approach, classical concepts used in non-classical >? >???????????? psychology, at least in the way they are commonly used in the current >? >???????????? literature, should be revised. One such concept is mediation. And I >? >???????????? personally do not have much of a problem when mediation is used to >? >???????????? denote the fundamental fact that every thing exists always through >? >???????????? *another*, never in and of itself. But I do think that it is >? >???????????? problematic to identify MEDIATORS, such as "a meaning", as a means to >? >???????????? account for or explain developmental processes and learning events, >? >??????? ?????precisely because it is there, at least in my view, that dualism creeps in. >? >???????????? For example, I find it paradoxical that you are concerned that our >? >???????????? monist approach risks turning perezhivanie into a useless category >? >????? ???????because it may be used to explain everything and nothing, and yet you >? >???????????? do not seem to have a problem using the term mediation to account for >? >???????????? the transformation of perezhivanie without clearly elaborating on how >? >??? ?????????mediation does change anything or what it looks like as a real >? >???????????? process. How is it different saying that a perezhivanie mediates the >? >???????????? experiencing-as-struggle from simply saying that it "affects" or >? >???????????? "determines" it? Indeed, if perezhivanie mediates >? >???????????? experiencing-as-struggle, does not experiencing-as-struglgle too >? >???????????? mediate perezhivanie? And do not both may be said to mediate development, or development mediate them? Is not this explaining everything and nothing? >? >???????????? I do believe you can argue that there is a difference between >? >???????????? mediation and classical psychology's cause-effect relations, but to >? >???????????? show this you need to dig into the dialectical underpinnings of the >? >???????????? theory. In your paper, you offer a nice analysis of a lovely case of >? >???????????? a teacher who, in dealing with a challenge with one of her students, >? > ????????????changes her perezhivanie. I think you can rightly argue that there is >? >???????????? a semiotic transformation, and I fully support your statement that by >? >???????????? studying discourse we can empirically approach questions of >? >???????? ????psychological development. The contradictions you show as being >? >???????????? involved and resolved resonate really well with what I experience as >? >???????????? a parent or as a teacher in the classroom. Yet, without unpacking >? >???????????? what this "mediation" taking place between one perezhivanie and the >? >???????????? next one means as a concrete and real, the same analysis could be done taking an information processing approach: >? >???????????? there is an situation that is processed (represented?) in one way, >? >???????????? which then leads to a (cognitive) dissonance, and then there is a >? >???????????? cognitive resolution by means of which the situation is presented >? >???????????? differently in consciousness (indeed, when seen in this way, the term >? >???????????? perezhivanie and the term "representation" become almost >? >???????????? indistinguishable). How is mediation, as an analytical concept, >? >???????????? helping here? And most importantly to the question of perezhivanie, >? >???????????? how is this analysis going to show the internal connection between >? >???????????? intellect and affect that Vygotsky formulates as constitutive of the notion of perezhivanie? >? >???????????? I believe that the key lies in understanding what Vygotsky means when >? >???????????? he says that perezhivanie is a unit of analysis. I will not repeat >? >???????????? here what already is written in at least a couple of the articles in >? >???????????? the special issue (Blunden, ours), that is the difference between >? >???????????? analysis by elements and unit analysis (Vygotsky 1987). A unit >? >???????????? analysis approach is consistent with Spinoza, for whom cause-effect >? >???????? ????explanations were not adequate, requiring instead an understanding of >? >???????????? self-development, perezhivanie as a kernel cell for the development >? >???????????? of personality. And I think you may be after this in your article in >? >???????????? suggesting a form of continuous movement from perezhivanie to >? >???????????? experiencing-as-struggle. But perhaps the major difficulty I find is that, in positing Vygotsky's perezhivanie as "a type of meaning" >? >???????????? and Vasilyuk's perezhivanie (or experiencing-as-struggle) as a "type >? >???????????? of activity," it is difficult not to see here a division between >? >???????????? product and process, a division that then is analytically bridged by >? >???????????? the addition of a third term, mediation, that should bring back the >? >???????????? real movement between the product and the process. >? >???????????? A different approach involves considering the concrete extension of >? >???????????? actual living and lived social relations, and look at them as >? >???????????? generative phenomena. What is there in the encounter between Carla >? >???????????? and the child that leads to change? For it is not inside the mind, >? >???????????? but in real life, in consciousness as the real relation between people, that Carla is changed. >? >???????????? How is the semantic structure that you nicely present and attribute >? >???????????? to Carla a product of the social relation between her and the child? >? >???????????? I think that to rightfully situate perezhivanie as a concept in a >? >???????????? Vygotskian framework, we ought to address its relation to the genetic >? >???????????? law of development. >? >???????????? There is much more to disentangle, but this is long enough. I hope I >? >???????????? have succeeded in making clear these ideas. Thanks so much for >? >???????????? engaging in the discussion! >? >???????????? Alfredo >? >???????????? ________________________________________ >? >???????????? From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >???????????? >? >???????????? >???????????? ? on behalf of Marc Clar? >? >???????????? >???????????? >? >???????????? Sent: 02 January 2017 22:14 >? >???????????? To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >? >???????????? Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! >? >???????????? Hi, all, and thank you so much, Alfredo, for your kind invitation to >? >???????????? participate in this discussion. My paper in the MCA special issue >? >???????????? focuses on a distinction between a type of activity, which I argue >? >???? ????????that is what Vasilyuk called *perezhivanie* (experiencing) and a type >? >???????????? of semiotic mediator, which I argue that is what Vygotsky, in The >? >???????????? Problem of the Environment, called *perezhivanie.* I argue, following >? >?????? ??????Vasilyuk, that in experiencing activities (Vasilyuk's perezhivanie), >? >???????????? this type of mediator is profoundly transformed ? in fact, that >? >???????????? experiencing activities consist of the semiotic transformation of this type of mediator. >? >???????????? As Veresov and Fleer argue in their commentary, perezhivanie (as a >? >???????????? type of >? >???????????? mediator) is for me a psychological phenomenon, one which is of >? >???????????? course conceptualized from a specific theoretical framework. But the >? >???????????? phenomenon is also visible from other theoretical frameworks as well, >? >???????????? as I mention in the paper. This phenomenon is my main interest, and >? >???????????? it is from this interest that I arrived at the concept of perezhivanie (not the other way around). >? >???????????? Now, the phenomenon is that at least emotion, reasoning, and volition >? >???????????? (formation of conscious purposes) seem to be decisively mediated by >? >???????????? holistic situational meaning. My current research concern is trying >? >???????????? to find ways to study and understand how this mediation occurs and >? >???????????? how these semiotic mediators are transformed and distributed. From >? >???????????? this view, I think that experiencing activities (Vasilyuk's >? >???????????? perezhivanie) may provide a good terrain to study these issues >? >???????????? (especially regarding the mediation of emotion), as I tried to exemplify in the paper. >? >???????????? Studying semiotic mediation, however, is of course not easy. >? >???????????? Following Vygotsky, I assume that extended discourse is the >? >???????????? manifestation of thinking within certain psychological conditions >? >???????????? (Vygotsky's Thinking and Speech, chapter 7), and I also assume the >? >???????????? Vygotsky's law of the unity of the structure and function of thinking >? >??? ?????????(Vygotsky's Thinking and Speech, chapter 6). From these two >? >???????????? assumptions, I propose that meaning (and its functions in human >? >???????????? activity) can be scientifically studied by structurally analyzing the >? >???????????? narratives generated by subjects, considering that the discourse >? >???????????? produced in the narrative is the point of departure of this study, >? >???????????? but that considerable analytical work must be done to move from this >? >???????????? discourse to the full characterization of meaning. It is in that >? >???????????? point where I find useful the work developed by Greimas, the usefulness of which I only suggest in the paper. >? >???????????? >>From this background, I found many interesting ideas and questions >? >???????????????? in the >? >???????????? other papers of the special issue. In this first post I will propose >? >???????????? two of them for possible discussion. The first one was raised by >? >???????????? Gonz?lez-Rey, when he introduces, in connection with perezhivanie, >? >???????????? the concepts of personality, and especially, of sense. So, which is >? >???????????? the conceptual (and-or >? >???????????? phenomenal) relation between perezhivanie and sense? Gonz?lez-Rey >? >???????????? suggests that both concepts are somewhat similar (and overcome by the >? >???????????? concept of ?subjective sense?); my opinion, partly expressed in my >? >???????????? commentary, is that perezhivanie is a type of meaning, which includes >? >???????????? different levels of depth, and that sense corresponds to the deepest >? >???????????? level of meaning (which can be characterized as a system of semic >? >???????????? oppositions). Therefore, sense wouldn't be in opposition to meaning >? >???????????? (as ?a microcosm of human consciousness?, as Kozulin remembers in his >? >???????????? commentary), although it would be in opposition to manifested meaning (the surface level of meaning). >? >???????????? The second issue was raised by Roth and Jornet, and I think it goes >? >???????????? beyond the issue of perezhivanie itself. If I understand them well, >? >???????????? they argue that Vygotsky's core proposal of cultural mediation is >? >???????????? influenced by the Cartesian dualism (mind-matter), and that a >? >???????????? promising approach to Cultural Psychology would be a Spinozist >? >???????????? monism. I am actually very interested on the issue of which >? >???????????? epistemological position can best substantiate the construction of a >? >???????????? cultural psychology, and that's why I feel inclined to take the >? >???????????? opportunity to ask for your opinions about that. About the proposal >? >???????????? of Roth and Jornet, I have some doubts. First, I don't see why >? >???????????? Vygotsky's proposals can be seen as dualist (in the Cartesian sense) >? >???????????? -I suspect that it is because of the analytical distinctions?. >? >???????????? Anyway, in my understanding, Vygotsky explicitly assumes a >? >???????????? materialist monism (for example in The Crisis), and in fact he constructs his proposal on mediation upon reflexology, which also explicitly assumed a materialist monism (e.g. >? >???????????? Sechenov). Would a Spinozist monism be a better point of departure? I >? >???????????? don't know, in my understanding it is a more idealist monism, and I >? >???????????? don't clearly see what could be gained. In my opinion, a scientific >? >???????????? psychology which includes the study of mind is only possible if any >? >???????????? type of monism is assumed. However, in my view, for a scientific >? >???????????? psychology, the ontological nature of the world is perhaps less >? >????????? ???important (it is an issue for metaphysics?), and I am inclined to assume a neutral monism (e.g. Russell). >? >???????????? So from this view, a materialist monism and a Spinozist monism >? >???????????? wouldn't be so different, so from both views it could be assumed that >? >???????????? all is of the same nature and all is similarly knowable (including >? >???????????? mind) [which is the ontological nature of the world and to what >? >???????????? degree it is knowable are issues that can be left to philosophy]. >? >???????????? However, in my opinion, this does not mean that, while assuming a >? >???????????? monism, analytical distinctions cannot be done when studying the >? >???????????? world. In that sense, I had the impression that Roth and Jornet >? >?? ??????????tended to dilute analytical distinctions in the name of monism; I >? >???????????? repeat that I don't know if I understood them well, but if this was >? >???????????? the case, in my opinion, analysis would be impossible within the new >? >???????????? psychology suggested by Roth and Jornet, and, regarding perezhivanie, >? >???????????? there would be the danger, noted by Vygotsky in The Crisis and >? >???????????? cautioned by Kozulin in his commentary, that by meaning everything, perezhivanie ends by meaning nothing. >? >???????????? Best regards and happy new year, >? >???????????? Marc. >? >???????????? 2017-01-02 9:12 GMT+01:00 Alfredo Jornet Gil : >? >???????????????? Dear all, >? >?????????? ??????I would like to join David, Luisa, Ana, Henry and the others to wish >? >???????????????? you all a Happy New Year! May it be full of joy, peace, and opportunity. >? >???????????????? I also would like to begin the year announcing our first ?MCA >? >?? ??????????????article discussion, ?although in fact corresponds to the last issue >? >???????????????? of the year >? >???????????? we >? >???????????????? just passed, Issue 4 on Perezhivanie. This is a very special >? >???????????????? *special* issue, not only because its topic has raised lots of >? >???????????????? interest lately in >? >???????????? the >? >???????????????? CHAT community but also because, greatly coordinated by Andy Blunden >? >???????????????? and the rest of the editorial team, the issue takes the form of a >? >???????????????? symposium where authors get the chance to present and respond to >? >???????????????? each others' ideas on the subject. In my view, this allows having a >? >???????????????? rich and >? >???????????? multidimensional >? >???????????????? approach to a subject as important as perezhivanie. >? >???????????????? Following with the dialogical spirit in which the special issue was >? >???????????????? assembled, we will focus on one lead article, but hoping to also >? >???????????????? engage ideas and insights present in or relevant to other >? >???????????????? contributions in the issue. ?Marc Clar?'s "Vygotsky and Vasilyuk on >? >???????????????? Perezhivanie: Two Notions and One Word" will be our focus. The >? >???????????????? article very nicely engages the lead work of Vygotsky, but also the >? >???????????????? less known ??(?in educational literature) but totally relevant works >? >???????????????? of psychologist ?F. Vasilyuk and semiotician >? >???????????? A. >? >???????????????? J. Greimas, mobilising a number of key concepts including those of >? >???????????? semiotic >? >???????????????? mediation and transformation. >? >???? ?????????????In addition to Marc, who will soon join us, I have encouraged some >? >???????????????? of >? >???????????? the >? >???????????????? other authors in the special issue to also join as "relevant >? >???????????????? others," if time and circumstances allow them. Let's hope that this >? >???????????????? will help keeping the symposium spirit up. >? >???????????????? Marc's article is attached to this e-mail and will be made open >? >???????????????? access at the T&F pages as soon as people is back from the holidays. >? >???????????????? The T&F link >? >???????????? is >? >???????????????? this: >? >???????????????? http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039.2016.1186194 >? >? ???????????????The link to the MCA Forum pages, where we announce our discussions >? >???????????????? and other xmca things, is here:http://lchc.ucsd.edu/MCA/ >? >???????????????? I wish us all a very productive and interesting discussion. >? >????????????? ???Alfredo >? ? ? -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 06BBD1EA5EDC410F906211EBF4248B95.png Type: image/png Size: 234 bytes Desc: not available Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20170108/023839fa/attachment.png From lpscholar2@gmail.com Sun Jan 8 12:49:26 2017 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2017 12:49:26 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Barack Obama, Before He Was President - The New Yorker Message-ID: <5872a5fc.09d1620a.1f361.f7d6@mx.google.com> Hear is an article that I believe expresses the reality of what Dewey called ?attitude?. A Sunday read that does speak to the general category of (experiences) and the notion of having AN experience as demarcated by working-through or living-through experiences. Obama, Before He Was President Even when he was very young, Obama was scornful of, as he puts it, ?people who preferred the dream to the reality, impotence to compromise.? http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2007/05/07/the-conciliator?mbid=nl_Sunday Longreads (12)&CNDID=40857424&spMailingID=10183133&spUserID=MTMzMTg0ODI3MDU3S0&spJobID=1080500581&spReportId=MTA4MDUwMDU4MQS2 Sent from my Windows 10 phone From anamshane@gmail.com Mon Jan 9 03:39:35 2017 From: anamshane@gmail.com (Ana Marjanovic-Shane) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2017 11:39:35 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Ideological Becomings in (Post)Socialist Childhood and Schooling from a Dialogic Framework Message-ID: Dear XMCA friends and colleagues! Dialogic Pedagogy Journal is issuing the following Call for papers for a special issue of Dialogic Pedagogy journal According to Bakhtin (1986) and Medvedev (1985), ?ideological becoming? is the formation of ideological subjectivity within the historical, political and cultural ?ideological environment,?? in which an individual lives. This formation is both reactive, emergent, and proactive, dialogic. Individual ideological subjectivity is shaped and constrained by its historical, political and cultural ideological environment. However, at the same time an individual creatively and at times dangerously transcends her/his ideological environment in her/his ideological becoming. Among other things, the XX century was characterized by the emergence and then decline of the so-called real socialism political and economic regimes. We feel it is important to document and analyze Ideological Becoming in (Post)Socialist Childhood and Schooling from a Dialogic Framework, while participants are still available. This special DPJ issue aims to bring together those who had first-hand experiences with or conduct educational and/or historical research with children and schooling in (post)socialist societies. (Post)socialist childhood and schooling in (post)socialist education system are usually assumed to be monolithic and authoritarian, far from dialogic. However, by reflecting on our own or other?s experiences, narratives and observations of (post)socialist childhood, we realized that our memories, experiences and observations might offer unique and enriching soil for understanding, exploring, reflecting, and critiquing dialogic pedagogical theories. Through this special issue, we hope to expand the scholarship of this community to the territory of a space and time that were not previously examined (sufficiently) for dialogic pedagogy by creating interests and forums for dialogues. Following are a few exemplary (non-exclusive) questions that we are interested to explore in this special issue: 1. What constituted dialogical pedagogy under the (post)socialist education system? What aspects of the socialist childhood/schooling were dialogical and what were not? 2. What was the boundary for dialogic pedagogy in (post)socialist childhood? 3. How did the dialogical (monological) schooling, parenting and child-caring made children social and political? 4. How did children (students) and teachers construct dialogues with the confinements of and the opportunities provided by the space, time and everyday lives in (post)socialist childhood (including family lives, parenting and school lives, museums, specialized/elite schools, camps, collective farms, after-school activities, etc.)? 5. How did diversity?language, sexuality, gender, ethnicity, race, (dis)ability, and other factors of diversity influence the construction and people?s participation of dialogues in (post)socialist schooling? 6. What lessons can be learned from (post)socialist childhood that might challenge our understanding of how learning, schooling, and dialogues are influenced by the political regimes in the past and today?s world? We understand that there are as many contradictions, complexities and dualisms in (post)socialist childhood as in dialogic pedagogy, we welcome scholars in a diversity of fields of studies to contribute to this special issue. Thereby, we loosely define ?dialogic pedagogy? as any scholarship and pedagogical practice, from educational researchers, philosophers, and practitioners, which values and gives priority to ?dialogue? in learning/teaching/educating across a wide range of institutional and non-institutional learning settings. We welcomed author?s experimentation and creativity in genres and approaches to their autobiographical research and writing ? a variety of sources of narratives including (but not limited to) autoethnographic accounts, collective biography, qualitative interviews, historical analysis, and discourse analysis. Scholars in fields outside of education but relevant to dialogic pedagogy are also encouraged to submit manuscripts (and participate in commentaries and online discussion), including but not limited to history, anthropology, sociology, linguistics, social work, psychology, philology, political science, social and criminal justice, philosophy, and so on. If you are interested, please submit 1-2-page proposal by March 1, 2017 to Dr. Lei Chen leich87@gmail.com (please contact her if you have questions). If you are selected, you will be expected to submit the first draft of your entire paper by October 1, 2017. The final draft is expected by February 1, 2018. Please see the DPJ guidelines for a manuscript submission here: http://dpj.pitt.edu/ojs/index.php/dpj1/about/submissions#authorGuidelines References Bakhtin, M. M. (1986). Speech genres and other late essays. Austin: University of Texas Press. Medvedev, P. N. (1985). The formal method in literary scholarship: A critical introduction to sociological poetics (A. J. Wehrle, Trans.). Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. * * * All the best, Ana -- *Ana Marjanovic-Shane* Dialogic Pedagogy Journal, Editor (dpj.pitt.edu) Chestnut Hill College, Associate Professor of Education e-mails: shaneam@chc.edu anamshane@gmail.com US phone: +1 267-334-2905 Serbian phone: +381 62 1904 110 From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Mon Jan 9 07:51:29 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2017 15:51:29 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! In-Reply-To: <5872773f.19af630a.27791.0ba4@mx.google.com> References: <1483344752182.40904@iped.uio.no> <1483467423798.57819@iped.uio.no> <1483601196884.31418@iped.uio.no> <5df5e870-3ef8-70d6-0c17-f8647ba17e62@mira.net> , <587124d9.d957620a.4a5a8.bd56@mx.google.com> <1483820996800.91513@iped.uio.no>, <58718707.4270630a.c8bff.94c9@mx.google.com> <1483836706132.31367@iped.uio.no>, <5872773f.19af630a.27791.0ba4@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <1483977082006.64293@iped.uio.no> Larry, I think that the one-substance approach provides a useful lenses to see units of analysis (in Vygotsky's sense of unit) as self-moving, self-generating units. Not that Vygotsky had not been clear about this already, but as a means to emphasise this. It forces the analysis to abandon mechanistic explanation in pro of a wholistic account, which precisely requires *differentiating* without dissembling into elements. Thus, differentiation has to be made not in terms of *elements* of what otherwise exists as a ?unity, such as for example dividing meaning from activity, but of dynamic changes between them, such as for example accounting for how a changing activity IS changing "meaning" (where "to be" is to be heard as an "unity/identity" in the dialectical sense). In our article, we offer a genetic account in which the way a person (a primary school student) experiences one and the same object (a cube) is made possible by, or more rightly, is genetically connected to a prior relation with another person (with a teacher). In that prior relation, experiencing one object (a cube) as a member of a class of objects (a member of the class "cubes") exists in and as the relation: the different moment fall not within one or the other person, teacher or student, but is distributed through both in the irreducible act of conversation. ?The student cannot intend the relation to the cube as a cube, but she can BE part of the relation in which the cube is marked and remarked as cube. BEING a part of that relation is not something she can intend or could possibly intend intellectually; whatever competences are involved in making it possible the relation between teacher and student, these are at the heart of the possibility of the cube to emerge as a mathematical body in the girl's consciousness, and these competences cannot be reduced to the intellect. Now. If we wanted to say that the SIGN [cube] has mediated the girls' understanding of [cube], then we should acknowledge that that SIGN is not a thing, but a relation between two persons. But the sign then is not something between things, or even between persons; it really and concretely is a relation between people that has to be accounted for empirically, such that saying that it is a sign is just a remark that it needs to be explored, not the final moment of the analysis; if anything, it should mark the starting point of the inquiry. I very much like Haydi's point that the sign relation NEEDS TO BE DONE. There are however critiques, from a Vygotskian perspective, to Vygotsky's last remark that first was the deed: "if the deed were not the word at the beginning, it cannot become the word at the end" (see Mikhailov, 2001). Of course, all this makes sense to me if word, and sign, is understood as a dialogical relation. Alfredo ________________________________ From: lpscholar2@gmail.com Sent: 08 January 2017 18:30 To: Alfredo Jornet Gil; Andy Blunden; Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; Larry Purss Subject: RE: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! So ... Moving to these more subtle nuanced shadings in this months special issue, in what ways does this months article answer Marc?s critique of having ?an? experience (as a unit) in a way that moves beyond becoming an ?undifferentiated whole?? This seems to be a key moment of ?our? thinking in the Deweyan sense : Thinking goes on in trains of ideas, but the ideas form a train only because they are much more than what an ?analytic psychology? calls ideas. They are phases, emotionally and practically ?distinguished? of a developing underlying quality .... Subtle shadings of a PERvading and developing hue. (quoted from page 115 of your and Roth?s 2013 article). Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Alfredo Jornet Gil Sent: January 7, 2017 4:43 PM To: lpscholar2@gmail.com; Andy Blunden; Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; Larry Purss Subject: Re: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! Thanks Larry; I also think our current understanding as elaborated in the MCA 2016 special issue is more nuanced; ?and less susceptible of Marc's critique of it becoming an undifferentiated whole that becomes un-studiable. Alfredo From: lpscholar2@gmail.com Sent: 08 January 2017 01:25 To: Alfredo Jornet Gil; Andy Blunden; Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; Larry Purss Subject: RE: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! Alfredo, i will attempt to stay within ?an experience? and as the ?working over an experience?. If i may, i will borrow your word meaning where you use the word (perfuse) as it helps me listen into David and Andy explore the contrast of ?word? and ?word meaning? as units. On page 113 of your and Roth?s article you focus in on affect. In your words you say : Affect is neither something separate from the unit nor a factor that influences or characterizes a part of this unit : It PERFUSES the unit. The unit you refer to is experience/perezivanie. This minimal unit includes all individuals, their social/material setting, and the TRANS-actional relations that BIND them into a whole. I hope this is staying within the bounds of exploring having AN experience as a unit ; -) Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Alfredo Jornet Gil Sent: January 7, 2017 12:24 PM To: Andy Blunden; Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; Larry Purss Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! Larry, all, our arguments in the 2014 address a science education literature in which the constructivist perspective is the leading perspective; We note that the assertion that people learn from experience is everywhere taken for granted but nowhere accounted for. We resort to pragmatist and phenomenological literature along with Vygotsky's insights to point out the need to account for learning as something that cannot be the result of an individual's construction; in experience there is always something in excess of what you intended, and this is a basic feature of doing, of performing. I take that to be your "trans" in the trans/zhivanie word, Larry, which already is denoted in the word PERezhivanie. But I do not wish to move our discussion too far away from Marc's paper and the Perezhivanie special issue. We also risk disengaging many that have not have the privilege we've had to have the time to read so many articles in just few days into the new year. I think we are a point in the discussion where a pretty clear point of agreement/disagreement, and therefore of possibility for growth, has been reached with regard to the view of perezhivanie as "an experience" and as the "working over it". I think that to allow as many as possible to follow, and hopefully also engage, I think it will be helpful to bring the diverse perspectives and theoretical accounts to matter in accounting for some actual material. And there are a number of cases described in the articles, including Marc's case of a teacher, as well as everyday facts, such as those brought by Beth, and in Beth's article... I take the task for myself too, but Saturday morning need to attend to other things! A ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com Sent: 07 January 2017 18:26 To: Andy Blunden; Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; Larry Purss Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! Andy, Peter, i hope the intention to move beyond politeness to struggle with this topic materializes. In this vein i want to introduce exploration of the ?excess? of actual over intended meaning as he sketched his introduction to ?experience?. Citing Dewey, Alfredo says that this excess of actual learning over intended learning INCLUDES what Dewey refers to as ?attitudes? and these ?attitudes? are FUNDAMENTALLY what count in the future. Alfredo and Roth then add this summary statement : There is therefore, a need to theorize experience in terms that do not assume control and rationality as the sine qua non of learning. It also implies a need to develop analytical accounts that retain the ?uncertainty? that is an ?integral part? of human experience. Where are Alfredo and Roth leading us with this sketch of experience? To highlight ?attitudes? that occur in the excess of actual over intended learning? The word ?attitudes? generates images of (atmosphere) and (moods) that ?flow? like cascading waterfalls that can be imaged as (force) or as (receptive). Attitudes that flow to places where they are received within a certain attitude of care and concern. Not as forceful an image as moving only with control and rationality. Describing ?weaker? thought that remains uncertain but that also opens us to the other?s peril and plight. Possibly a post-analytic motion that exceeds the intended by living-through the actual that develops ?attitudes? that are fundamentally what count for the future. Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Andy Blunden Sent: January 7, 2017 5:00 AM To: Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! OK Peter, what you say is all very true I am sure, but it entails conflating activity and action (as mass nouns) and context and mediation, and makes the required distinction much like one could find multiple meanings for the word "and" by listing the different phrases and clauses which can be linked by "and." Andy ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making On 7/01/2017 11:42 PM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > > Let me try to illustrate. > > Reading as mediated action: The cultural-historical > context of reading mediates how one?s attention and > response are channeled in socially constructed ways. So, > in one setting, say at home or reading in the company of > friends, a novel might bring a reader to tears, or invite > readers to share personal stories that parallel those of > the plot lines, or laugh out loud. But another setting, a > formal school or university class, would have historical > values and practices that mute emotional and personal > responses, and promote a more sober, analytic way of > reading and talking that fits with specific historical > critical conventions and genres, and discourages others. > > Reading as mediating action: The act of reading can be > transformational. In reading about an talking about a > character?s actions, a reader might reconsider a value > system, become more sympathetic to real people who > resemble oppressed characters, etc. In other words, > reading a text may serve a mediational process in which > textual ideas and exemplars enable a reader to think > differently. > > *From:*Andy Blunden [mailto:ablunden@mira.net] > *Sent:* Saturday, January 7, 2017 6:28 AM > *To:* Peter Smagorinsky ; eXtended Mind, > Culture, Activity > *Subject:* Re: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > Can you explain in a paragraph or two,. Peter, rather than > asking us all to read 10,000 words to extract an answer? > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > Andy Blunden > http://home.mira.net/~andy > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > > On 7/01/2017 11:23 PM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > > Andy and others, I tried to work out the mediated/mediating question in the area of reading....see if this helps. > > Smagorinsky, P., & O'Donnell-Allen, C. (1998). Reading as mediated and mediating action: Composing meaning for literature through multimedia interpretive texts. Reading Research Quarterly, 33, 198-226. Available athttp://www.petersmagorinsky.net/About/PDF/RRQ/RRQ1998.pdf > > -----Original Message----- > > From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden > > Sent: Friday, January 6, 2017 7:12 PM > > To:xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > I have never understood this supposed distinction, Alfredo, between "mediated activity" and "mediating activity" given that all activity is mediated and all activity mediates. > > Also, could you spell out what you mean by the "tension" > > between perezhivanie as meaning and perezhivanie as struggle. > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > Andy Blunden > > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > On 5/01/2017 6:26 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > > Thanks Marc for your careful response. > > I am familiar to Vygotsky's notion of cultural mediation and I am aware and acknowledge that it was elaborated as a means to overcome dualism, and that it is not analog to a computational approach. > > When I brought the computing analogy, I did so with regard not to the concept of cultural mediation in general, but to the way it can be (and is) deployed analytically. I react to what it seems to me a dichotomy between a "meaning" as something that is static (thereby a form of "representation" or reflection of the relation with the environment instead of?refraction)?? and the experiencing-as-struggling, which is described as?transformation or change. If so, mediation here would seem to be part of a methodological device that first dissects "a type of meaning" from "a type of activity" (or a given state from the process that changes that state), and then unites it by adding the term "mediation." And this may be my misreading, but in that (mis)reading (which perhaps is mostly due to the fact that in your empirical illustration only the initial and end product, i.e., perezhivanie, are described, but not the experiencing-as-struggle, that is, the moving between the two), mediation here seems to do as analytical concept precisely what you were afraid our monism was doing: explaining nothing. Only the end products but not the process of producing perezhivanie are revealed. This may be problematic if one attends to what Veresov argues in the paper I shared yesterday, where he defends the notion of mediation but also specifies that Vygotsky speaks of *mediating activity* (as opposed to *mediated* activity). That is, not mediation by signs as products, but mediating activity as the activity of producing signs (which again is an activity of producing social relations, perhaps what you refer as "holistic meanings"?). What do you think? > > I did not think you were trying to deny the influence of Spinoza, and I do not think we ever said that Perezhivanie was primarily a move from Cartesian Dualism to Monism, as you suggest in your post. I copy and paste from my prior post: "The fact is that Vygotsky was building a theory on the unity of the affect and the intellect that was to be grounded on Spinoza, and what we try to do is to explore how perezhivanie, as a concept being developed during the same period (but not finalised or totally settled!), could be seen from the perspective of the Spinozist Vygotsky." > > I totally believe that bringing the distinction between perezhivanie as meaning, and perezhivanie as struggle, is totally relevant, and Beth Ferholt's vignettes of Where the Wild Things Are do indeed illustrate this. We really need to address this tension, which as Beth's examples and as our own everyday experience shows, is a tension that matters not just to books and to theories but to living persons (children, teachers), a tension that moreover is present and mentioned in all the articles of the symposium. The papers offer different proposals, and I think is so great we have the chance to discuss them! I too, as you, am very interesting in hearing others about the questions you had concerning sense and meaning. > > Alfredo > > From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > on behalf of Marc Clar? > > > > Sent: 04 January 2017 22:31 > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > Thank you very much, Alfredo, for sharing this excellent paper by > > Veresov, and thanks also for your responses, which really helped me to > > better understand your points. My main doubt about your proposal > > was/is caused by the statement that the idea of cultural > > mediation/mediator implies a cartesian dualism. This shocks me > > because, to me, the idea of cultural mediation is absolutely crucial > > (in fact, the keystone) for the construction of a monist (and > > scientific) psychology that does not forget mind ?that is, a cultural > > psychology. From your response, however, I realized that we may be > > approaching the idea of mediation in different ways. I talk of > > mediation and mediators in a quite restricted way. The starting point > > of my understanding of mediation is a dialectical relationship > > (organic, transactional) between the subject and the world (Vygotsky departs from the scheme stimulus-response, from reflexology). > > This relationship, that Vygotsky calls primitive psychological > > functions, would be basically biological. However, in human beings > > this relationship is mediated by cultural means: signs and tools; or > > primary, secondary and terciary artifacts. These cultural means > > reorganize the primitive functions (dialectic S-O relationship), which > > become then higher psychological functions (S-M-O) (see for example, > > The problem of the cultural development of the child, in The Vygotsky > > Reader). Now, the subject, the cultural mediators, and the object form > > an inseparable dialectical unit, so that the subject acts on > > (transforms) the object through the prism of the cultural mediators, > > the object acts on (transforms) the subject also through the prism of > > the cultural mediators, and the cultural means are themselves also > > transformed as a consequence of their mediation in this continuous > > dynamic dialectical tension. Here, for me, it is important the idea > > that the cultural means are as material (if we assume a materialist > > monism) as all the rest of the world; in fact, are parts of the > > material world which become signs or tools (and can be therefore > > socially distributed). This permits the introduction of the scientific > > study of mind-consciousness (as mediating systems of signs), because > > mind is not anymore something immaterial and unobservable, but it is > > as material and observable as the rest of the natural world. It is > > from this view that, for me, the idea of cultural mediation is the > > keystone of a monist psychology that includes mind. Thus, when I speak > > of mediators, I refer to the cultural means which mediate in the S-O > > dialectics; I am especially interested in signs/secondary artifacts. > > Here, it is perhaps necessary to insist that when I talk of studying > > mediators (and their semantic structure), this doesn't mean that they > > are taken out from the activity (the flux of live) in which they > > mediate (since out of activity they are not signs anymore); here, I > > think Vygotsky tries again to overcome another old dichotomy, the > > functionalism-structuralism one. I hope that all this makes also clear the difference between this view and that of computational psychologies (which in general are profoundly and explicitly dualist and not dialectic). > > Back to perezhivanie, I'm not obviously trying to deny the influence > > of Spinoza on Vygotsky's thinking (this is explicit in Vygotsky's > > writings, especially in ?The teaching about emotions?, in the Vol.6 of > > the Collected Works). But I have doubts that Vygotsky's introduction > > of the concept of perezhivanie is to be regarded primarily as a > > movement towards monism (from a previous cartesian dualism), and that > > this movement questions the concept of cultural mediation. Instead, > > and I think that this is in line with some of Gonz?lez-Rey > > observations in his paper, my impression is that the introduction of > > the concept of perezhivanie responds more to a movement (a further > > step) towards holism (something that, in my understanding, can also be > > found in Spinoza). Thus, I think that the word meaning is still the > > unit of analysis in the last Vygotsky -and therefore, the idea of > > cultural mediation is still crucial (in fact, in The problem of the > > environment, he connects the concept of perezhivanie, which has just > > introduced, to the development of word meaning [p.345-346, also cited > > in my paper]). However, in my view, in the last Vygotsky the focus is > > not anymore primarily on the word-meaning as formed for things (or > > collections of things, as in the ontogenetic research with Sakharov), but the focus is now in the formation of meaning for holistic situations. > > Best regards, > > Marc. > > 2017-01-03 19:16 GMT+01:00 Alfredo Jornet Gil : > > Hi Marc, all, > > thanks for joining and for your interesting work, which I follow > > since I became aware of it. I appreciate the way in your paper you > > show careful and honest attention to the texts of the authors > > involved, but perhaps most of all I appreciate that the paper makes > > the transformational dimension related to struggle and change > > salient, a dimension all papers deemed central to perezhivanie. And I > > have learned more about Vasilyuk by reading your paper. But I also > > see that we have approached the question of perezhivanie differently > > and I think that addressing the questions that you raise concerning > > our article may be a good way to both respond and discuss your paper. > > I am aware that our use of the term monism may be problematic to > > some, and N. Veresov, who has recently written about this (see > > attached article), warns against the dangers of simply moving from > > dualism into an undifferentiating monism that relativizes everything, > > making development un-studiable. This seems to be the way in which > > you have understood our argument, and of course this is not what we are or want to be doing. > > Probably many will think that *dialectical materialism* rather than > > monism is the proper term, and I could agree with them; we do in fact > > use dialectical materialism there and elsewhere. Yet, we wanted to > > emphasise the Spinozist influence (an influence that also runs > > through Marx) and so we found it appropriate to use the term monism, > > a term that Vygotsky uses before arguing that Spinoza "develops an essentially materialistic view" > > (Collected Works, Vol. 6, p. 124). For us, the aim is working out > > ways to empirically examine and formulate problems in ways that do > > not reify a mind-body dualism. > > Although overcoming dualism is foundational to the CHAT paradigm, I > > would however not say that Vygotsky did get to solve all of the > > problems that Cartesian dualism had created for psychology, even > > though he recognised those problems brilliantly as early as in the > > "Crisis". It should suffice to cite Vygotsky's own remarks, which we quote in the paper (and which A.N. > > Leont'ev mentions in the introduction to the collected works), where > > Vygotsky explicitly critiques some of his own prior ideas for failing > > to overcome dualism. We agree with those who, like F. G. Rey, see > > Vygotsky's project as a developing rather than as a finalised one. > > The fact is that Vygotsky was building a theory on the unity of the > > affect and the intellect that was to be grounded on Spinoza, and what > > we try to do is to explore how perezhivanie, as a concept being > > developed during the same period (but not finalised or totally > > settled!), could be seen from the perspective of the Spinozist Vygotsky. > > As you note, in our article we argue that, if one takes the Spinozist > > one-substance approach, classical concepts used in non-classical > > psychology, at least in the way they are commonly used in the current > > literature, should be revised. One such concept is mediation. And I > > personally do not have much of a problem when mediation is used to > > denote the fundamental fact that every thing exists always through > > *another*, never in and of itself. But I do think that it is > > problematic to identify MEDIATORS, such as "a meaning", as a means to > > account for or explain developmental processes and learning events, > > precisely because it is there, at least in my view, that dualism creeps in. > > For example, I find it paradoxical that you are concerned that our > > monist approach risks turning perezhivanie into a useless category > > because it may be used to explain everything and nothing, and yet you > > do not seem to have a problem using the term mediation to account for > > the transformation of perezhivanie without clearly elaborating on how > > mediation does change anything or what it looks like as a real > > process. How is it different saying that a perezhivanie mediates the > > experiencing-as-struggle from simply saying that it "affects" or > > "determines" it? Indeed, if perezhivanie mediates > > experiencing-as-struggle, does not experiencing-as-struglgle too > > mediate perezhivanie? And do not both may be said to mediate development, or development mediate them? Is not this explaining everything and nothing? > > I do believe you can argue that there is a difference between > > mediation and classical psychology's cause-effect relations, but to > > show this you need to dig into the dialectical underpinnings of the > > theory. In your paper, you offer a nice analysis of a lovely case of > > a teacher who, in dealing with a challenge with one of her students, > > changes her perezhivanie. I think you can rightly argue that there is > > a semiotic transformation, and I fully support your statement that by > > studying discourse we can empirically approach questions of > > psychological development. The contradictions you show as being > > involved and resolved resonate really well with what I experience as > > a parent or as a teacher in the classroom. Yet, without unpacking > > what this "mediation" taking place between one perezhivanie and the > > next one means as a concrete and real, the same analysis could be done taking an information processing approach: > > there is an situation that is processed (represented?) in one way, > > which then leads to a (cognitive) dissonance, and then there is a > > cognitive resolution by means of which the situation is presented > > differently in consciousness (indeed, when seen in this way, the term > > perezhivanie and the term "representation" become almost > > indistinguishable). How is mediation, as an analytical concept, > > helping here? And most importantly to the question of perezhivanie, > > how is this analysis going to show the internal connection between > > intellect and affect that Vygotsky formulates as constitutive of the notion of perezhivanie? > > I believe that the key lies in understanding what Vygotsky means when > > he says that perezhivanie is a unit of analysis. I will not repeat > > here what already is written in at least a couple of the articles in > > the special issue (Blunden, ours), that is the difference between > > analysis by elements and unit analysis (Vygotsky 1987). A unit > > analysis approach is consistent with Spinoza, for whom cause-effect > > explanations were not adequate, requiring instead an understanding of > > self-development, perezhivanie as a kernel cell for the development > > of personality. And I think you may be after this in your article in > > suggesting a form of continuous movement from perezhivanie to > > experiencing-as-struggle. But perhaps the major difficulty I find is that, in positing Vygotsky's perezhivanie as "a type of meaning" > > and Vasilyuk's perezhivanie (or experiencing-as-struggle) as a "type > > of activity," it is difficult not to see here a division between > > product and process, a division that then is analytically bridged by > > the addition of a third term, mediation, that should bring back the > > real movement between the product and the process. > > A different approach involves considering the concrete extension of > > actual living and lived social relations, and look at them as > > generative phenomena. What is there in the encounter between Carla > > and the child that leads to change? For it is not inside the mind, > > but in real life, in consciousness as the real relation between people, that Carla is changed. > > How is the semantic structure that you nicely present and attribute > > to Carla a product of the social relation between her and the child? > > I think that to rightfully situate perezhivanie as a concept in a > > Vygotskian framework, we ought to address its relation to the genetic > > law of development. > > There is much more to disentangle, but this is long enough. I hope I > > have succeeded in making clear these ideas. Thanks so much for > > engaging in the discussion! > > Alfredo > > ________________________________________ > > From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > on behalf of Marc Clar? > > > > > Sent: 02 January 2017 22:14 > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > Hi, all, and thank you so much, Alfredo, for your kind invitation to > > participate in this discussion. My paper in the MCA special issue > > focuses on a distinction between a type of activity, which I argue > > that is what Vasilyuk called *perezhivanie* (experiencing) and a type > > of semiotic mediator, which I argue that is what Vygotsky, in The > > Problem of the Environment, called *perezhivanie.* I argue, following > > Vasilyuk, that in experiencing activities (Vasilyuk's perezhivanie), > > this type of mediator is profoundly transformed ? in fact, that > > experiencing activities consist of the semiotic transformation of this type of mediator. > > As Veresov and Fleer argue in their commentary, perezhivanie (as a > > type of > > mediator) is for me a psychological phenomenon, one which is of > > course conceptualized from a specific theoretical framework. But the > > phenomenon is also visible from other theoretical frameworks as well, > > as I mention in the paper. This phenomenon is my main interest, and > > it is from this interest that I arrived at the concept of perezhivanie (not the other way around). > > Now, the phenomenon is that at least emotion, reasoning, and volition > > (formation of conscious purposes) seem to be decisively mediated by > > holistic situational meaning. My current research concern is trying > > to find ways to study and understand how this mediation occurs and > > how these semiotic mediators are transformed and distributed. From > > this view, I think that experiencing activities (Vasilyuk's > > perezhivanie) may provide a good terrain to study these issues > > (especially regarding the mediation of emotion), as I tried to exemplify in the paper. > > Studying semiotic mediation, however, is of course not easy. > > Following Vygotsky, I assume that extended discourse is the > > manifestation of thinking within certain psychological conditions > > (Vygotsky's Thinking and Speech, chapter 7), and I also assume the > > Vygotsky's law of the unity of the structure and function of thinking > > (Vygotsky's Thinking and Speech, chapter 6). From these two > > assumptions, I propose that meaning (and its functions in human > > activity) can be scientifically studied by structurally analyzing the > > narratives generated by subjects, considering that the discourse > > produced in the narrative is the point of departure of this study, > > but that considerable analytical work must be done to move from this > > discourse to the full characterization of meaning. It is in that > > point where I find useful the work developed by Greimas, the usefulness of which I only suggest in the paper. > > >From this background, I found many interesting ideas and questions > > in the > > other papers of the special issue. In this first post I will propose > > two of them for possible discussion. The first one was raised by > > Gonz?lez-Rey, when he introduces, in connection with perezhivanie, > > the concepts of personality, and especially, of sense. So, which is > > the conceptual (and-or > > phenomenal) relation between perezhivanie and sense? Gonz?lez-Rey > > suggests that both concepts are somewhat similar (and overcome by the > > concept of ?subjective sense?); my opinion, partly expressed in my > > commentary, is that perezhivanie is a type of meaning, which includes > > different levels of depth, and that sense corresponds to the deepest > > level of meaning (which can be characterized as a system of semic > > oppositions). Therefore, sense wouldn't be in opposition to meaning > > (as ?a microcosm of human consciousness?, as Kozulin remembers in his > > commentary), although it would be in opposition to manifested meaning (the surface level of meaning). > > The second issue was raised by Roth and Jornet, and I think it goes > > beyond the issue of perezhivanie itself. If I understand them well, > > they argue that Vygotsky's core proposal of cultural mediation is > > influenced by the Cartesian dualism (mind-matter), and that a > > promising approach to Cultural Psychology would be a Spinozist > > monism. I am actually very interested on the issue of which > > epistemological position can best substantiate the construction of a > > cultural psychology, and that's why I feel inclined to take the > > opportunity to ask for your opinions about that. About the proposal > > of Roth and Jornet, I have some doubts. First, I don't see why > > Vygotsky's proposals can be seen as dualist (in the Cartesian sense) > > -I suspect that it is because of the analytical distinctions?. > > Anyway, in my understanding, Vygotsky explicitly assumes a > > materialist monism (for example in The Crisis), and in fact he constructs his proposal on mediation upon reflexology, which also explicitly assumed a materialist monism (e.g. > > Sechenov). Would a Spinozist monism be a better point of departure? I > > don't know, in my understanding it is a more idealist monism, and I > > don't clearly see what could be gained. In my opinion, a scientific > > psychology which includes the study of mind is only possible if any > > type of monism is assumed. However, in my view, for a scientific > > psychology, the ontological nature of the world is perhaps less > > important (it is an issue for metaphysics?), and I am inclined to assume a neutral monism (e.g. Russell). > > So from this view, a materialist monism and a Spinozist monism > > wouldn't be so different, so from both views it could be assumed that > > all is of the same nature and all is similarly knowable (including > > mind) [which is the ontological nature of the world and to what > > degree it is knowable are issues that can be left to philosophy]. > > However, in my opinion, this does not mean that, while assuming a > > monism, analytical distinctions cannot be done when studying the > > world. In that sense, I had the impression that Roth and Jornet > > tended to dilute analytical distinctions in the name of monism; I > > repeat that I don't know if I understood them well, but if this was > > the case, in my opinion, analysis would be impossible within the new > > psychology suggested by Roth and Jornet, and, regarding perezhivanie, > > there would be the danger, noted by Vygotsky in The Crisis and > > cautioned by Kozulin in his commentary, that by meaning everything, perezhivanie ends by meaning nothing. > > Best regards and happy new year, > > Marc. > > 2017-01-02 9:12 GMT+01:00 Alfredo Jornet Gil : > > Dear all, > > I would like to join David, Luisa, Ana, Henry and the others to wish > > you all a Happy New Year! May it be full of joy, peace, and opportunity. > > I also would like to begin the year announcing our first ?MCA > > article discussion, ?although in fact corresponds to the last issue > > of the year > > we > > just passed, Issue 4 on Perezhivanie. This is a very special > > *special* issue, not only because its topic has raised lots of > > interest lately in > > the > > CHAT community but also because, greatly coordinated by Andy Blunden > > and the rest of the editorial team, the issue takes the form of a > > symposium where authors get the chance to present and respond to > > each others' ideas on the subject. In my view, this allows having a > > rich and > > multidimensional > > approach to a subject as important as perezhivanie. > > Following with the dialogical spirit in which the special issue was > > assembled, we will focus on one lead article, but hoping to also > > engage ideas and insights present in or relevant to other > > contributions in the issue. ?Marc Clar?'s "Vygotsky and Vasilyuk on > > Perezhivanie: Two Notions and One Word" will be our focus. The > > article very nicely engages the lead work of Vygotsky, but also the > > less known ??(?in educational literature) but totally relevant works > > of psychologist ?F. Vasilyuk and semiotician > > A. > > J. Greimas, mobilising a number of key concepts including those of > > semiotic > > mediation and transformation. > > ?In addition to Marc, who will soon join us, I have encouraged some > > of > > the > > other authors in the special issue to also join as "relevant > > others," if time and circumstances allow them. Let's hope that this > > will help keeping the symposium spirit up. > > Marc's article is attached to this e-mail and will be made open > > access at the T&F pages as soon as people is back from the holidays. > > The T&F link > > is > > this: > > http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039.2016.1186194 > > The link to the MCA Forum pages, where we announce our discussions > > and other xmca things, is here:http://lchc.ucsd.edu/MCA/ > > I wish us all a very productive and interesting discussion. > > Alfredo > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 06BBD1EA5EDC410F906211EBF4248B95.png Type: image/png Size: 234 bytes Desc: 06BBD1EA5EDC410F906211EBF4248B95.png Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20170109/774a9bc4/attachment.png From lpscholar2@gmail.com Mon Jan 9 10:25:51 2017 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2017 10:25:51 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! In-Reply-To: <1483977082006.64293@iped.uio.no> References: <1483344752182.40904@iped.uio.no> <1483467423798.57819@iped.uio.no> <1483601196884.31418@iped.uio.no> <5df5e870-3ef8-70d6-0c17-f8647ba17e62@mira.net> , <587124d9.d957620a.4a5a8.bd56@mx.google.com> <1483820996800.91513@iped.uio.no>, <58718707.4270630a.c8bff.94c9@mx.google.com> <1483836706132.31367@iped.uio.no>, <5872773f.19af630a.27791.0ba4@mx.google.com> <1483977082006.64293@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <5873d5d6.05ae630a.e4933.db19@mx.google.com> So, following your train of thought we should always qualify ?sign? as ?sign relation? that moves genetically or ?dynamically?. These changes or TRANS formations experienced as moving exPERiences. However, if we take the metaphors of weather or water falling or moods changing is this movement best ?differentiated? as forceful movement that is PROjecting itself forcefully moving from one place to another or can this movement be imaged as ?receptive? being. The weather travelling or moving or being received into the low area from the high area. The movement imaged more as receiving, less intentional, more moving into the low pressure zone from the high pressure zone? (as a metaphor). Can the irreducible movement of conversation as dynamically fluid movement also be imaged through this metaphor? Where ?to be? is to be ?received?. This as a possible reflection upon the notion of ?forceful? movement. Now this requires a change of ?attitude? in the Dewey sense of this term. An attitude moving beyond strictly ?intentional? acts. The struggle becomes developing a (weaker) notion of thought and agency that retains vitality and remains animated within the irreducible flow of conversation. Does Marc?s article accomodate this flow sense within the two contrasting notions of perezhivanie explored in the article. On page 7 of the article Marc uses the term (dilutes) at different levels of depth. (image of flowing from surface to depth) like weather, water falling, or moods shifting. In Marc?s words?: In my view, Greimas?s theory and observations are very consistent with Vygotsky?s, especially with those reported in chapter 7 of Thinking and Speech, that is, at deeper levels of meaning discourse becomes progressively abbreviated, and the literal meaning of the words DILUTES in favor of sense. If we take Marc?s literal words as ?sign relations? that become abbreviated and ?diluted? in favour of ?sense? then sense may be that TRANS formational movement that is comprehended in Dewey?s notion of having AN experience. The meaning of comprehended as (grasped) within the dynamic flow of experiences as ?receptive? as well as ?forceful movements. I am going out on a limb with these conjectures as I image these movements as flowing trans-formations that move beyond mastery and self-control and are not so forceful. An alternative perspective. Seeing Carla?s journey beyond the duty-lack of ability divide to more receptively comprehend the student through proximity rather than distance that deserves respectful care, concern, and consideration (see page 8 of Marc?s article). The whole ?constitutional model? (Dewey?s attitude) of Carla?s perezhivanie has been re-placed. Carla is now ?able to? listen respectively to the student?s struggle having worked through ?this? event as ?an? experience. After having ?this? experience Dewey would say THEN the word meaning is generated. (after living through the exPERience). The word meaning con-solidates and organizes and diffuses the perezhivanie after the ?repetition? that occurs prior to the con-solidation as Carla moves through what can be imaged as shifting moods that clorand difuse social situation, arriving at ?an? experience that is comprehended (grasped) less forcefully and more receptively as Carla works through the duty-lack of ability struggle. Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Alfredo Jornet Gil Sent: January 9, 2017 7:51 AM To: lpscholar2@gmail.com; Andy Blunden; Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; Larry Purss Subject: Re: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! Larry, I think that the one-substance approach provides a useful lenses to see units of analysis (in Vygotsky's sense of unit) as self-moving, self-generating units. Not that Vygotsky had not been clear about this already, but as a means to emphasise?this. It forces the analysis to abandon mechanistic explanation?in pro of?a wholistic account, which precisely requires *differentiating* without dissembling into elements. Thus, differentiation has to be made not in terms?of?*elements* of what otherwise exists as a??unity, such as?for example dividing?meaning?from?activity, but of dynamic changes between them, such as for example accounting for how a changing activity IS changing "meaning"?(where?"to be"?is to be heard as an "unity/identity" in the dialectical sense).? In our article, we offer a genetic account in which the?way?a person (a primary school?student) experiences one and the same object (a cube)?is made possible by,?or?more?rightly, is genetically connected to?a prior relation with another person (with a teacher). In that prior relation, experiencing one?object (a cube)?as a member of a class of objects (a member of the class "cubes")?exists in and as the relation: the different moment fall not within one or the other person, teacher or student, but is distributed through both in the irreducible?act of conversation.??The student cannot intend the relation to the cube as a cube, but she can BE part of the relation in which the cube is marked and remarked as cube.?BEING a part of that relation is not something she can intend?or could possibly intend intellectually; whatever competences are involved in making it possible the relation between teacher and student, these?are at the heart of the possibility of the cube to emerge as a mathematical body in the girl's?consciousness, and these competences?cannot be reduced to the intellect. Now. If we wanted to say that the SIGN [cube] has mediated the girls' understanding of [cube], then we should acknowledge that that SIGN is not a thing, but a relation between two persons. But the sign then is not something between things, or even between persons; it really and concretely is a relation between people that has to be accounted for empirically, such that saying that it is a sign is just a remark that it needs to be explored, not the final moment of the analysis; if anything, it should mark the starting point of the inquiry.? I very much like Haydi's point that the sign relation NEEDS TO BE DONE. There are however critiques, from a Vygotskian perspective, to Vygotsky's last remark that first was the deed: "if the deed were not the word at the beginning, it cannot become the word at the end" (see Mikhailov, 2001). Of course, all this makes sense to me if word, and sign, is understood as a dialogical relation.? Alfredo From: lpscholar2@gmail.com Sent: 08 January 2017 18:30 To: Alfredo Jornet Gil; Andy Blunden; Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; Larry Purss Subject: RE: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! ? So ... Moving to these more subtle nuanced shadings in this months special issue, in what ways does this months article answer Marc?s critique of having ?an? experience (as a unit) in a way that moves beyond? becoming an ?undifferentiated whole?? This seems to be a key moment of ?our? thinking in the Deweyan sense?: ? Thinking goes on in trains of ideas, but the ideas form a train only because they are much more than what an ?analytic psychology? calls ideas. They are phases, emotionally and practically ?distinguished? of a developing underlying quality .... Subtle shadings of a PERvading and developing hue. ? (quoted from page 115 of your and Roth?s 2013 article). ? ? ? Sent from my Windows 10 phone ? From: Alfredo Jornet Gil Sent: January 7, 2017 4:43 PM To: lpscholar2@gmail.com; Andy Blunden; Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; Larry Purss Subject: Re: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! ? Thanks Larry; I also think our current?understanding as elaborated in the?MCA?2016?special issue?is more nuanced;??and less?susceptible of?Marc's critique of it becoming?an undifferentiated whole that becomes un-studiable.? ? Alfredo From: lpscholar2@gmail.com Sent: 08 January 2017 01:25 To: Alfredo Jornet Gil; Andy Blunden; Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; Larry Purss Subject: RE: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! ? Alfredo, i will attempt to stay within ?an experience? and as the ?working over an experience?. If i may, i will borrow your word meaning where you use the word (perfuse) as it helps me listen into David and Andy explore the contrast of ?word? and ?word meaning? as units. On page 113 of your and Roth?s article you focus in on affect. In your words you say?: ? Affect is neither something separate from the unit nor a factor that influences or characterizes a part of this unit?: It PERFUSES the unit. The unit you refer to is experience/perezivanie. This minimal unit includes all individuals, their social/material setting, and the TRANS-actional relations that BIND them into a whole. ? I hope this is staying within the bounds of exploring having AN experience as a unit ; -) ? Sent from my Windows 10 phone ? From: Alfredo Jornet Gil Sent: January 7, 2017 12:24 PM To: Andy Blunden; Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; Larry Purss Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! ? Larry, all, ? our arguments in the 2014 address a science education literature in which the constructivist perspective is the leading perspective; We note that the assertion that people learn from experience is everywhere taken for granted but nowhere accounted for. We resort to pragmatist and phenomenological literature along with Vygotsky's insights to point out the need to account for learning as something that cannot be the result of an individual's construction; in experience there is always something in excess of what you intended, and this is a basic feature of doing, of performing. I take that to be your "trans" in the trans/zhivanie word, Larry, which already is denoted in the word PERezhivanie. ? But I do not wish to move our discussion too far away from Marc's paper and the Perezhivanie special issue. We also risk disengaging many that have not have the privilege we've had to have the time to read so many articles in just few days into the new year. I think we are a point in the discussion where a pretty clear point of agreement/disagreement, and therefore of possibility for growth, has been reached with regard to the view of perezhivanie as "an experience" and as the "working over it". I think that to allow as many as possible to follow, and hopefully also engage, I think it will be helpful to bring the diverse perspectives and theoretical accounts to matter in accounting for some actual material. And there are a number of cases described in the articles, including Marc's case of a teacher, as well as everyday facts, such as those brought by Beth, and in Beth's article... ? I take the task for myself too, but Saturday morning need to attend to other things! A ? ? ? ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com Sent: 07 January 2017 18:26 To: Andy Blunden; Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; Larry Purss Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! ? Andy, Peter, i hope the intention to move beyond politeness to struggle with this topic materializes. In this vein i want to introduce exploration of the ?excess? of actual over intended meaning as he sketched his introduction to ?experience?. ? Citing Dewey, Alfredo says that this excess of actual learning over intended learning INCLUDES what Dewey refers to as ?attitudes? and these ?attitudes? are FUNDAMENTALLY what count in the future. Alfredo and Roth? then add this summary statement : ? There is therefore, a need to theorize experience in terms that do not assume control and rationality as the sine qua non of learning. It also implies a need to develop analytical accounts that retain the ?uncertainty? that is an ?integral part? of human experience. ? Where are Alfredo and Roth leading us with this sketch of experience? To highlight ?attitudes? that occur in the excess of actual over intended learning? The word ?attitudes? generates images of (atmosphere) and (moods) that ?flow? like cascading waterfalls that can be imaged as (force) or as (receptive). Attitudes that flow to places where they are received within a certain attitude of care and concern. Not as forceful an image as moving only? with control and rationality.? Describing ?weaker? thought that remains uncertain but that also opens us to the other?s peril and plight. Possibly a post-analytic motion that exceeds the intended by living-through the actual that develops ?attitudes? that are fundamentally what count for the future. ? ? Sent from my Windows 10 phone ? From: Andy Blunden Sent: January 7, 2017 5:00 AM To: Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! ? OK Peter, what you say is all very true I am sure, but it entails conflating activity and action (as mass nouns) and context and mediation, and makes the required distinction much like one could find multiple meanings for the word "and" by listing the different phrases and clauses which can be linked by "and." ? Andy ? ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making ? On 7/01/2017 11:42 PM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: >? > Let me try to illustrate. >? > Reading as mediated action: The cultural-historical > context of reading mediates how one?s attention and > response are channeled in socially constructed ways. So, > in one setting, say at home or reading in the company of > friends, a novel might bring a reader to tears, or invite > readers to share personal stories that parallel those of > the plot lines, or laugh out loud. But another setting, a > formal school or university class, would have historical > values and practices that mute emotional and personal > responses, and promote a more sober, analytic way of > reading and talking that fits with specific historical >? critical conventions and genres, and discourages others. >? > Reading as mediating action: The act of reading can be > transformational. In reading about an talking about a > character?s actions, a reader might reconsider a value > system, become more sympathetic to real people who > resemble oppressed characters, etc. In other words, > reading a text may serve a mediational process in which > textual ideas and exemplars enable a reader to think > differently. >? > *From:*Andy Blunden [mailto:ablunden@mira.net] > *Sent:* Saturday, January 7, 2017 6:28 AM > *To:* Peter Smagorinsky ; eXtended Mind, > Culture, Activity > *Subject:* Re: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! >? > Can you explain in a paragraph or two,. Peter, rather than > asking us all to read 10,000 words to extract an answer? >? > Andy >? > ------------------------------------------------------------ >? > Andy Blunden > http://home.mira.net/~andy > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making >? >? > On 7/01/2017 11:23 PM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: >? >???? Andy and others, I tried to work out the mediated/mediating question in the area of reading....see if this helps. >? >???? Smagorinsky, P., & O'Donnell-Allen, C. (1998). Reading as mediated and mediating action: Composing meaning for literature through multimedia interpretive texts. Reading Research Quarterly, 33, 198-226. Available athttp://www.petersmagorinsky.net/About/PDF/RRQ/RRQ1998.pdf >? >???? -----Original Message----- >? >???? From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >???? ? [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden >? >???? Sent: Friday, January 6, 2017 7:12 PM >? >???? To:xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu >? >???? Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! >? >???? I have never understood this supposed distinction, Alfredo, between "mediated activity" and "mediating activity" given that all activity is mediated and all activity mediates. >? >???? Also, could you spell out what you mean by the "tension" >? >???? between perezhivanie as meaning and perezhivanie as struggle. >? >???? Andy >? >???? ------------------------------------------------------------ >? >???? Andy Blunden >? >???? http://home.mira.net/~andy >? >???? http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making >? >???? On 5/01/2017 6:26 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: >? >???????? Thanks Marc for your careful response. >? >???????? I am familiar to Vygotsky's notion of cultural mediation and I am aware and acknowledge that it was elaborated as a means to overcome dualism, and that it is not analog to a computational approach. >? >???????? When I brought the computing analogy, I did so with regard not to the concept of cultural mediation in general, but to the way it can be (and is) deployed analytically. I react to what it seems to me a dichotomy between a "meaning" as something that is static (thereby a form of "representation" or reflection of the relation with the environment instead of?refraction)??? and the experiencing-as-struggling, which is described as?transformation or change. If so, mediation here would seem to be part of a methodological device that first dissects "a type of meaning" from "a type of activity" (or a given state from the process that changes that state), and then unites it by adding the term "mediation." And this may be my misreading, but in that (mis)reading (which perhaps is mostly due to the fact that in your empirical illustration only the initial and end product, i.e., perezhivanie, are described, but not the experiencing-as-struggle, that is, the moving between the two), mediation here seems to do as analytical concept precisely what you were afraid our monism was doing: explaining nothing. Only the end products but not the process of producing perezhivanie are revealed. This may be problematic if one attends to what Veresov argues in the paper I shared yesterday, where he defends the notion of mediation but also specifies that Vygotsky speaks of *mediating activity* (as opposed to *mediated* activity). That is, not mediation by signs as products, but mediating activity as the activity of producing signs (which again is an activity of producing social relations, perhaps what you refer as "holistic meanings"?). What do you think? >? >???????? I did not think you were trying to deny the influence of Spinoza, and I do not think we ever said that Perezhivanie was primarily a move from Cartesian Dualism to Monism, as you suggest in your post. I copy and paste from my prior post:? "The fact is that Vygotsky was building a theory on the unity of the affect and the intellect that was to be grounded on Spinoza, and what we try to do is to explore how perezhivanie, as a concept being developed during the same period (but not finalised or totally settled!), could be seen from the perspective of the Spinozist Vygotsky." >? >???????? I totally believe that bringing the distinction between perezhivanie as meaning, and perezhivanie as struggle, is totally relevant, and Beth Ferholt's vignettes of Where the Wild Things Are do indeed illustrate this. We really need to address this tension, which as Beth's examples and as our own everyday experience shows, is a tension that matters not just to books and to theories but to living persons (children, teachers), a tension that moreover is present and mentioned in all the articles of the symposium. The papers offer different proposals, and I think is so great we have the chance to discuss them! I too, as you, am very interesting in hearing others about the questions you had concerning sense and meaning. >? >???????? Alfredo >? >???????? From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >???????? >? >???????? >???????? ? on behalf of Marc Clar? >? >???????? >? >???????? Sent: 04 January 2017 22:31 >? >???????? To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >? >???????? Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! >? >???????? Thank you very much, Alfredo, for sharing this excellent paper by >? >???????? Veresov, and thanks also for your responses, which really helped me to >? >???????? better understand your points. My main doubt about your proposal >? >???????? was/is caused by the statement that the idea of cultural >? >???????? mediation/mediator implies a cartesian dualism. This shocks me >? >???????? because, to me, the idea of cultural mediation is absolutely crucial >? >???????? (in fact, the keystone) for the construction of a monist (and >? >???????? scientific) psychology that does not forget mind ?that is, a cultural >? >???????? psychology. From your response, however, I realized that we may be >? >? ???????approaching the idea of mediation in different ways. I talk of >? >???????? mediation and mediators in a quite restricted way. The starting point >? >???????? of my understanding of mediation is a dialectical relationship >? >???????? (organic, transactional) between the subject and the world (Vygotsky departs from the scheme stimulus-response, from reflexology). >? >???????? This relationship, that Vygotsky calls primitive psychological >? >???????? functions, would be basically biological. However, in human beings >? >???????? this relationship is mediated by cultural means: signs and tools; or >? >???????? primary, secondary and terciary artifacts. These cultural means >? >???????? reorganize the primitive functions (dialectic S-O relationship), which >? >???????? become then higher psychological functions (S-M-O) (see for example, >? >???????? The problem of the cultural development of the child, in The Vygotsky >? >???????? Reader). Now, the subject, the cultural mediators, and the object form >? >???????? an inseparable dialectical unit, so that the subject acts on >? >???????? (transforms) the object through the prism of the cultural mediators, >? >???????? the object acts on (transforms) the subject also through the prism of >? >??? ?????the cultural mediators, and the cultural means are themselves also >? >???????? transformed as a consequence of their mediation in this continuous >? >???????? dynamic dialectical tension. Here, for me, it is important the idea >? >???????? that the cultural means are as material (if we assume a materialist >? >???????? monism) as all the rest of the world; in fact, are parts of the >? >???????? material world which become signs or tools (and can be therefore >? >???????? socially distributed). This permits the introduction of the scientific >? >???????? study of mind-consciousness (as mediating systems of signs), because >? >???????? mind is not anymore something immaterial and unobservable, but it is >? >???????? as material and observable as the rest of the natural world. It is >? >???????? from this view that, for me, the idea of cultural mediation is the >? >???????? keystone of a monist psychology that includes mind. Thus, when I speak >? >???????? of mediators, I refer to the cultural means which mediate in the S-O >? >???????? dialectics; I am especially interested in signs/secondary artifacts. >? >???????? Here, it is perhaps necessary to insist that when I talk of studying >? >???????? mediators (and their semantic structure), this doesn't mean that they >? >???????? are taken out from the activity (the flux of live) in which they >? >???????? mediate (since out of activity they are not signs anymore); here, I >? >???????? think Vygotsky tries again to overcome another old dichotomy, the >? >???????? functionalism-structuralism one. I hope that all this makes also clear the difference between this view and that of computational psychologies (which in general are profoundly and explicitly dualist and not dialectic). >? >???????? Back to perezhivanie, I'm not obviously trying to deny the influence >? >???????? of Spinoza on Vygotsky's thinking (this is explicit in Vygotsky's >? >???????? writings, especially in ?The teaching about emotions?, in the Vol.6 of >? >???????? the Collected Works). But I have doubts that Vygotsky's introduction >? >???????? of the concept of perezhivanie is to be regarded primarily as a >? >???????? movement towards monism (from a previous cartesian dualism), and that >? >???????? this movement questions the concept of cultural mediation. Instead, >? >???????? and I think that this is in line with some of Gonz?lez-Rey >? >???????? observations in his paper, my impression is that the introduction of >? >???????? the concept of perezhivanie responds more to a movement (a further >? >???????? step) towards holism (something that, in my understanding, can also be >? >???????? found in Spinoza). Thus, I think that the word meaning is still the >? >???????? unit of analysis in the last Vygotsky -and therefore, the idea of >? >???????? cultural mediation is still crucial (in fact, in The problem of the >? >???????? environment, he connects the concept of perezhivanie, which has just >? >???????? introduced, to the development of word meaning [p.345-346, also cited >? >???????? in my paper]). However, in my view, in the last Vygotsky the focus is >? >???????? not anymore primarily on the word-meaning as formed for things (or >? >???????? collections of things, as in the ontogenetic research with Sakharov), but the focus is now in the formation of meaning for holistic situations. >? >???????? Best regards, >? >???????? Marc. >? >???????? 2017-01-03 19:16 GMT+01:00 Alfredo Jornet Gil : >? >???????????? Hi Marc, all, >? >???????????? thanks for joining and for your interesting work, which I follow >? >???????????? since I became aware of it. I appreciate the way in your paper you >? >???????????? show careful and honest attention to the texts of the authors >? >???????????? involved, but perhaps most of all I appreciate that the paper makes >? >???????????? the transformational dimension related to struggle and change >? >???????????? salient, a dimension all papers deemed central to perezhivanie. And I >? >?????? ??????have learned more about Vasilyuk by reading your paper. But I also >? >???????????? see that we have approached the question of perezhivanie differently >? >???????????? and I think that addressing the questions that you raise concerning >? >?????????? ??our article may be a good way to both respond and discuss your paper. >? >???????????? I am aware that our use of the term monism may be problematic to >? >???????????? some, and N. Veresov, who has recently written about this (see >? >???????????? attached article), warns against the dangers of simply moving from >? >???????????? dualism into an undifferentiating monism that relativizes everything, >? >???????????? making development un-studiable. This seems to be the way in which >? >???????????? you have understood our argument, and of course this is not what we are or want to be doing. >? >???????????? Probably many will think that *dialectical materialism* rather than >? >???????????? monism is the proper term, and I could agree with them; we do in fact >? >???????????? use dialectical materialism there and elsewhere. Yet, we wanted to >? >???????????? emphasise the Spinozist influence (an influence that also runs >? >???????????? through Marx) and so we found it appropriate to use the term monism, >? >??????? ?????a term that Vygotsky uses before arguing that Spinoza "develops an essentially materialistic view" >? >???????????? (Collected Works, Vol. 6, p. 124). For us, the aim is working out >? >???????????? ways to empirically examine and formulate problems in ways that do >? >???????????? not reify a mind-body dualism. >? >???????????? Although overcoming dualism is foundational to the CHAT paradigm, I >? >???????????? would however not say that Vygotsky did get to solve all of the >? >???????????? problems that Cartesian dualism had created for psychology, even >? >???????????? though he recognised those problems brilliantly as early as in the >? >???????????? "Crisis". It should suffice to cite Vygotsky's own remarks, which we quote in the paper (and which A.N. >? > ????????????Leont'ev mentions in the introduction to the collected works), where >? >???????????? Vygotsky explicitly critiques some of his own prior ideas for failing >? >???????????? to overcome dualism. We agree with those who, like F. G. Rey, see >? >???????????? Vygotsky's project as a developing rather than as a finalised one. >? >???????????? The fact is that Vygotsky was building a theory on the unity of the >? >???????????? affect and the intellect that was to be grounded on Spinoza, and what >? >? ???????????we try to do is to explore how perezhivanie, as a concept being >? >???????????? developed during the same period (but not finalised or totally >? >???????????? settled!), could be seen from the perspective of the Spinozist Vygotsky. >? >????????? ???As you note, in our article we argue that, if one takes the Spinozist >? >???????????? one-substance approach, classical concepts used in non-classical >? >???????????? psychology, at least in the way they are commonly used in the current >? >???????????? literature, should be revised. One such concept is mediation. And I >? >???????????? personally do not have much of a problem when mediation is used to >? >???????????? denote the fundamental fact that every thing exists always through >? >???????????? *another*, never in and of itself. But I do think that it is >? >???????????? problematic to identify MEDIATORS, such as "a meaning", as a means to >? >???????????? account for or explain developmental processes and learning events, >? >??????? ?????precisely because it is there, at least in my view, that dualism creeps in. >? >???????????? For example, I find it paradoxical that you are concerned that our >? >???????????? monist approach risks turning perezhivanie into a useless category >? >????? ???????because it may be used to explain everything and nothing, and yet you >? >???????????? do not seem to have a problem using the term mediation to account for >? >???????????? the transformation of perezhivanie without clearly elaborating on how >? >??? ?????????mediation does change anything or what it looks like as a real >? >???????????? process. How is it different saying that a perezhivanie mediates the >? >???????????? experiencing-as-struggle from simply saying that it "affects" or >? >???????????? "determines" it? Indeed, if perezhivanie mediates >? >???????????? experiencing-as-struggle, does not experiencing-as-struglgle too >? >???????????? mediate perezhivanie? And do not both may be said to mediate development, or development mediate them? Is not this explaining everything and nothing? >? >???????????? I do believe you can argue that there is a difference between >? >???????????? mediation and classical psychology's cause-effect relations, but to >? >???????????? show this you need to dig into the dialectical underpinnings of the >? >???????????? theory. In your paper, you offer a nice analysis of a lovely case of >? >???????????? a teacher who, in dealing with a challenge with one of her students, >? > ????????????changes her perezhivanie. I think you can rightly argue that there is >? >???????????? a semiotic transformation, and I fully support your statement that by >? >???????????? studying discourse we can empirically approach questions of >? >???????? ????psychological development. The contradictions you show as being >? >???????????? involved and resolved resonate really well with what I experience as >? >???????????? a parent or as a teacher in the classroom. Yet, without unpacking >? >???????????? what this "mediation" taking place between one perezhivanie and the >? >???????????? next one means as a concrete and real, the same analysis could be done taking an information processing approach: >? >???????????? there is an situation that is processed (represented?) in one way, >? >???????????? which then leads to a (cognitive) dissonance, and then there is a >? >???????????? cognitive resolution by means of which the situation is presented >? >???????????? differently in consciousness (indeed, when seen in this way, the term >? >???????????? perezhivanie and the term "representation" become almost >? >???????????? indistinguishable). How is mediation, as an analytical concept, >? >???????????? helping here? And most importantly to the question of perezhivanie, >? >???????????? how is this analysis going to show the internal connection between >? >???????????? intellect and affect that Vygotsky formulates as constitutive of the notion of perezhivanie? >? >???????????? I believe that the key lies in understanding what Vygotsky means when >? >???????????? he says that perezhivanie is a unit of analysis. I will not repeat >? >???????????? here what already is written in at least a couple of the articles in >? >???????????? the special issue (Blunden, ours), that is the difference between >? >???????????? analysis by elements and unit analysis (Vygotsky 1987). A unit >? >???????????? analysis approach is consistent with Spinoza, for whom cause-effect >? >???????? ????explanations were not adequate, requiring instead an understanding of >? >???????????? self-development, perezhivanie as a kernel cell for the development >? >???????????? of personality. And I think you may be after this in your article in >? >???????????? suggesting a form of continuous movement from perezhivanie to >? >???????????? experiencing-as-struggle. But perhaps the major difficulty I find is that, in positing Vygotsky's perezhivanie as "a type of meaning" >? >???????????? and Vasilyuk's perezhivanie (or experiencing-as-struggle) as a "type >? >???????????? of activity," it is difficult not to see here a division between >? >???????????? product and process, a division that then is analytically bridged by >? >???????????? the addition of a third term, mediation, that should bring back the >? >???????????? real movement between the product and the process. >? >???????????? A different approach involves considering the concrete extension of >? >???????????? actual living and lived social relations, and look at them as >? >???????????? generative phenomena. What is there in the encounter between Carla >? >???????????? and the child that leads to change? For it is not inside the mind, >? >???????????? but in real life, in consciousness as the real relation between people, that Carla is changed. >? >???????????? How is the semantic structure that you nicely present and attribute >? >???????????? to Carla a product of the social relation between her and the child? >? >???????????? I think that to rightfully situate perezhivanie as a concept in a >? >???????????? Vygotskian framework, we ought to address its relation to the genetic >? >???????????? law of development. >? >???????????? There is much more to disentangle, but this is long enough. I hope I >? >???????????? have succeeded in making clear these ideas. Thanks so much for >? >???????????? engaging in the discussion! >? >???????????? Alfredo >? >???????????? ________________________________________ >? >???????????? From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >???????????? >? >???????????? >???????????? ? on behalf of Marc Clar? >? >???????????? >???????????? >? >???????????? Sent: 02 January 2017 22:14 >? >???????????? To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >? >???????????? Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! >? >???????????? Hi, all, and thank you so much, Alfredo, for your kind invitation to >? >???????????? participate in this discussion. My paper in the MCA special issue >? >???????????? focuses on a distinction between a type of activity, which I argue >? >???? ????????that is what Vasilyuk called *perezhivanie* (experiencing) and a type >? >???????????? of semiotic mediator, which I argue that is what Vygotsky, in The >? >???????????? Problem of the Environment, called *perezhivanie.* I argue, following >? >?????? ??????Vasilyuk, that in experiencing activities (Vasilyuk's perezhivanie), >? >???????????? this type of mediator is profoundly transformed ? in fact, that >? >???????????? experiencing activities consist of the semiotic transformation of this type of mediator. >? >???????????? As Veresov and Fleer argue in their commentary, perezhivanie (as a >? >???????????? type of >? >???????????? mediator) is for me a psychological phenomenon, one which is of >? >???????????? course conceptualized from a specific theoretical framework. But the >? >???????????? phenomenon is also visible from other theoretical frameworks as well, >? >???????????? as I mention in the paper. This phenomenon is my main interest, and >? >???????????? it is from this interest that I arrived at the concept of perezhivanie (not the other way around). >? >???????????? Now, the phenomenon is that at least emotion, reasoning, and volition >? >???????????? (formation of conscious purposes) seem to be decisively mediated by >? >???????????? holistic situational meaning. My current research concern is trying >? >???????????? to find ways to study and understand how this mediation occurs and >? >???????????? how these semiotic mediators are transformed and distributed. From >? >???????????? this view, I think that experiencing activities (Vasilyuk's >? >???????????? perezhivanie) may provide a good terrain to study these issues >? >???????????? (especially regarding the mediation of emotion), as I tried to exemplify in the paper. >? >???????????? Studying semiotic mediation, however, is of course not easy. >? >???????????? Following Vygotsky, I assume that extended discourse is the >? >???????????? manifestation of thinking within certain psychological conditions >? >???????????? (Vygotsky's Thinking and Speech, chapter 7), and I also assume the >? >???????????? Vygotsky's law of the unity of the structure and function of thinking >? >??? ?????????(Vygotsky's Thinking and Speech, chapter 6). From these two >? >???????????? assumptions, I propose that meaning (and its functions in human >? >???????????? activity) can be scientifically studied by structurally analyzing the >? >???????????? narratives generated by subjects, considering that the discourse >? >???????????? produced in the narrative is the point of departure of this study, >? >???????????? but that considerable analytical work must be done to move from this >? >???????????? discourse to the full characterization of meaning. It is in that >? >???????????? point where I find useful the work developed by Greimas, the usefulness of which I only suggest in the paper. >? >???????????? >>From this background, I found many interesting ideas and questions >? >???????????????? in the >? >???????????? other papers of the special issue. In this first post I will propose >? >???????????? two of them for possible discussion. The first one was raised by >? >???????????? Gonz?lez-Rey, when he introduces, in connection with perezhivanie, >? >???????????? the concepts of personality, and especially, of sense. So, which is >? >???????????? the conceptual (and-or >? >???????????? phenomenal) relation between perezhivanie and sense? Gonz?lez-Rey >? >???????????? suggests that both concepts are somewhat similar (and overcome by the >? >???????????? concept of ?subjective sense?); my opinion, partly expressed in my >? >???????????? commentary, is that perezhivanie is a type of meaning, which includes >? >???????????? different levels of depth, and that sense corresponds to the deepest >? >???????????? level of meaning (which can be characterized as a system of semic >? >???????????? oppositions). Therefore, sense wouldn't be in opposition to meaning >? >???????????? (as ?a microcosm of human consciousness?, as Kozulin remembers in his >? >???????????? commentary), although it would be in opposition to manifested meaning (the surface level of meaning). >? >???????????? The second issue was raised by Roth and Jornet, and I think it goes >? >???????????? beyond the issue of perezhivanie itself. If I understand them well, >? >???????????? they argue that Vygotsky's core proposal of cultural mediation is >? >???????????? influenced by the Cartesian dualism (mind-matter), and that a >? >???????????? promising approach to Cultural Psychology would be a Spinozist >? >???????????? monism. I am actually very interested on the issue of which >? >???????????? epistemological position can best substantiate the construction of a >? >???????????? cultural psychology, and that's why I feel inclined to take the >? >???????????? opportunity to ask for your opinions about that. About the proposal >? >???????????? of Roth and Jornet, I have some doubts. First, I don't see why >? >???????????? Vygotsky's proposals can be seen as dualist (in the Cartesian sense) >? >???????????? -I suspect that it is because of the analytical distinctions?. >? >???????????? Anyway, in my understanding, Vygotsky explicitly assumes a >? >???????????? materialist monism (for example in The Crisis), and in fact he constructs his proposal on mediation upon reflexology, which also explicitly assumed a materialist monism (e.g. >? >???????????? Sechenov). Would a Spinozist monism be a better point of departure? I >? >???????????? don't know, in my understanding it is a more idealist monism, and I >? >???????????? don't clearly see what could be gained. In my opinion, a scientific >? >???????????? psychology which includes the study of mind is only possible if any >? >???????????? type of monism is assumed. However, in my view, for a scientific >? >???????????? psychology, the ontological nature of the world is perhaps less >? >????????? ???important (it is an issue for metaphysics?), and I am inclined to assume a neutral monism (e.g. Russell). >? >???????????? So from this view, a materialist monism and a Spinozist monism >? >???????????? wouldn't be so different, so from both views it could be assumed that >? >???????????? all is of the same nature and all is similarly knowable (including >? >???????????? mind) [which is the ontological nature of the world and to what >? >???????????? degree it is knowable are issues that can be left to philosophy]. >? >???????????? However, in my opinion, this does not mean that, while assuming a >? >???????????? monism, analytical distinctions cannot be done when studying the >? >???????????? world. In that sense, I had the impression that Roth and Jornet >? >?? ??????????tended to dilute analytical distinctions in the name of monism; I >? >???????????? repeat that I don't know if I understood them well, but if this was >? >???????????? the case, in my opinion, analysis would be impossible within the new >? >???????????? psychology suggested by Roth and Jornet, and, regarding perezhivanie, >? >???????????? there would be the danger, noted by Vygotsky in The Crisis and >? >???????????? cautioned by Kozulin in his commentary, that by meaning everything, perezhivanie ends by meaning nothing. >? >???????????? Best regards and happy new year, >? >???????????? Marc. >? >???????????? 2017-01-02 9:12 GMT+01:00 Alfredo Jornet Gil : >? >???????????????? Dear all, >? >?????????? ??????I would like to join David, Luisa, Ana, Henry and the others to wish >? >???????????????? you all a Happy New Year! May it be full of joy, peace, and opportunity. >? >???????????????? I also would like to begin the year announcing our first ?MCA >? >?? ??????????????article discussion, ?although in fact corresponds to the last issue >? >???????????????? of the year >? >???????????? we >? >???????????????? just passed, Issue 4 on Perezhivanie. This is a very special >? >???????????????? *special* issue, not only because its topic has raised lots of >? >???????????????? interest lately in >? >???????????? the >? >???????????????? CHAT community but also because, greatly coordinated by Andy Blunden >? >???????????????? and the rest of the editorial team, the issue takes the form of a >? >???????????????? symposium where authors get the chance to present and respond to >? >???????????????? each others' ideas on the subject. In my view, this allows having a >? >???????????????? rich and >? >???????????? multidimensional >? >???????????????? approach to a subject as important as perezhivanie. >? >???????????????? Following with the dialogical spirit in which the special issue was >? >???????????????? assembled, we will focus on one lead article, but hoping to also >? >???????????????? engage ideas and insights present in or relevant to other >? >???????????????? contributions in the issue. ?Marc Clar?'s "Vygotsky and Vasilyuk on >? >???????????????? Perezhivanie: Two Notions and One Word" will be our focus. The >? >???????????????? article very nicely engages the lead work of Vygotsky, but also the >? >???????????????? less known ??(?in educational literature) but totally relevant works >? >???????????????? of psychologist ?F. Vasilyuk and semiotician >? >???????????? A. >? >???????????????? J. Greimas, mobilising a number of key concepts including those of >? >???????????? semiotic >? >???????????????? mediation and transformation. >? >???? ?????????????In addition to Marc, who will soon join us, I have encouraged some >? >???????????????? of >? >???????????? the >? >???????????????? other authors in the special issue to also join as "relevant >? >???????????????? others," if time and circumstances allow them. Let's hope that this >? >???????????????? will help keeping the symposium spirit up. >? >???????????????? Marc's article is attached to this e-mail and will be made open >? >???????????????? access at the T&F pages as soon as people is back from the holidays. >? >???????????????? The T&F link >? >???????????? is >? >???????????????? this: >? >???????????????? http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039.2016.1186194 >? >? ???????????????The link to the MCA Forum pages, where we announce our discussions >? >???????????????? and other xmca things, is here:http://lchc.ucsd.edu/MCA/ >? >???????????????? I wish us all a very productive and interesting discussion. >? >????????????? ???Alfredo >? ? ? ? -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 603001FE94694E78B3DC955DD3B6347E.png Type: image/png Size: 213 bytes Desc: not available Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20170109/2da82050/attachment.png -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: D1E69A66D83E4402A0A8CBB340485BAA.png Type: image/png Size: 305 bytes Desc: not available Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20170109/2da82050/attachment-0001.png From feine@duq.edu Mon Jan 9 15:05:15 2017 From: feine@duq.edu (Elizabeth Fein) Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2017 18:05:15 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Extended Deadline: Society for Qualitative Inquiry in Psychology 2017 Conference Message-ID: ***THE DEADLINE FOR SUBMITTING TO SQIP'S 2017 CONFERENCE HAS BEEN EXTENDED TO FEBRUARY 1ST, 2017*** Dear Colleagues, Attached please find the Call for Papers, with our *extended deadline of February 1st,* for the 2017 Conference of the Society for Qualitative Inquiry in Psychology (SQIP), a Section of Division 5 of the American Psychological Association. The conference will be held May 24th and 25th at Fordham University's Lincoln Center campus in New York City. We invite proposals for: - Symposia consisting of 3 - 5 papers on a particular topic - Individual papers which we will group into symposia - Posters for our poster session(s) For those who are interested in putting together an organized symposium, you can post ideas on the Conference Discussion Forum on the SQIP blog: http://qualpsy.org/events/2017-conference/2017-interest-forum/ We hope to see you in May! Best, Elizabeth -- Elizabeth Fein, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Department of Psychology Duquesne University -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: SQIP 2017 Call for Papers Final.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 1013010 bytes Desc: not available Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20170109/3e0a19e9/attachment-0001.pdf From ablunden@mira.net Mon Jan 9 15:41:42 2017 From: ablunden@mira.net (Andy Blunden) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2017 10:41:42 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! In-Reply-To: <5873d5d6.05ae630a.e4933.db19@mx.google.com> References: <1483344752182.40904@iped.uio.no> <1483467423798.57819@iped.uio.no> <1483601196884.31418@iped.uio.no> <5df5e870-3ef8-70d6-0c17-f8647ba17e62@mira.net> <587124d9.d957620a.4a5a8.bd56@mx.google.com> <1483820996800.91513@iped.uio.no> <58718707.4270630a.c8bff.94c9@mx.google.com> <1483836706132.31367@iped.uio.no> <5872773f.19af630a.27791.0ba4@mx.google.com> <1483977082006.64293@iped.uio.no> <5873d5d6.05ae630a.e4933.db19@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <05d411f3-56a7-7e80-3671-52c1fa3c51b2@mira.net> Is that right, Alfredo, what Larry says? That signs are not material artefacts (as I had thought), at all? It seemed to me that you were saying that as well. Andy ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making On 10/01/2017 5:25 AM, lpscholar2@gmail.com wrote: > > So, following your train of thought we should always > qualify ?sign? as ?sign relation? that moves genetically > or ?dynamically?. > From ablunden@mira.net Mon Jan 9 16:05:04 2017 From: ablunden@mira.net (Andy Blunden) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2017 11:05:04 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] perezhivanie Message-ID: <6a36c6a8-2f45-8b45-ad6d-3e94d63565b1@mira.net> Marc, throughout the Special Issue we spelt /perezhivanie/ the same say and put it in italics, indicating a Russian word transliterated into English, and systematically had authors delete "experiencing" and "lived experience" from their articles and even quotations, as part of an effort to create a common meaning for the word. Summing up your position, in the Response, you said: In my reading (and I apologize in advance for any misinterpretations), the different papers in this special issue have basically noted four different phenomena that are sometimes referred to as /perezhivanie/. They might be considered four different meanings of the word. To distinguish between these meanings of /perezhivanie/, I will give them four different tentative names: experiencing-as-contemplation; experiencing-as-struggle; fantasy-based experiencing-as-struggle; and m-/perezhivanie/. What is your recommendation for future writers? Should they choose one of these four terms? Or use /perezhivanie/ and qualify, or rely on context to specify meaning? Andy -- ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making From marc.clara@gmail.com Mon Jan 9 18:19:20 2017 From: marc.clara@gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Marc_Clar=C3=A0?=) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2017 03:19:20 +0100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: perezhivanie In-Reply-To: <6a36c6a8-2f45-8b45-ad6d-3e94d63565b1@mira.net> References: <6a36c6a8-2f45-8b45-ad6d-3e94d63565b1@mira.net> Message-ID: Hi, Andy, In my opinion, it is important, and especially in this topic, to be precise about the phenomena or the aspects of the phenomena which are under scrutiny; otherwise, scientific discussion and cumulative construction may become quite difficult. In this case, it might happen, I think, that different people interarticulate a formally coherent discourse talking of perezhivanie, and they think they are talking about the same object of study and about analogous observations, but in reality talking about different objects of study, or different aspects, or about observations which can be complementary (instead of in opposition, for example). The problem, in my view, is not that there are different focuses, aspects, etc. under research in relation to a phenomenon or different related phenomena; the problem may arise if observations about different aspects, for example, are counterpoised and discussed as if they were about the same aspect of the phenomenon. That's why I think it may be useful to make some distinctions, to gain some precision in the scientific work on perezhivanie. The first distinction, experiencing-as-contemplation and experiencing-as-struggle, is made by Vasilyuk (although with a different name for experiencing-as-struggle, as explained in the paper). He initially distinguishes these as two types of activity, although later suggests that experiencing-as-contemplation could be an initial moment for a subsequent experiencing-as-struggle (but not all experiencing-as-contemplation would necessarily imply experiencing-as-struggle). In experiencing-as-struggle, Vasilyuk also identifies the importance of the cultural meanings that mediate this activity -which he calls schematism,- and especially how these meanings are transformed in experiencing-as-struggle. In my interpretation, when Vygotsky talks of perezhivanie in The Problem of the Environment, he focuses mainly in this type of meaning. This is what in my comment I suggested to call m-perezhivanie. I agree with you, Andy, and I think this is also related to part of Alfredo's points, that there is no experiencing-as-struggle without a mediating m-perezhivanie which is transformed in the activity, so that, even analytically, this distinction could seem useless, because studying experiencing-as-struggle is the same as studying the transformation of m-perezhivanija, and viceversa. Still, I think that the distinction may be useful because I work with the hypothesis that this type of holistic meaning is key not only as a mediator in experiencing-as-struggle, but in many other types of activity (as I mentioned also in previous messages and also in the paper). Thus, what we learn about this type of mediating meaning in experiencing-as-struggle may inform also about other types of activities and viceversa. Also, and in the same vein, in my view this distinction helps to connect Vygotsky and Vasilyuk works on perezhivanie. Thus, note that, in The Problem of the Environment, Vygotsky does not consider what in my interpretation is m-perezhivanie as mediating in activities of experiencing-as-struggle, but instead he considers it, basically, as mediating in activities of experiencing-as-contemplation. I don't know if the terms I suggested are adequate or not, and I don't consider myself with authority enough to recommend one term over others, but I think that, regardless the terms used, we need to be precise about the phenomenon or aspects of the phenomenon we are addressing. Best regards, Marc. 2017-01-10 1:05 GMT+01:00 Andy Blunden : > Marc, throughout the Special Issue we spelt /perezhivanie/ the same say > and put it in italics, indicating a Russian word transliterated into > English, and systematically had authors delete "experiencing" and "lived > experience" from their articles and even quotations, as part of an effort > to create a common meaning for the word. Summing up your position, in the > Response, you said: > > In my reading (and I apologize in advance for any > misinterpretations), the different papers in this > special issue have basically noted four different > phenomena that are sometimes referred to as > /perezhivanie/. They might be considered four > different meanings of the word. To distinguish > between these meanings of /perezhivanie/, I will > give them four different tentative names: > experiencing-as-contemplation; > experiencing-as-struggle; fantasy-based > experiencing-as-struggle; and m-/perezhivanie/. > > What is your recommendation for future writers? Should they choose one of > these four terms? Or use /perezhivanie/ and qualify, or rely on context to > specify meaning? > > Andy > -- > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Andy Blunden > http://home.mira.net/~andy > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > From ablunden@mira.net Mon Jan 9 18:37:34 2017 From: ablunden@mira.net (Andy Blunden) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2017 13:37:34 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: perezhivanie In-Reply-To: References: <6a36c6a8-2f45-8b45-ad6d-3e94d63565b1@mira.net> Message-ID: <6adc9183-c712-bfbd-6adc-ddcb91b65931@mira.net> I heartily concur with your efforts to gain precision, Marc. Leaving aside the generation of new terms willy nilly for no scientific purpose, the problem we face (especially in appropriating scientific work in the Marxist tradition) is this: the object is itself is not fixed. Analytical approaches want strictly circumscribed objects, differentiated from one another by definable attributes, but continuing analysis (e.g. over the history of a science) lead to more and more distinctions, leading to the disintegration of the original concept or insight. For example, the psychology of a child is not like the psychology of an adult, and yet the child is a person, just as is an adult, and the psychology of a child has to be understood *not in itself* but in its fitness to turn, eventually, into the psychology of an adult. Irina Mescheryakov's dictionary definition (circulated by Alfredo last week) said: "According to the theory of Vygotsky, /perezhivanie/ can be approached like any other mental function which in ontogenesis is developed from involuntary and direct forms to the highest forms, which have status of action or activity. This approach offers possibilities for distinguishing the different genetic forms /perezhivanie/, and also for the search for the cultural-historical means of mastery of /perezhivanie./" So my point is: generating multiple different terms for /perezhivanie/ in this or that circumstance places an obligation on the writer to show how one transforms into the other. Such a transformation process is not *yet another form* of /perezhivanie/ but the content of the processes undergoing transformation. Andy ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making On 10/01/2017 1:19 PM, Marc Clar? wrote: > Hi, Andy, > In my opinion, it is important, and especially in this > topic, to be precise about the phenomena or the aspects of > the phenomena which are under scrutiny; otherwise, > scientific discussion and cumulative construction may > become quite difficult. In this case, it might happen, I > think, that different people interarticulate a formally > coherent discourse talking of perezhivanie, and they think > they are talking about the same object of study and about > analogous observations, but in reality talking about > different objects of study, or different aspects, or about > observations which can be complementary (instead of in > opposition, for example). The problem, in my view, is not > that there are different focuses, aspects, etc. under > research in relation to a phenomenon or different related > phenomena; the problem may arise if observations about > different aspects, for example, are counterpoised and > discussed as if they were about the same aspect of the > phenomenon. > That's why I think it may be useful to make some > distinctions, to gain some precision in the scientific > work on perezhivanie. The first distinction, > experiencing-as-contemplation and > experiencing-as-struggle, is made by Vasilyuk (although > with a different name for experiencing-as-struggle, as > explained in the paper). He initially distinguishes these > as two types of activity, although later suggests that > experiencing-as-contemplation could be an initial moment > for a subsequent experiencing-as-struggle (but not all > experiencing-as-contemplation would necessarily imply > experiencing-as-struggle). In experiencing-as-struggle, > Vasilyuk also identifies the importance of the cultural > meanings that mediate this activity -which he calls > schematism,- and especially how these meanings are > transformed in experiencing-as-struggle. In my > interpretation, when Vygotsky talks of perezhivanie in The > Problem of the Environment, he focuses mainly in this type > of meaning. This is what in my comment I suggested to call > m-perezhivanie. > I agree with you, Andy, and I think this is also related > to part of Alfredo's points, that there is no > experiencing-as-struggle without a mediating > m-perezhivanie which is transformed in the activity, so > that, even analytically, this distinction could seem > useless, because studying experiencing-as-struggle is the > same as studying the transformation of m-perezhivanija, > and viceversa. Still, I think that the distinction may be > useful because I work with the hypothesis that this type > of holistic meaning is key not only as a mediator in > experiencing-as-struggle, but in many other types of > activity (as I mentioned also in previous messages and > also in the paper). Thus, what we learn about this type of > mediating meaning in experiencing-as-struggle may inform > also about other types of activities and viceversa. Also, > and in the same vein, in my view this distinction helps to > connect Vygotsky and Vasilyuk works on perezhivanie. Thus, > note that, in The Problem of the Environment, Vygotsky > does not consider what in my interpretation is > m-perezhivanie as mediating in activities of > experiencing-as-struggle, but instead he considers it, > basically, as mediating in activities of > experiencing-as-contemplation. > I don't know if the terms I suggested are adequate or not, > and I don't consider myself with authority enough to > recommend one term over others, but I think that, > regardless the terms used, we need to be precise about the > phenomenon or aspects of the phenomenon we are addressing. > Best regards, > Marc. > > 2017-01-10 1:05 GMT+01:00 Andy Blunden >: > > Marc, throughout the Special Issue we spelt > /perezhivanie/ the same say and put it in italics, > indicating a Russian word transliterated into English, > and systematically had authors delete "experiencing" > and "lived experience" from their articles and even > quotations, as part of an effort to create a common > meaning for the word. Summing up your position, in the > Response, you said: > > In my reading (and I apologize in advance for any > misinterpretations), the different papers in this > special issue have basically noted four different > phenomena that are sometimes referred to as > /perezhivanie/. They might be considered four > different meanings of the word. To distinguish > between these meanings of /perezhivanie/, I will > give them four different tentative names: > experiencing-as-contemplation; > experiencing-as-struggle; fantasy-based > experiencing-as-struggle; and m-/perezhivanie/. > > What is your recommendation for future writers? Should > they choose one of these four terms? Or use > /perezhivanie/ and qualify, or rely on context to > specify meaning? > > Andy > -- > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Andy Blunden > http://home.mira.net/~andy > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > > > From wagner.schmit@gmail.com Mon Jan 9 18:46:50 2017 From: wagner.schmit@gmail.com (Wagner Luiz Schmit) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2017 11:46:50 +0900 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: perezhivanie In-Reply-To: References: <6a36c6a8-2f45-8b45-ad6d-3e94d63565b1@mira.net> Message-ID: Dear xmca colleagues, "So my point is: generating multiple different terms for /perezhivanie/ in this or that circumstance places an obligation on the writer to show how one transforms into the other. Such a transformation process is not *yet another form* of /perezhivanie/ but the content of the processes undergoing transformation." Thanks Professor Blunden to give some clarity to this puzzle I though I was getting the grasp of the idea of perezhivanie, especially through the works of Professor Nikolai Veresov, and I tried to summarize it in a paper (the Culture & Psychology one attached bellow). I was lost in all these threads and discussions on perezhivanie. I have the same worries as Marc Clara about the phenomena that we are underpinning under the tag "perezhivanie", but not only the phenomena of perezhivanie but also the concept of perezhivanie. And there are other "perezhivanie", this "m-perezhivanie", and reading a paper I found "soperezhivanie" and "collective perezhivanie" (see attached paper from March and Fleer). But this point of yours sets the start for the pathway through all these "perezhivanie". Thanks Wagner Luiz Schmit On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 11:19 AM, Marc Clar? wrote: > Hi, Andy, > In my opinion, it is important, and especially in this topic, to be precise > about the phenomena or the aspects of the phenomena which are under > scrutiny; otherwise, scientific discussion and cumulative construction may > become quite difficult. In this case, it might happen, I think, that > different people interarticulate a formally coherent discourse talking of > perezhivanie, and they think they are talking about the same object of > study and about analogous observations, but in reality talking about > different objects of study, or different aspects, or about observations > which can be complementary (instead of in opposition, for example). The > problem, in my view, is not that there are different focuses, aspects, etc. > under research in relation to a phenomenon or different related phenomena; > the problem may arise if observations about different aspects, for example, > are counterpoised and discussed as if they were about the same aspect of > the phenomenon. > That's why I think it may be useful to make some distinctions, to gain some > precision in the scientific work on perezhivanie. The first distinction, > experiencing-as-contemplation and experiencing-as-struggle, is made by > Vasilyuk (although with a different name for experiencing-as-struggle, as > explained in the paper). He initially distinguishes these as two types of > activity, although later suggests that experiencing-as-contemplation could > be an initial moment for a subsequent experiencing-as-struggle (but not all > experiencing-as-contemplation would necessarily imply > experiencing-as-struggle). In experiencing-as-struggle, Vasilyuk also > identifies the importance of the cultural meanings that mediate this > activity -which he calls schematism,- and especially how these meanings are > transformed in experiencing-as-struggle. In my interpretation, when > Vygotsky talks of perezhivanie in The Problem of the Environment, he > focuses mainly in this type of meaning. This is what in my comment I > suggested to call m-perezhivanie. > I agree with you, Andy, and I think this is also related to part of > Alfredo's points, that there is no experiencing-as-struggle without a > mediating m-perezhivanie which is transformed in the activity, so that, > even analytically, this distinction could seem useless, because studying > experiencing-as-struggle is the same as studying the transformation of > m-perezhivanija, and viceversa. Still, I think that the distinction may be > useful because I work with the hypothesis that this type of holistic > meaning is key not only as a mediator in experiencing-as-struggle, but in > many other types of activity (as I mentioned also in previous messages and > also in the paper). Thus, what we learn about this type of mediating > meaning in experiencing-as-struggle may inform also about other types of > activities and viceversa. Also, and in the same vein, in my view this > distinction helps to connect Vygotsky and Vasilyuk works on perezhivanie. > Thus, note that, in The Problem of the Environment, Vygotsky does not > consider what in my interpretation is m-perezhivanie as mediating in > activities of experiencing-as-struggle, but instead he considers it, > basically, as mediating in activities of experiencing-as-contemplation. > I don't know if the terms I suggested are adequate or not, and I don't > consider myself with authority enough to recommend one term over others, > but I think that, regardless the terms used, we need to be precise about > the phenomenon or aspects of the phenomenon we are addressing. > Best regards, > Marc. > > 2017-01-10 1:05 GMT+01:00 Andy Blunden : > > > Marc, throughout the Special Issue we spelt /perezhivanie/ the same say > > and put it in italics, indicating a Russian word transliterated into > > English, and systematically had authors delete "experiencing" and "lived > > experience" from their articles and even quotations, as part of an effort > > to create a common meaning for the word. Summing up your position, in the > > Response, you said: > > > > In my reading (and I apologize in advance for any > > misinterpretations), the different papers in this > > special issue have basically noted four different > > phenomena that are sometimes referred to as > > /perezhivanie/. They might be considered four > > different meanings of the word. To distinguish > > between these meanings of /perezhivanie/, I will > > give them four different tentative names: > > experiencing-as-contemplation; > > experiencing-as-struggle; fantasy-based > > experiencing-as-struggle; and m-/perezhivanie/. > > > > What is your recommendation for future writers? Should they choose one of > > these four terms? Or use /perezhivanie/ and qualify, or rely on context > to > > specify meaning? > > > > Andy > > -- > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > Andy Blunden > > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: CulturePsychology2016Schmit1354067X16663006.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 173057 bytes Desc: not available Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20170110/f83daf24/attachment.pdf -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: March and Fleer - 2016 - Soperezhivanie Dramatic events in fairy tales and.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 260546 bytes Desc: not available Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20170110/f83daf24/attachment-0001.pdf From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Mon Jan 9 19:57:15 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2017 03:57:15 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! In-Reply-To: <05d411f3-56a7-7e80-3671-52c1fa3c51b2@mira.net> References: <1483344752182.40904@iped.uio.no> <1483467423798.57819@iped.uio.no> <1483601196884.31418@iped.uio.no> <5df5e870-3ef8-70d6-0c17-f8647ba17e62@mira.net> <587124d9.d957620a.4a5a8.bd56@mx.google.com> <1483820996800.91513@iped.uio.no> <58718707.4270630a.c8bff.94c9@mx.google.com> <1483836706132.31367@iped.uio.no> <5872773f.19af630a.27791.0ba4@mx.google.com> <1483977082006.64293@iped.uio.no> <5873d5d6.05ae630a.e4933.db19@mx.google.com>, <05d411f3-56a7-7e80-3671-52c1fa3c51b2@mira.net> Message-ID: <1484020634294.98269@iped.uio.no> I am not sure what part of Larry's or mine text you refer to, Andy, or why what I have written raises that question. But if your question is whether I think that words (as signs) are immaterial, or that a cube (as per the empirical case in our article) is immaterial as sign, then of course not. If your question is whether I think that sign relations are immaterial because they are not things but relations, then again no, that's not what I think or try to say. I assume we agree, however, that a pointing finger *does* things in a very different way than things can be done with a stick. Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Andy Blunden Sent: 10 January 2017 00:41 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! Is that right, Alfredo, what Larry says? That signs are not material artefacts (as I had thought), at all? It seemed to me that you were saying that as well. Andy ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making On 10/01/2017 5:25 AM, lpscholar2@gmail.com wrote: > > So, following your train of thought we should always > qualify ?sign? as ?sign relation? that moves genetically > or ?dynamically?. > From ablunden@mira.net Mon Jan 9 20:32:26 2017 From: ablunden@mira.net (Andy Blunden) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2017 15:32:26 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! In-Reply-To: <1484020634294.98269@iped.uio.no> References: <1483344752182.40904@iped.uio.no> <1483467423798.57819@iped.uio.no> <1483601196884.31418@iped.uio.no> <5df5e870-3ef8-70d6-0c17-f8647ba17e62@mira.net> <587124d9.d957620a.4a5a8.bd56@mx.google.com> <1483820996800.91513@iped.uio.no> <58718707.4270630a.c8bff.94c9@mx.google.com> <1483836706132.31367@iped.uio.no> <5872773f.19af630a.27791.0ba4@mx.google.com> <1483977082006.64293@iped.uio.no> <5873d5d6.05ae630a.e4933.db19@mx.google.com> <05d411f3-56a7-7e80-3671-52c1fa3c51b2@mira.net> <1484020634294.98269@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <4d279ed9-6211-8ff8-13a6-b06dc700883e@mira.net> I agree with you that taking an action as sign-mediated is distinct from taking an action as tool-mediated. One can of course point with a stick, and poke with a finger, yes? That's all good. But Larry drew from reading your message that signs were not material artefacts. Perhaps he had in mind: "that SIGN is not a thing, but a relation between two persons." Andy ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making On 10/01/2017 2:57 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > I am not sure what part of Larry's or mine text you refer to, Andy, or why what I have written raises that question. But if your question is whether I think that words (as signs) are immaterial, or that a cube (as per the empirical case in our article) is immaterial as sign, then of course not. If your question is whether I think that sign relations are immaterial because they are not things but relations, then again no, that's not what I think or try to say. I assume we agree, however, that a pointing finger *does* things in a very different way than things can be done with a stick. > > Alfredo > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Andy Blunden > Sent: 10 January 2017 00:41 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > Is that right, Alfredo, what Larry says? That signs are not > material artefacts (as I had thought), at all? It seemed to > me that you were saying that as well. > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Andy Blunden > http://home.mira.net/~andy > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > On 10/01/2017 5:25 AM, lpscholar2@gmail.com wrote: >> So, following your train of thought we should always >> qualify ?sign? as ?sign relation? that moves genetically >> or ?dynamically?. >> From lpscholar2@gmail.com Tue Jan 10 07:32:33 2017 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2017 07:32:33 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! In-Reply-To: <4d279ed9-6211-8ff8-13a6-b06dc700883e@mira.net> References: <1483344752182.40904@iped.uio.no> <1483467423798.57819@iped.uio.no> <1483601196884.31418@iped.uio.no> <5df5e870-3ef8-70d6-0c17-f8647ba17e62@mira.net> <587124d9.d957620a.4a5a8.bd56@mx.google.com> <1483820996800.91513@iped.uio.no> <58718707.4270630a.c8bff.94c9@mx.google.com> <1483836706132.31367@iped.uio.no> <5872773f.19af630a.27791.0ba4@mx.google.com> <1483977082006.64293@iped.uio.no> <5873d5d6.05ae630a.e4933.db19@mx.google.com> <05d411f3-56a7-7e80-3671-52c1fa3c51b2@mira.net> <1484020634294.98269@iped.uio.no> <4d279ed9-6211-8ff8-13a6-b06dc700883e@mira.net> Message-ID: <5874feb6.047c630a.9bd85.28f2@mx.google.com> Andy, Alfredo, i do not have access to the other papers in this months journal exploring perezhivanie. However, i do have access to alfredo?s and Roth?s paper (toward a theory of experience) and this paper may add some clarity to perezhivanie as contemplation, perezhivanie as struggle, and m-perezhivanie. Turning to page 119 of Alfredo?s article, Alfredo and Roth write?: As Dewey, cultural historical psychologists emphasize that activity cannot be reduced to volitional processes and volitional experiences. Now turning to Dewey to elaborate this point further, i will quote the paragraph composed by Alfredo and Roth on page 119 that captures this truth?: Having ?an? experience ? one that is ?integrated and demarcated in the general stream of experience from other experiences (Dewey, 1934) as opposed to mere automatic reflexes of no significant contribution to further development ? involves a ?balance? a ?proportion? of DOING AND UNDERGOING?: ?Unbalance on either side blurs the perception of relations and leaves the experience partial and distorted.? (Dewey, p 51). Lust for completion ( an excess of agency) results in an experience ?so dispersed and miscellaneous as hardly to deserve the name?. (p 51). An excess of receptivity leads to an equally distorted experience ?because nothing takes root in mind when there is no balance between doing and receiving?. (p 51-52). Reception MEANS that we are given a gift; and gifts, as recent phenomenological analyses show lie beyond our intentions. (Marion, 1997). In this dialectic between doing and receiving, agency and reception, are set IN CONSTITUTIVE MOTION. I find this paragraph focusing on Dewey introducing a truth that can be perceived and i believe may add to clarifying perezhivanie as contemplative, perezhivanie as enduring struggle, and m-perezhivanie. As Vygotsky emphasized - the passions -what we are subject and subjected to, including suffering and pain, are an integral and IRREDUCIBLE part of perezhivanie ?generally?. Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Andy Blunden Sent: January 9, 2017 8:34 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! I agree with you that taking an action as sign-mediated is distinct from taking an action as tool-mediated. One can of course point with a stick, and poke with a finger, yes? That's all good. But Larry drew from reading your message that signs were not material artefacts. Perhaps he had in mind: "that SIGN is not a thing, but a relation between two persons." Andy ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making On 10/01/2017 2:57 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > I am not sure what part of Larry's or mine text you refer to, Andy, or why what I have written raises that question. But if your question is whether I think that words (as signs) are immaterial, or that a cube (as per the empirical case in our article) is immaterial as sign, then of course not. If your question is whether I think that sign relations are immaterial because they are not things but relations, then again no, that's not what I think or try to say. I assume we agree, however, that a pointing finger *does* things in a very different way than things can be done with a stick. > > Alfredo > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Andy Blunden > Sent: 10 January 2017 00:41 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > Is that right, Alfredo, what Larry says? That signs are not > material artefacts (as I had thought), at all? It seemed to > me that you were saying that as well. > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Andy Blunden > http://home.mira.net/~andy > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > On 10/01/2017 5:25 AM, lpscholar2@gmail.com wrote: >> So, following your train of thought we should always >> qualify ?sign? as ?sign relation? that moves genetically >> or ?dynamically?. >> From haydizulfei@rocketmail.com Tue Jan 10 07:35:51 2017 From: haydizulfei@rocketmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?=E2=80=AAHaydi_Zulfei=E2=80=AC_=E2=80=AA?=) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2017 15:35:51 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: perezhivanie In-Reply-To: References: <6a36c6a8-2f45-8b45-ad6d-3e94d63565b1@mira.net> Message-ID: <1414767608.3764909.1484062551444@mail.yahoo.com> Hi Marc,Excuse me for the embedded discourse ! From: Marc Clar? To: Andy Blunden ; "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" Sent: Tuesday, 10 January 2017, 5:49:20 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: perezhivanie Hi, Andy, In my opinion, it is important, and especially in this topic, to be precise about the phenomena or the aspects of the phenomena which are under scrutiny; otherwise, scientific discussion and cumulative construction may become quite difficult. In this case, it might happen, I think, that different people interarticulate a formally coherent discourse talking of perezhivanie, and they think they are talking about the same object of study and about analogous observations, but in reality talking about different objects of study, or different aspects, or about observations which can be complementary (instead of in opposition, for example). The problem, in my view, is not that there are different focuses, aspects, etc. under research in relation to a phenomenon or different related phenomena; the problem may arise if observations about different aspects, for example, are counterpoised and discussed as if they were about the same aspect of the phenomenon. **If I'm not mistaken in my badly-dreamt of conjectures , you've opined through a big paragraph in a way of leveling accusations against some sort of 'different people' who because of their unknowability of good ways to attainment of the truth , misrepresent "a formally coherent discourse talking of perezhivanie"--of a unified ! assembly of the extraordinary profiles with the highest values of research endeavours .** That's why I think it may be useful to make some distinctions, to gain some precision in the scientific work on perezhivanie. The first distinction, experiencing-as-contemplation and experiencing-as-struggle, is made by Vasilyuk (although with a different name for experiencing-as-struggle, as explained in the paper). He initially distinguishes these as two types of activity, although later suggests that experiencing-as-contemplation could be an initial moment for a subsequent experiencing-as-struggle (but not all experiencing-as-contemplation would necessarily imply experiencing-as-struggle). In experiencing-as-struggle, Vasilyuk also identifies the importance of the cultural meanings that mediate this activity -which he calls schematism,- and especially how these meanings are transformed in experiencing-as-struggle. In my interpretation, when Vygotsky talks of perezhivanie in The Problem of the Environment, he focuses mainly in this type of meaning. This is what in my comment I suggested to call m-perezhivanie. **Yes , It's about a lifetime I've not been convinced that sign as abstract fixed code to necessarily accord with one definite determinate invariant meaning or even polysemical as in a dictionary antecedently traceable to once some use in the past could be magic to all achivements and you're everybody to be praised to have been able to innovate the term 'struggle' to depict all the measures taken and all the procedures to be carried out post-receptical to the schematism or orienting stage . We've at some point in the past discussed the phenomenological stage of contemplation , then not the delayed receptive and last theoretical moments of a concrete universal concept especially with respect to Late Davydov's ideas and theorems .** ? **My points if I want to be precise :?1. What is the difference between Vygotsky's 'practical joint activity' and that of Leontiev's ? in the text2. Does 'experiencing' PRECISELY convey 'activity' ; please add the many different terms you have used in the article in the absence of the ties fastening them together. Of course , you've admitted the limits .?3. What is our focus of speciality in either case ? activity , meaning . I will not continue .** **Have we ever thought that when we use a sign , in fact and actually we intend 'a sign OF. That is with signs even with meanings we are not yet within the WORLD , assemblage of social relations , the social situation of development , communicational interactions , transactions . We're not to reinterpret the world , we are to change it with our work , expenditure of energy , stamina and nowadays with the type of work we've termed 'labour' . I repeat : we're not just to reinterpret. In the article , we read meaning ... created , that is newly created with respect to all and whole factors extra/intra and as you like as MOMENTS for the emergence and ascension of a miraculous meaning which is used effectively on the spot and in the peculiar context innovated creatively. The one minute later , even if we repeat and try to copy , things will be odd to accept fully . ?The impasse is social , the impossibility is social . I talked of impossibles and impasses as social maladies , as psychoses and deteriorations and the impoverishment and the communal ruptures and disintegration . We're facing macrosocials and if microsocials , microsocials that might lead to fall and perishing and devastation . We face Carlas not the one Carla . It's not the one class , it's the universe class . Where are we ? And what do scientific researches do ? with what outcome ? And what are the rungs to the tops of the ladder ? Vasiluk is right with the alteration , you as well . ** ?? I agree with you, Andy, and I think this is also related to part of Alfredo's points, that there is no experiencing-as-struggle without a mediating m-perezhivanie which is transformed in the activity, so that, even analytically, this distinction could seem useless, because studying experiencing-as-struggle is the same as studying the transformation of m-perezhivanija, and viceversa. Still, I think that the distinction may be useful because I work with the hypothesis that this type of holistic meaning is key not only as a mediator in experiencing-as-struggle, but in many other types of activity (as I mentioned also in previous messages and also in the paper). Thus, what we learn about this type of mediating meaning in experiencing-as-struggle may inform also about other types of activities and viceversa. Also, and in the same vein, in my view this distinction helps to connect Vygotsky and Vasilyuk works on perezhivanie. Thus, note that, in The Problem of the Environment, Vygotsky does not consider what in my interpretation is m-perezhivanie as mediating in activities of experiencing-as-struggle, but instead he considers it, basically, as mediating in activities of experiencing-as-contemplation. I don't know if the terms I suggested are adequate or not, and I don't consider myself with authority enough to recommend one term over others, but I think that, regardless the terms used, we need to be precise about the phenomenon or aspects of the phenomenon we are addressing. Best regards, Marc. a student 2017-01-10 1:05 GMT+01:00 Andy Blunden : > Marc, throughout the Special Issue we spelt /perezhivanie/ the same say > and put it in italics, indicating a Russian word transliterated into > English, and systematically had authors delete "experiencing" and "lived > experience" from their articles and even quotations, as part of an effort > to create a common meaning for the word. Summing up your position, in the > Response, you said: > >? ? ? ? In my reading (and I apologize in advance for any >? ? ? ? misinterpretations), the different papers in this >? ? ? ? special issue have basically noted four different >? ? ? ? phenomena that are sometimes referred to as >? ? ? ? /perezhivanie/. They might be considered four >? ? ? ? different meanings of the word. To distinguish >? ? ? ? between these meanings of /perezhivanie/, I will >? ? ? ? give them four different tentative names: >? ? ? ? experiencing-as-contemplation; >? ? ? ? experiencing-as-struggle; fantasy-based >? ? ? ? experiencing-as-struggle; and m-/perezhivanie/. > > What is your recommendation for future writers? Should they choose one of > these four terms? Or use /perezhivanie/ and qualify, or rely on context to > specify meaning? > > Andy > -- > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Andy Blunden > http://home.mira.net/~andy > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > From bella.kotik@gmail.com Tue Jan 10 07:37:59 2017 From: bella.kotik@gmail.com (Bella Kotik-Friedgut) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2017 17:37:59 +0200 Subject: [Xmca-l] conference in Tel Aviv Message-ID: May be of interest? Sincerely yours Bella Kotik-Friedgut Dear Colleague, I am writing to invite you to participate in the 42nd International Conference on Improving University Teaching, to be held in Tel Aviv, Israel, from July 18th through July 20th 2017. The theme of this year?s conference is "Assessment Reconsidered.? Information about our theme and sub themes is available at our website, www.iutconference.com, where you will also find the link for proposal submissions. Our submission deadline this year is February 3d, 2017; presenters will be notified of our decision by March 3d. (All papers to be presented at the Conference will be included in the Conference proceedings.) Additional information about accommodations and conference tours will be posted on the web site as it becomes available. This year?s conference is hosted by the Mofet Institute, a national intercollegial center for research and programs in teacher education and professional development. Tel Aviv, with its large student population and vibrant cultural life, offers the conference a congenial setting. I very much hope you can join us in Tel Aviv next July for what promises to be a warm and lively conference. With best wishes, Jim Wilkinson President, IUT -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: banner-2017-proposals-600.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 31357 bytes Desc: not available Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20170110/5eef4ee5/attachment.jpg From dkellogg60@gmail.com Tue Jan 10 15:24:21 2017 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2017 10:24:21 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! In-Reply-To: References: <1483344752182.40904@iped.uio.no> <1483467423798.57819@iped.uio.no> <1483601196884.31418@iped.uio.no> <5df5e870-3ef8-70d6-0c17-f8647ba17e62@mira.net> <587124d9.d957620a.4a5a8.bd56@mx.google.com> <1483820996800.91513@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: Andy: A good paradox! Word meaning is a unit, but the spoken word itself is just an element--a thing. We can see that this is, on the face of it, impossible: within a single holistic analysis, an element can be a part of a unit, but a unit can never be a part of an element. So what you are referring to when you say that the word is a thing is the "sonic" or "phasal" quality of the word: its "acoustic" properties, its "phonetics". But not its phonology. The word that Vygotsky uses for "phoneme" refers to the 1929 work of the Prague Circle, originally the Moscow Circle. He is a LITTLE coy about this, because the founders, Jakobson and Trubetskoy, were not very popular with the authorities and Vygotsky already had plenty of heterodox acquaintances to worry about. Nevertheless, whenever Vygotsky says "phoneme", we know he really means what Jakobson and Trubetskoy called "morphophonemes". We know this because the examples he actually gives--Russian case endings--are morpho-phonemes and not simply phonemes: so for example in English the sound /s/ is a simple phoneme when I say the word "self" but if I say "Andy's" the sound /s/ is a morpho-phoneme: a difference in sounding that makes a difference in meaning. The system (that is, the paradigmatic menu) of these differences in soundings are what the Moscow and Prague Circles called "phonology" (as OPPOSED to phonetics), and this is the kind of "phoneme" that Vygotsky is really talking about. Still, you can see that it is not what he is talking about when he says word meaning, because these units are still nowhere near big enough to describe the kinds of changes which must occur when verbal thinking develops. I feel the same way about a lot of the examples offered of "perezhivanie", including Marc's. If MacDuff's grief or Carla's epiphany about the misbehavior of her kids being due to "outside influences" really is the unit of personality and experience that Vygotsky wants us to use when we analyse the ontogenesis of personality, then it is no more appropriate than using the morpho-phoneme to analyse the whole of verbal thinking. Just as evolution (of species) requires very different units from history (of classes), development, whether we are talking about verbal thinking or the personality as a whole, is going to require very different units from learning, whether we are talking about MacDuff or Carla. The units must be able to develop; that is, the relationship of the elements within them must be susceptible to many changes over time. Let me give three examples of how this happens in different "perezhivanie". They are not mine; they are Vygotsky's, and they are all from the Pedological Lectures. First, the Crisis at One. Neither the biological nor the social endowment of the child greatly changes in the acquisition of speech; nevertheless, the relationship between the personality and the environment, of which both personality moments and environmental ones are constituent elements, is entirely transformed. Here we are not talking about phonemes, or even morpho-phonemes: we are talking about "wordings"--whole utterances. In Melbourne I presented some data that demonstrated this beautifully--a child's first word is actually an attempt to imitate a whole conversation. Second, the Crisis at Three. Vygotsky spends a lot of time discussing the "Seven Stars"--the symptoms of the "Terrible Twos" and "Threenagehood" noted by harried parents everywhere. But by the end of his analysis it's clear that what really happens is a new relationship between wish and will: in extreme cases, the child actually wishes for one thing (e.g. compromise) and wills the opposite (the everlasting "No!"). Again, neither the personality moments as such nor the environmental ones change, but there is a separation and a sorting which allows the subordination of wish to will that we see in play. This isn't the kind of "aha" moment that Marc is offering us at all: Vygotsky actually calls it the "antipode" of future will, because instead of enabling will it actually paralyzes it. But it is indubitably a key moment in the development of the relation of personality to environmental moments that we see in "perizhivanie". Thirdly, the Crisis at Seven. I think Gonzalez Rey makes a total hash of this, and I get very cross when I read his article. It is not true that the essence of perizhivanie remained a mystery to Vygotsky simply because he no longer subscribes to "the aesthetic reaction" and "catharsis" and other notions that he toyed with in Psych of Art (he's no longer doing experiments on changes in breathing rate when people read the works of Bunin either!). It might be true that he never offered a system of facts and methodological procedures for perezivanie, but that was only because one already existed, for example in the work of Wallon and Stern and others. It is demonstrably not true that when Vygotsky says that the speech environment of those around him does not change when the child learns to talk at one, he is not "profoundly contradictory with the concept of sense": when you read the quotation in context, it is very clear that what he is referring to are the kinds of absolute indicators used by Zalkind: how often the parents read the newspapers, the dialect they speak, and their educational background. These do not change, and if the child wants to make sense, these are the factors the child will have to relate to. Vygotsky gives the example of a child who is severely retarded. The child wants to play with other children and is rejected. The child walks down the street and the other children follow, laughing. The child is shrieked at, insulted, but as soon as the humiliation stops, the child is perfectly happy with himself. Vygotsky points out that the child is not able to "co-generalize" the "perizhivanie" of the humiliations: each is unpleasant, but they are entirely separate and cannot be connected with any internal sense of inferiority. A normal child, however, is able to "internalize" these humiliations and consequently develops a sense of inferiority. We can see that what has happened is the insertion of what Vygotsky calls an "intellectual" moment: an inner layer, which is what distinguishes later Chaplin movies from earlier ones (again, Vygotsky's example, not mine!) and what brings about the "loss of directness and naivete" that we see in pre-schoolers. I think that the reason people find "perizhivanie" so hard to work with is the same reason that they find "word meaning" hard to work with: it develops. The feeling of drinking milk as the infant drinks it is perizhivanie, and the thought of being humiliated when you are mulling it over and contemplating revenge is also perizhivanie, and only a profound analysis which includes ontogenetic development and not just learning will show the inner link between them. It's for that reason that I think that "activity" is not a useful unit of analysis and I am much more inclined to use your word "project", so long as it can include what Vygotsky calls "inner activeness". Vygotsky says: ????? ? ?????????, ?????????? ? ?. ?., ? ???? ???? ? ?????????? ???????????, ??? ?????????? ???????????? ??????????????? ????????? ??????????????? ?? ??????? ? ??????? ?????????????. ??? ??? ????? ????? ?????????? ?????????? ? ???????? ???????? ??????????? ? ???, ???, ? ?? ????? ??? ? ?????????? ???????? ??? ?????????? ???????????? ???????????? ???????????????? ????? ? ?????????, ??????? ???????????, ? ???????? ???????? ?? ????? ???????????? ?????????????? ???????????, ???????????? ??????????? ?????????? ?????????? ?? ????????? ? ??????? ????????????. ??? ??? ???????, ??????? ????? ??????????, ? ?? ????? ????? ?? ?????? ??? ????? ???-??????, ???, ? ???????? ????????? ?????????????? ??????? ? ?????????? ????????????. When I think, remember, etc. I am dealing with inner activeness; this psychological process of inner activity is not directly linked to any external activity. The new form of inner activeness in the School Age consists of this: that while during the preschool years these inner activities demonstrated an immediate link with action, with external activeness, in the school years we have a relative autonomy which emerges, inner activeness which is relatively independent of external activities. Here is already a child who can think, at the same time when he is doing or seeing something, one in whom has emerged a differentiation of inner and outer activities. David Kellogg Macquarie University On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 10:07 AM, Andy Blunden wrote: > David: "Are words really units?" > > Well, firstly, "units" is a *relative* term. That is, the question is: are > words units of something, some complex process subject to analysis. And > which? > > Secondly, according to Vygotsky, "no." The concept Vygotsky proposes as a > unit is "word meaning" which he says is a unity of sound and meaning. The > sound is an artefact, which, detached from its meaningful utterance in a > transactional context is just a thing, viz., a word. Whereas "word meaning" > is an arrtefact-mediated action, a unit of human social activity. > > It is true that words can be countable or mass according to context, but I > wasn't talking about words was I? I was talking about word meaning. > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Andy Blunden > http://home.mira.net/~andy > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > On 8/01/2017 7:59 AM, David Kellogg wrote: > >> Are words really units? When we look at their ideational meaning (that is, >> their logical and experiential content--their capacity for representing >> and >> linking together human experiences) they seem to fall into two very >> different categories: lexical words like "perezhivanie" or "sense" or >> "personality" of "individual" and grammatical words like "of", or "might", >> or "is". The lexical words seem to behave like units--they are bounded, >> discrete, and, as Andy would say, "countable" (the problem is that almost >> all nouns are both countable and uncountable depending on the context you >> put them in, so this distinction is really not as essential as Andy seems >> to assume). But the more grammatical words seem to be elements of some >> larger unit, which we can call wording. >> >> Veresov and Fleer come up against this problem with "edintsvo" and >> "edintsa". Of course, as they say, the two words are distinct. But this >> doesn't necessarily mean that the former always corresponds to "unity" in >> English and the latter is always "unit". If you look at the paragraph they >> translate on 330, you can see that Vygotsky starts with an idea that is >> quite "synoptic" and is well expressed by "unit". But in the last sentence >> there is a sense that "perezhivanie" is a meta-stable unit--one that >> remains self-similar only through a process of thorough change, like a >> bicycle whose every part is replaced--and in English is it is better to >> express this idea with "unity". The problem is that the differences >> between >> "edintsvo" and "edintsva" in Russian is a matter of gender (I think) and >> not simply abstractness, and as a result the English version, which cannot >> use the resource of gender,has to rely on abstractness, so the words >> "unity" and "unit" are somewhat more distinct and less linked than >> "edintsvo" and "edintsva". >> >> There are other problems that are similar. When Gonzalez Rey uses the word >> "final moment" to refer to the final period of Vygotsky's thinking, he >> leaves the anglophone reader the impression that he is referring to >> Vygotsky's deathbed thoughts. On the other hand, when Veresov and Fleer >> use >> "factor" to translate the same Russian word that Gonzalez Rey is using, >> they are giving us something more quantitative than Vygotsky intended, and >> their translation of "dalee nerazloshim'im chastyami etava edinstva" >> into "vital and further indivisible part of the whole" is quite opaque in >> English (notice that here Veresov and Fleer use "whole" to translate >> "edinstva" rather than "unit"!) At some point you have to accept that you >> can change Russian words into English words as if you were exchanging >> rubles for dollars, but you still won't be able to buy a samovar at >> Walmart. >> >> David Kellogg >> Macquarie University >> >> >> >> On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 5:21 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >> wrote: >> >> Larry, all, >>> >>> our arguments in the 2014 address a science education literature in which >>> the constructivist perspective is the leading perspective; We note that >>> the >>> assertion that people learn from experience is everywhere taken for >>> granted >>> but nowhere accounted for. We resort to pragmatist and phenomenological >>> literature along with Vygotsky's insights to point out the need to >>> account >>> for learning as something that cannot be the result of an individual's >>> construction; in experience there is always something in excess of what >>> you >>> intended, and this is a basic feature of doing, of performing. I take >>> that >>> to be your "trans" in the trans/zhivanie word, Larry, which already is >>> denoted in the word PERezhivanie. >>> >>> But I do not wish to move our discussion too far away from Marc's paper >>> and the Perezhivanie special issue. We also risk disengaging many that >>> have >>> not have the privilege we've had to have the time to read so many >>> articles >>> in just few days into the new year. I think we are a point in the >>> discussion where a pretty clear point of agreement/disagreement, and >>> therefore of possibility for growth, has been reached with regard to the >>> view of perezhivanie as "an experience" and as the "working over it". I >>> think that to allow as many as possible to follow, and hopefully also >>> engage, I think it will be helpful to bring the diverse perspectives and >>> theoretical accounts to matter in accounting for some actual material. >>> And >>> there are a number of cases described in the articles, including Marc's >>> case of a teacher, as well as everyday facts, such as those brought by >>> Beth, and in Beth's article... >>> >>> I take the task for myself too, but Saturday morning need to attend to >>> other things! >>> A >>> >>> >>> >>> ________________________________________ >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>> on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com >>> Sent: 07 January 2017 18:26 >>> To: Andy Blunden; Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; >>> Larry Purss >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! >>> >>> Andy, Peter, i hope the intention to move beyond politeness to struggle >>> with this topic materializes. >>> In this vein i want to introduce exploration of the ?excess? of actual >>> over intended meaning as he sketched his introduction to ?experience?. >>> >>> Citing Dewey, Alfredo says that this excess of actual learning over >>> intended learning INCLUDES what Dewey refers to as ?attitudes? and these >>> ?attitudes? are FUNDAMENTALLY what count in the future. >>> Alfredo and Roth then add this summary statement : >>> >>> There is therefore, a need to theorize experience in terms that do not >>> assume control and rationality as the sine qua non of learning. It also >>> implies a need to develop analytical accounts that retain the >>> ?uncertainty? >>> that is an ?integral part? of human experience. >>> >>> Where are Alfredo and Roth leading us with this sketch of experience? To >>> highlight ?attitudes? that occur in the excess of actual over intended >>> learning? The word ?attitudes? generates images of (atmosphere) and >>> (moods) >>> that ?flow? like cascading waterfalls that can be imaged as (force) or as >>> (receptive). Attitudes that flow to places where they are received >>> within a >>> certain attitude of care and concern. Not as forceful an image as moving >>> only with control and rationality. Describing ?weaker? thought that >>> remains uncertain but that also opens us to the other?s peril and plight. >>> Possibly a post-analytic motion that exceeds the intended by >>> living-through >>> the actual that develops ?attitudes? that are fundamentally what count >>> for >>> the future. >>> >>> >>> Sent from my Windows 10 phone >>> >>> From: Andy Blunden >>> Sent: January 7, 2017 5:00 AM >>> To: Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! >>> >>> OK Peter, what you say is all very true I am sure, but it >>> entails conflating activity and action (as mass nouns) and >>> context and mediation, and makes the required distinction >>> much like one could find multiple meanings for the word >>> "and" by listing the different phrases and clauses which can >>> be linked by "and." >>> >>> Andy >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>> Andy Blunden >>> http://home.mira.net/~andy >>> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making >>> >>> On 7/01/2017 11:42 PM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: >>> >>>> Let me try to illustrate. >>>> >>>> Reading as mediated action: The cultural-historical >>>> context of reading mediates how one?s attention and >>>> response are channeled in socially constructed ways. So, >>>> in one setting, say at home or reading in the company of >>>> friends, a novel might bring a reader to tears, or invite >>>> readers to share personal stories that parallel those of >>>> the plot lines, or laugh out loud. But another setting, a >>>> formal school or university class, would have historical >>>> values and practices that mute emotional and personal >>>> responses, and promote a more sober, analytic way of >>>> reading and talking that fits with specific historical >>>> critical conventions and genres, and discourages others. >>>> >>>> Reading as mediating action: The act of reading can be >>>> transformational. In reading about an talking about a >>>> character?s actions, a reader might reconsider a value >>>> system, become more sympathetic to real people who >>>> resemble oppressed characters, etc. In other words, >>>> reading a text may serve a mediational process in which >>>> textual ideas and exemplars enable a reader to think >>>> differently. >>>> >>>> *From:*Andy Blunden [mailto:ablunden@mira.net] >>>> *Sent:* Saturday, January 7, 2017 6:28 AM >>>> *To:* Peter Smagorinsky ; eXtended Mind, >>>> Culture, Activity >>>> *Subject:* Re: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! >>>> >>>> Can you explain in a paragraph or two,. Peter, rather than >>>> asking us all to read 10,000 words to extract an answer? >>>> >>>> Andy >>>> >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>> >>>> Andy Blunden >>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy >>>> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making >>>> >>>> >>>> On 7/01/2017 11:23 PM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: >>>> >>>> Andy and others, I tried to work out the mediated/mediating >>>> question >>>> >>> in the area of reading....see if this helps. >>> >>>> Smagorinsky, P., & O'Donnell-Allen, C. (1998). Reading as mediated >>>> >>> and mediating action: Composing meaning for literature through multimedia >>> interpretive texts. Reading Research Quarterly, 33, 198-226. Available >>> athttp://www.petersmagorinsky.net/About/PDF/RRQ/RRQ1998.pdf >>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> >>>> From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ >>>> >>> mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden >>> >>>> Sent: Friday, January 6, 2017 7:12 PM >>>> >>>> To:xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>> >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! >>>> >>>> I have never understood this supposed distinction, Alfredo, between >>>> >>> "mediated activity" and "mediating activity" given that all activity is >>> mediated and all activity mediates. >>> >>>> Also, could you spell out what you mean by the "tension" >>>> >>>> between perezhivanie as meaning and perezhivanie as struggle. >>>> >>>> Andy >>>> >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>> >>>> Andy Blunden >>>> >>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy >>>> >>>> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective- >>>> >>> decision-making >>> >>>> On 5/01/2017 6:26 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: >>>> >>>> Thanks Marc for your careful response. >>>> >>>> I am familiar to Vygotsky's notion of cultural mediation and I >>>> >>> am aware and acknowledge that it was elaborated as a means to overcome >>> dualism, and that it is not analog to a computational approach. >>> >>>> When I brought the computing analogy, I did so with regard not >>>> >>> to the concept of cultural mediation in general, but to the way it can be >>> (and is) deployed analytically. I react to what it seems to me a >>> dichotomy >>> between a "meaning" as something that is static (thereby a form of >>> "representation" or reflection of the relation with the environment >>> instead >>> of?refraction)?? and the experiencing-as-struggling, which is described >>> as?transformation or change. If so, mediation here would seem to be part >>> of >>> a methodological device that first dissects "a type of meaning" from "a >>> type of activity" (or a given state from the process that changes that >>> state), and then unites it by adding the term "mediation." And this may >>> be >>> my misreading, but in that (mis)reading (which perhaps is mostly due to >>> the >>> fact that in your empirical illustration only the initial and end >>> product, >>> i.e., perezhivanie, are described, but not the experiencing-as-struggle, >>> that is, the moving between the two), mediation here seems to do as >>> analytical concept precisely what you were afraid our monism was doing: >>> explaining nothing. Only the end products but not the process of >>> producing >>> perezhivanie are revealed. This may be problematic if one attends to what >>> Veresov argues in the paper I shared yesterday, where he defends the >>> notion >>> of mediation but also specifies that Vygotsky speaks of *mediating >>> activity* (as opposed to *mediated* activity). That is, not mediation by >>> signs as products, but mediating activity as the activity of producing >>> signs (which again is an activity of producing social relations, perhaps >>> what you refer as "holistic meanings"?). What do you think? >>> >>>> I did not think you were trying to deny the influence of >>>> >>> Spinoza, and I do not think we ever said that Perezhivanie was primarily >>> a >>> move from Cartesian Dualism to Monism, as you suggest in your post. I >>> copy >>> and paste from my prior post: "The fact is that Vygotsky was building a >>> theory on the unity of the affect and the intellect that was to be >>> grounded >>> on Spinoza, and what we try to do is to explore how perezhivanie, as a >>> concept being developed during the same period (but not finalised or >>> totally settled!), could be seen from the perspective of the Spinozist >>> Vygotsky." >>> >>>> I totally believe that bringing the distinction between >>>> >>> perezhivanie as meaning, and perezhivanie as struggle, is totally >>> relevant, >>> and Beth Ferholt's vignettes of Where the Wild Things Are do indeed >>> illustrate this. We really need to address this tension, which as Beth's >>> examples and as our own everyday experience shows, is a tension that >>> matters not just to books and to theories but to living persons >>> (children, >>> teachers), a tension that moreover is present and mentioned in all the >>> articles of the symposium. The papers offer different proposals, and I >>> think is so great we have the chance to discuss them! I too, as you, am >>> very interesting in hearing others about the questions you had concerning >>> sense and meaning. >>> >>>> Alfredo >>>> >>>> From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> on behalf of Marc >>>> >>> Clar? >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Sent: 04 January 2017 22:31 >>>> >>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>> >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! >>>> >>>> Thank you very much, Alfredo, for sharing this excellent paper >>>> by >>>> >>>> Veresov, and thanks also for your responses, which really >>>> helped >>>> >>> me to >>> >>>> better understand your points. My main doubt about your >>>> proposal >>>> >>>> was/is caused by the statement that the idea of cultural >>>> >>>> mediation/mediator implies a cartesian dualism. This shocks me >>>> >>>> because, to me, the idea of cultural mediation is absolutely >>>> >>> crucial >>> >>>> (in fact, the keystone) for the construction of a monist (and >>>> >>>> scientific) psychology that does not forget mind ?that is, a >>>> >>> cultural >>> >>>> psychology. From your response, however, I realized that we may >>>> >>> be >>> >>>> approaching the idea of mediation in different ways. I talk of >>>> >>>> mediation and mediators in a quite restricted way. The starting >>>> >>> point >>> >>>> of my understanding of mediation is a dialectical relationship >>>> >>>> (organic, transactional) between the subject and the world >>>> >>> (Vygotsky departs from the scheme stimulus-response, from reflexology). >>> >>>> This relationship, that Vygotsky calls primitive psychological >>>> >>>> functions, would be basically biological. However, in human >>>> >>> beings >>> >>>> this relationship is mediated by cultural means: signs and >>>> >>> tools; or >>> >>>> primary, secondary and terciary artifacts. These cultural means >>>> >>>> reorganize the primitive functions (dialectic S-O >>>> relationship), >>>> >>> which >>> >>>> become then higher psychological functions (S-M-O) (see for >>>> >>> example, >>> >>>> The problem of the cultural development of the child, in The >>>> >>> Vygotsky >>> >>>> Reader). Now, the subject, the cultural mediators, and the >>>> >>> object form >>> >>>> an inseparable dialectical unit, so that the subject acts on >>>> >>>> (transforms) the object through the prism of the cultural >>>> >>> mediators, >>> >>>> the object acts on (transforms) the subject also through the >>>> >>> prism of >>> >>>> the cultural mediators, and the cultural means are themselves >>>> >>> also >>> >>>> transformed as a consequence of their mediation in this >>>> >>> continuous >>> >>>> dynamic dialectical tension. Here, for me, it is important the >>>> >>> idea >>> >>>> that the cultural means are as material (if we assume a >>>> >>> materialist >>> >>>> monism) as all the rest of the world; in fact, are parts of the >>>> >>>> material world which become signs or tools (and can be >>>> therefore >>>> >>>> socially distributed). This permits the introduction of the >>>> >>> scientific >>> >>>> study of mind-consciousness (as mediating systems of signs), >>>> >>> because >>> >>>> mind is not anymore something immaterial and unobservable, but >>>> >>> it is >>> >>>> as material and observable as the rest of the natural world. It >>>> >>> is >>> >>>> from this view that, for me, the idea of cultural mediation is >>>> >>> the >>> >>>> keystone of a monist psychology that includes mind. Thus, when >>>> I >>>> >>> speak >>> >>>> of mediators, I refer to the cultural means which mediate in >>>> the >>>> >>> S-O >>> >>>> dialectics; I am especially interested in signs/secondary >>>> >>> artifacts. >>> >>>> Here, it is perhaps necessary to insist that when I talk of >>>> >>> studying >>> >>>> mediators (and their semantic structure), this doesn't mean >>>> that >>>> >>> they >>> >>>> are taken out from the activity (the flux of live) in which >>>> they >>>> >>>> mediate (since out of activity they are not signs anymore); >>>> >>> here, I >>> >>>> think Vygotsky tries again to overcome another old dichotomy, >>>> the >>>> >>>> functionalism-structuralism one. I hope that all this makes >>>> also >>>> >>> clear the difference between this view and that of computational >>> psychologies (which in general are profoundly and explicitly dualist and >>> not dialectic). >>> >>>> Back to perezhivanie, I'm not obviously trying to deny the >>>> >>> influence >>> >>>> of Spinoza on Vygotsky's thinking (this is explicit in >>>> Vygotsky's >>>> >>>> writings, especially in ?The teaching about emotions?, in the >>>> >>> Vol.6 of >>> >>>> the Collected Works). But I have doubts that Vygotsky's >>>> >>> introduction >>> >>>> of the concept of perezhivanie is to be regarded primarily as a >>>> >>>> movement towards monism (from a previous cartesian dualism), >>>> and >>>> >>> that >>> >>>> this movement questions the concept of cultural mediation. >>>> >>> Instead, >>> >>>> and I think that this is in line with some of Gonz?lez-Rey >>>> >>>> observations in his paper, my impression is that the >>>> >>> introduction of >>> >>>> the concept of perezhivanie responds more to a movement (a >>>> >>> further >>> >>>> step) towards holism (something that, in my understanding, can >>>> >>> also be >>> >>>> found in Spinoza). Thus, I think that the word meaning is still >>>> >>> the >>> >>>> unit of analysis in the last Vygotsky -and therefore, the idea >>>> of >>>> >>>> cultural mediation is still crucial (in fact, in The problem of >>>> >>> the >>> >>>> environment, he connects the concept of perezhivanie, which has >>>> >>> just >>> >>>> introduced, to the development of word meaning [p.345-346, also >>>> >>> cited >>> >>>> in my paper]). However, in my view, in the last Vygotsky the >>>> >>> focus is >>> >>>> not anymore primarily on the word-meaning as formed for things >>>> >>> (or >>> >>>> collections of things, as in the ontogenetic research with >>>> >>> Sakharov), but the focus is now in the formation of meaning for holistic >>> situations. >>> >>>> Best regards, >>>> >>>> Marc. >>>> >>>> 2017-01-03 19:16 GMT+01:00 Alfredo Jornet Gil< >>>> >>> a.j.gil@iped.uio.no> : >>> >>>> Hi Marc, all, >>>> >>>> thanks for joining and for your interesting work, which I >>>> >>> follow >>> >>>> since I became aware of it. I appreciate the way in your >>>> >>> paper you >>> >>>> show careful and honest attention to the texts of the >>>> authors >>>> >>>> involved, but perhaps most of all I appreciate that the >>>> >>> paper makes >>> >>>> the transformational dimension related to struggle and >>>> change >>>> >>>> salient, a dimension all papers deemed central to >>>> >>> perezhivanie. And I >>> >>>> have learned more about Vasilyuk by reading your paper. But >>>> >>> I also >>> >>>> see that we have approached the question of perezhivanie >>>> >>> differently >>> >>>> and I think that addressing the questions that you raise >>>> >>> concerning >>> >>>> our article may be a good way to both respond and discuss >>>> >>> your paper. >>> >>>> I am aware that our use of the term monism may be >>>> >>> problematic to >>> >>>> some, and N. Veresov, who has recently written about this >>>> >>> (see >>> >>>> attached article), warns against the dangers of simply >>>> >>> moving from >>> >>>> dualism into an undifferentiating monism that relativizes >>>> >>> everything, >>> >>>> making development un-studiable. This seems to be the way >>>> in >>>> >>> which >>> >>>> you have understood our argument, and of course this is not >>>> >>> what we are or want to be doing. >>> >>>> Probably many will think that *dialectical materialism* >>>> >>> rather than >>> >>>> monism is the proper term, and I could agree with them; we >>>> >>> do in fact >>> >>>> use dialectical materialism there and elsewhere. Yet, we >>>> >>> wanted to >>> >>>> emphasise the Spinozist influence (an influence that also >>>> >>> runs >>> >>>> through Marx) and so we found it appropriate to use the >>>> term >>>> >>> monism, >>> >>>> a term that Vygotsky uses before arguing that Spinoza >>>> >>> "develops an essentially materialistic view" >>> >>>> (Collected Works, Vol. 6, p. 124). For us, the aim is >>>> >>> working out >>> >>>> ways to empirically examine and formulate problems in ways >>>> >>> that do >>> >>>> not reify a mind-body dualism. >>>> >>>> Although overcoming dualism is foundational to the CHAT >>>> >>> paradigm, I >>> >>>> would however not say that Vygotsky did get to solve all of >>>> >>> the >>> >>>> problems that Cartesian dualism had created for psychology, >>>> >>> even >>> >>>> though he recognised those problems brilliantly as early as >>>> >>> in the >>> >>>> "Crisis". It should suffice to cite Vygotsky's own remarks, >>>> >>> which we quote in the paper (and which A.N. >>> >>>> Leont'ev mentions in the introduction to the collected >>>> >>> works), where >>> >>>> Vygotsky explicitly critiques some of his own prior ideas >>>> >>> for failing >>> >>>> to overcome dualism. We agree with those who, like F. G. >>>> >>> Rey, see >>> >>>> Vygotsky's project as a developing rather than as a >>>> >>> finalised one. >>> >>>> The fact is that Vygotsky was building a theory on the >>>> unity >>>> >>> of the >>> >>>> affect and the intellect that was to be grounded on >>>> Spinoza, >>>> >>> and what >>> >>>> we try to do is to explore how perezhivanie, as a concept >>>> >>> being >>> >>>> developed during the same period (but not finalised or >>>> >>> totally >>> >>>> settled!), could be seen from the perspective of the >>>> >>> Spinozist Vygotsky. >>> >>>> As you note, in our article we argue that, if one takes the >>>> >>> Spinozist >>> >>>> one-substance approach, classical concepts used in >>>> >>> non-classical >>> >>>> psychology, at least in the way they are commonly used in >>>> >>> the current >>> >>>> literature, should be revised. One such concept is >>>> >>> mediation. And I >>> >>>> personally do not have much of a problem when mediation is >>>> >>> used to >>> >>>> denote the fundamental fact that every thing exists always >>>> >>> through >>> >>>> *another*, never in and of itself. But I do think that it >>>> is >>>> >>>> problematic to identify MEDIATORS, such as "a meaning", as >>>> a >>>> >>> means to >>> >>>> account for or explain developmental processes and learning >>>> >>> events, >>> >>>> precisely because it is there, at least in my view, that >>>> >>> dualism creeps in. >>> >>>> For example, I find it paradoxical that you are concerned >>>> >>> that our >>> >>>> monist approach risks turning perezhivanie into a useless >>>> >>> category >>> >>>> because it may be used to explain everything and nothing, >>>> >>> and yet you >>> >>>> do not seem to have a problem using the term mediation to >>>> >>> account for >>> >>>> the transformation of perezhivanie without clearly >>>> >>> elaborating on how >>> >>>> mediation does change anything or what it looks like as a >>>> >>> real >>> >>>> process. How is it different saying that a perezhivanie >>>> >>> mediates the >>> >>>> experiencing-as-struggle from simply saying that it >>>> >>> "affects" or >>> >>>> "determines" it? Indeed, if perezhivanie mediates >>>> >>>> experiencing-as-struggle, does not >>>> experiencing-as-struglgle >>>> >>> too >>> >>>> mediate perezhivanie? And do not both may be said to >>>> mediate >>>> >>> development, or development mediate them? Is not this explaining >>> everything >>> and nothing? >>> >>>> I do believe you can argue that there is a difference >>>> between >>>> >>>> mediation and classical psychology's cause-effect >>>> relations, >>>> >>> but to >>> >>>> show this you need to dig into the dialectical >>>> underpinnings >>>> >>> of the >>> >>>> theory. In your paper, you offer a nice analysis of a >>>> lovely >>>> >>> case of >>> >>>> a teacher who, in dealing with a challenge with one of her >>>> >>> students, >>> >>>> changes her perezhivanie. I think you can rightly argue >>>> that >>>> >>> there is >>> >>>> a semiotic transformation, and I fully support your >>>> >>> statement that by >>> >>>> studying discourse we can empirically approach questions of >>>> >>>> psychological development. The contradictions you show as >>>> >>> being >>> >>>> involved and resolved resonate really well with what I >>>> >>> experience as >>> >>>> a parent or as a teacher in the classroom. Yet, without >>>> >>> unpacking >>> >>>> what this "mediation" taking place between one perezhivanie >>>> >>> and the >>> >>>> next one means as a concrete and real, the same analysis >>>> >>> could be done taking an information processing approach: >>> >>>> there is an situation that is processed (represented?) in >>>> >>> one way, >>> >>>> which then leads to a (cognitive) dissonance, and then >>>> there >>>> >>> is a >>> >>>> cognitive resolution by means of which the situation is >>>> >>> presented >>> >>>> differently in consciousness (indeed, when seen in this >>>> way, >>>> >>> the term >>> >>>> perezhivanie and the term "representation" become almost >>>> >>>> indistinguishable). How is mediation, as an analytical >>>> >>> concept, >>> >>>> helping here? And most importantly to the question of >>>> >>> perezhivanie, >>> >>>> how is this analysis going to show the internal connection >>>> >>> between >>> >>>> intellect and affect that Vygotsky formulates as >>>> >>> constitutive of the notion of perezhivanie? >>> >>>> I believe that the key lies in understanding what Vygotsky >>>> >>> means when >>> >>>> he says that perezhivanie is a unit of analysis. I will not >>>> >>> repeat >>> >>>> here what already is written in at least a couple of the >>>> >>> articles in >>> >>>> the special issue (Blunden, ours), that is the difference >>>> >>> between >>> >>>> analysis by elements and unit analysis (Vygotsky 1987). A >>>> >>> unit >>> >>>> analysis approach is consistent with Spinoza, for whom >>>> >>> cause-effect >>> >>>> explanations were not adequate, requiring instead an >>>> >>> understanding of >>> >>>> self-development, perezhivanie as a kernel cell for the >>>> >>> development >>> >>>> of personality. And I think you may be after this in your >>>> >>> article in >>> >>>> suggesting a form of continuous movement from perezhivanie >>>> to >>>> >>>> experiencing-as-struggle. But perhaps the major difficulty >>>> I >>>> >>> find is that, in positing Vygotsky's perezhivanie as "a type of meaning" >>> >>>> and Vasilyuk's perezhivanie (or experiencing-as-struggle) >>>> as >>>> >>> a "type >>> >>>> of activity," it is difficult not to see here a division >>>> >>> between >>> >>>> product and process, a division that then is analytically >>>> >>> bridged by >>> >>>> the addition of a third term, mediation, that should bring >>>> >>> back the >>> >>>> real movement between the product and the process. >>>> >>>> A different approach involves considering the concrete >>>> >>> extension of >>> >>>> actual living and lived social relations, and look at them >>>> as >>>> >>>> generative phenomena. What is there in the encounter >>>> between >>>> >>> Carla >>> >>>> and the child that leads to change? For it is not inside >>>> the >>>> >>> mind, >>> >>>> but in real life, in consciousness as the real relation >>>> >>> between people, that Carla is changed. >>> >>>> How is the semantic structure that you nicely present and >>>> >>> attribute >>> >>>> to Carla a product of the social relation between her and >>>> >>> the child? >>> >>>> I think that to rightfully situate perezhivanie as a >>>> concept >>>> >>> in a >>> >>>> Vygotskian framework, we ought to address its relation to >>>> >>> the genetic >>> >>>> law of development. >>>> >>>> There is much more to disentangle, but this is long enough. >>>> >>> I hope I >>> >>>> have succeeded in making clear these ideas. Thanks so much >>>> >>> for >>> >>>> engaging in the discussion! >>>> >>>> Alfredo >>>> >>>> ________________________________________ >>>> >>>> From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> on behalf of >>>> Marc >>>> >>> Clar? >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Sent: 02 January 2017 22:14 >>>> >>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>> >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! >>>> >>>> Hi, all, and thank you so much, Alfredo, for your kind >>>> >>> invitation to >>> >>>> participate in this discussion. My paper in the MCA special >>>> >>> issue >>> >>>> focuses on a distinction between a type of activity, which >>>> I >>>> >>> argue >>> >>>> that is what Vasilyuk called *perezhivanie* (experiencing) >>>> >>> and a type >>> >>>> of semiotic mediator, which I argue that is what Vygotsky, >>>> >>> in The >>> >>>> Problem of the Environment, called *perezhivanie.* I argue, >>>> >>> following >>> >>>> Vasilyuk, that in experiencing activities (Vasilyuk's >>>> >>> perezhivanie), >>> >>>> this type of mediator is profoundly transformed ? in fact, >>>> >>> that >>> >>>> experiencing activities consist of the semiotic >>>> >>> transformation of this type of mediator. >>> >>>> As Veresov and Fleer argue in their commentary, >>>> perezhivanie >>>> >>> (as a >>> >>>> type of >>>> >>>> mediator) is for me a psychological phenomenon, one which >>>> is >>>> >>> of >>> >>>> course conceptualized from a specific theoretical >>>> framework. >>>> >>> But the >>> >>>> phenomenon is also visible from other theoretical >>>> frameworks >>>> >>> as well, >>> >>>> as I mention in the paper. This phenomenon is my main >>>> >>> interest, and >>> >>>> it is from this interest that I arrived at the concept of >>>> >>> perezhivanie (not the other way around). >>> >>>> Now, the phenomenon is that at least emotion, reasoning, >>>> and >>>> >>> volition >>> >>>> (formation of conscious purposes) seem to be decisively >>>> >>> mediated by >>> >>>> holistic situational meaning. My current research concern >>>> is >>>> >>> trying >>> >>>> to find ways to study and understand how this mediation >>>> >>> occurs and >>> >>>> how these semiotic mediators are transformed and >>>> >>> distributed. From >>> >>>> this view, I think that experiencing activities (Vasilyuk's >>>> >>>> perezhivanie) may provide a good terrain to study these >>>> >>> issues >>> >>>> (especially regarding the mediation of emotion), as I tried >>>> >>> to exemplify in the paper. >>> >>>> Studying semiotic mediation, however, is of course not >>>> easy. >>>> >>>> Following Vygotsky, I assume that extended discourse is the >>>> >>>> manifestation of thinking within certain psychological >>>> >>> conditions >>> >>>> (Vygotsky's Thinking and Speech, chapter 7), and I also >>>> >>> assume the >>> >>>> Vygotsky's law of the unity of the structure and function >>>> of >>>> >>> thinking >>> >>>> (Vygotsky's Thinking and Speech, chapter 6). From these two >>>> >>>> assumptions, I propose that meaning (and its functions in >>>> >>> human >>> >>>> activity) can be scientifically studied by structurally >>>> >>> analyzing the >>> >>>> narratives generated by subjects, considering that the >>>> >>> discourse >>> >>>> produced in the narrative is the point of departure of this >>>> >>> study, >>> >>>> but that considerable analytical work must be done to move >>>> >>> from this >>> >>>> discourse to the full characterization of meaning. It is in >>>> >>> that >>> >>>> point where I find useful the work developed by Greimas, >>>> the >>>> >>> usefulness of which I only suggest in the paper. >>> >>>> >From this background, I found many interesting ideas and >>>> >>> questions >>> >>>> in the >>>> >>>> other papers of the special issue. In this first post I >>>> will >>>> >>> propose >>> >>>> two of them for possible discussion. The first one was >>>> >>> raised by >>> >>>> Gonz?lez-Rey, when he introduces, in connection with >>>> >>> perezhivanie, >>> >>>> the concepts of personality, and especially, of sense. So, >>>> >>> which is >>> >>>> the conceptual (and-or >>>> >>>> phenomenal) relation between perezhivanie and sense? >>>> >>> Gonz?lez-Rey >>> >>>> suggests that both concepts are somewhat similar (and >>>> >>> overcome by the >>> >>>> concept of ?subjective sense?); my opinion, partly >>>> expressed >>>> >>> in my >>> >>>> commentary, is that perezhivanie is a type of meaning, >>>> which >>>> >>> includes >>> >>>> different levels of depth, and that sense corresponds to >>>> the >>>> >>> deepest >>> >>>> level of meaning (which can be characterized as a system of >>>> >>> semic >>> >>>> oppositions). Therefore, sense wouldn't be in opposition to >>>> >>> meaning >>> >>>> (as ?a microcosm of human consciousness?, as Kozulin >>>> >>> remembers in his >>> >>>> commentary), although it would be in opposition to >>>> >>> manifested meaning (the surface level of meaning). >>> >>>> The second issue was raised by Roth and Jornet, and I think >>>> >>> it goes >>> >>>> beyond the issue of perezhivanie itself. If I understand >>>> >>> them well, >>> >>>> they argue that Vygotsky's core proposal of cultural >>>> >>> mediation is >>> >>>> influenced by the Cartesian dualism (mind-matter), and >>>> that a >>>> >>>> promising approach to Cultural Psychology would be a >>>> >>> Spinozist >>> >>>> monism. I am actually very interested on the issue of which >>>> >>>> epistemological position can best substantiate the >>>> >>> construction of a >>> >>>> cultural psychology, and that's why I feel inclined to take >>>> >>> the >>> >>>> opportunity to ask for your opinions about that. About the >>>> >>> proposal >>> >>>> of Roth and Jornet, I have some doubts. First, I don't see >>>> >>> why >>> >>>> Vygotsky's proposals can be seen as dualist (in the >>>> >>> Cartesian sense) >>> >>>> -I suspect that it is because of the analytical >>>> >>> distinctions?. >>> >>>> Anyway, in my understanding, Vygotsky explicitly assumes a >>>> >>>> materialist monism (for example in The Crisis), and in fact >>>> >>> he constructs his proposal on mediation upon reflexology, which also >>> explicitly assumed a materialist monism (e.g. >>> >>>> Sechenov). Would a Spinozist monism be a better point of >>>> >>> departure? I >>> >>>> don't know, in my understanding it is a more idealist >>>> >>> monism, and I >>> >>>> don't clearly see what could be gained. In my opinion, a >>>> >>> scientific >>> >>>> psychology which includes the study of mind is only >>>> possible >>>> >>> if any >>> >>>> type of monism is assumed. However, in my view, for a >>>> >>> scientific >>> >>>> psychology, the ontological nature of the world is perhaps >>>> >>> less >>> >>>> important (it is an issue for metaphysics?), and I am >>>> >>> inclined to assume a neutral monism (e.g. Russell). >>> >>>> So from this view, a materialist monism and a Spinozist >>>> >>> monism >>> >>>> wouldn't be so different, so from both views it could be >>>> >>> assumed that >>> >>>> all is of the same nature and all is similarly knowable >>>> >>> (including >>> >>>> mind) [which is the ontological nature of the world and to >>>> >>> what >>> >>>> degree it is knowable are issues that can be left to >>>> >>> philosophy]. >>> >>>> However, in my opinion, this does not mean that, while >>>> >>> assuming a >>> >>>> monism, analytical distinctions cannot be done when >>>> studying >>>> >>> the >>> >>>> world. In that sense, I had the impression that Roth and >>>> >>> Jornet >>> >>>> tended to dilute analytical distinctions in the name of >>>> >>> monism; I >>> >>>> repeat that I don't know if I understood them well, but if >>>> >>> this was >>> >>>> the case, in my opinion, analysis would be impossible >>>> within >>>> >>> the new >>> >>>> psychology suggested by Roth and Jornet, and, regarding >>>> >>> perezhivanie, >>> >>>> there would be the danger, noted by Vygotsky in The Crisis >>>> >>> and >>> >>>> cautioned by Kozulin in his commentary, that by meaning >>>> >>> everything, perezhivanie ends by meaning nothing. >>> >>>> Best regards and happy new year, >>>> >>>> Marc. >>>> >>>> 2017-01-02 9:12 GMT+01:00 Alfredo Jornet Gil< >>>> >>> a.j.gil@iped.uio.no> : >>> >>>> Dear all, >>>> >>>> I would like to join David, Luisa, Ana, Henry and the >>>> >>> others to wish >>> >>>> you all a Happy New Year! May it be full of joy, peace, >>>> >>> and opportunity. >>> >>>> I also would like to begin the year announcing our >>>> first >>>> >>> ?MCA >>> >>>> article discussion, ?although in fact corresponds to >>>> the >>>> >>> last issue >>> >>>> of the year >>>> >>>> we >>>> >>>> just passed, Issue 4 on Perezhivanie. This is a very >>>> >>> special >>> >>>> *special* issue, not only because its topic has raised >>>> >>> lots of >>> >>>> interest lately in >>>> >>>> the >>>> >>>> CHAT community but also because, greatly coordinated by >>>> >>> Andy Blunden >>> >>>> and the rest of the editorial team, the issue takes the >>>> >>> form of a >>> >>>> symposium where authors get the chance to present and >>>> >>> respond to >>> >>>> each others' ideas on the subject. In my view, this >>>> >>> allows having a >>> >>>> rich and >>>> >>>> multidimensional >>>> >>>> approach to a subject as important as perezhivanie. >>>> >>>> Following with the dialogical spirit in which the >>>> >>> special issue was >>> >>>> assembled, we will focus on one lead article, but >>>> hoping >>>> >>> to also >>> >>>> engage ideas and insights present in or relevant to >>>> other >>>> >>>> contributions in the issue. ?Marc Clar?'s "Vygotsky and >>>> >>> Vasilyuk on >>> >>>> Perezhivanie: Two Notions and One Word" will be our >>>> >>> focus. The >>> >>>> article very nicely engages the lead work of Vygotsky, >>>> >>> but also the >>> >>>> less known ??(?in educational literature) but totally >>>> >>> relevant works >>> >>>> of psychologist ?F. Vasilyuk and semiotician >>>> >>>> A. >>>> >>>> J. Greimas, mobilising a number of key concepts >>>> >>> including those of >>> >>>> semiotic >>>> >>>> mediation and transformation. >>>> >>>> ?In addition to Marc, who will soon join us, I have >>>> >>> encouraged some >>> >>>> of >>>> >>>> the >>>> >>>> other authors in the special issue to also join as >>>> >>> "relevant >>> >>>> others," if time and circumstances allow them. Let's >>>> >>> hope that this >>> >>>> will help keeping the symposium spirit up. >>>> >>>> Marc's article is attached to this e-mail and will be >>>> >>> made open >>> >>>> access at the T&F pages as soon as people is back from >>>> >>> the holidays. >>> >>>> The T&F link >>>> >>>> is >>>> >>>> this: >>>> >>>> http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039. >>>> >>> 2016.1186194 >>> >>>> The link to the MCA Forum pages, where we announce our >>>> >>> discussions >>> >>>> and other xmca things, is here: >>>> http://lchc.ucsd.edu/MCA/ >>>> >>>> I wish us all a very productive and interesting >>>> >>> discussion. >>> >>>> Alfredo >>>> >>>> >>> >> > From ablunden@mira.net Tue Jan 10 16:54:59 2017 From: ablunden@mira.net (Andy Blunden) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2017 11:54:59 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! In-Reply-To: References: <1483344752182.40904@iped.uio.no> <1483467423798.57819@iped.uio.no> <1483601196884.31418@iped.uio.no> <5df5e870-3ef8-70d6-0c17-f8647ba17e62@mira.net> <587124d9.d957620a.4a5a8.bd56@mx.google.com> <1483820996800.91513@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: How to understand the personality? ... i.e., the *development* of the personality? The subject's inheritance, and The subject's experiences (/perezhivaniya/) ... just think of how you'd go about writing a good biography or Bildungsroman. Andy ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making On 11/01/2017 10:24 AM, David Kellogg wrote: > Andy: > > A good paradox! Word meaning is a unit, but the spoken > word itself is just an element--a thing. We can see that > this is, on the face of it, impossible: within a single > holistic analysis, an element can be a part of a unit, but > a unit can never be a part of an element. So what you are > referring to when you say that the word is a thing is the > "sonic" or "phasal" quality of the word: its "acoustic" > properties, its "phonetics". > > But not its phonology. The word that Vygotsky uses for > "phoneme" refers to the 1929 work of the Prague Circle, > originally the Moscow Circle. He is a LITTLE coy about > this, because the founders, Jakobson and Trubetskoy, were > not very popular with the authorities and Vygotsky already > had plenty of heterodox acquaintances to worry about. > Nevertheless, whenever Vygotsky says "phoneme", we know he > really means what Jakobson and Trubetskoy called > "morphophonemes". We know this because the examples he > actually gives--Russian case endings--are morpho-phonemes > and not simply phonemes: so for example in English the > sound /s/ is a simple phoneme when I say the word "self" > but if I say "Andy's" the sound /s/ is a morpho-phoneme: a > difference in sounding that makes a difference in meaning. > The system (that is, the paradigmatic menu) of these > differences in soundings are what the Moscow and Prague > Circles called "phonology" (as OPPOSED to phonetics), and > this is the kind of "phoneme" that Vygotsky is really > talking about. > > Still, you can see that it is not what he is talking about > when he says word meaning, because these units are still > nowhere near big enough to describe the kinds of changes > which must occur when verbal thinking develops. I feel the > same way about a lot of the examples offered of > "perezhivanie", including Marc's. If MacDuff's grief > or Carla's epiphany about the misbehavior of her kids > being due to "outside influences" really is the unit of > personality and experience that Vygotsky wants us to use > when we analyse the ontogenesis of personality, then it is > no more appropriate than using the morpho-phoneme to > analyse the whole of verbal thinking. Just as evolution > (of species) requires very different units from history > (of classes), development, whether we are talking about > verbal thinking or the personality as a whole, is going to > require very different units from learning, whether we are > talking about MacDuff or Carla. The units must be able to > develop; that is, the relationship of the elements within > them must be susceptible to many changes over time. > > Let me give three examples of how this happens > in different "perezhivanie". They are not mine; they are > Vygotsky's, and they are all from the Pedological Lectures. > > First, the Crisis at One. Neither the biological nor the > social endowment of the child greatly changes in the > acquisition of speech; nevertheless, the relationship > between the personality and the environment, of which > both personality moments and environmental ones are > constituent elements, is entirely transformed. Here we are > not talking about phonemes, or even morpho-phonemes: we > are talking about "wordings"--whole utterances. In > Melbourne I presented some data that demonstrated this > beautifully--a child's first word is actually an attempt > to imitate a whole conversation. > > Second, the Crisis at Three. Vygotsky spends a lot of time > discussing the "Seven Stars"--the symptoms of the > "Terrible Twos" and "Threenagehood" noted by harried > parents everywhere. But by the end of his analysis it's > clear that what really happens is a new relationship > between wish and will: in extreme cases, the child > actually wishes for one thing (e.g. compromise) and > wills the opposite (the everlasting "No!"). Again, neither > the personality moments as such nor the environmental ones > change, but there is a separation and a sorting which > allows the subordination of wish to will that we see in > play. This isn't the kind of "aha" moment that Marc is > offering us at all: Vygotsky actually calls it the > "antipode" of future will, because instead of enabling > will it actually paralyzes it. But it is indubitably a key > moment in the development of the relation of personality > to environmental moments that we see in "perizhivanie". > > Thirdly, the Crisis at Seven. I think Gonzalez Rey makes a > total hash of this, and I get very cross when I read his > article. It is not true that the essence of perizhivanie > remained a mystery to Vygotsky simply because he no longer > subscribes to "the aesthetic reaction" and "catharsis" and > other notions that he toyed with in Psych of Art (he's no > longer doing experiments on changes in breathing rate when > people read the works of Bunin either!). It might be true > that he never offered a system of facts and methodological > procedures for perezivanie, but that was only because one > already existed, for example in the work of Wallon and > Stern and others. It is demonstrably not true that when > Vygotsky says that the speech environment of those around > him does not change when the child learns to talk at one, > he is not "profoundly contradictory with the concept of > sense": when you read the quotation in context, it is very > clear that what he is referring to are the kinds of > absolute indicators used by Zalkind: how often the parents > read the newspapers, the dialect they speak, and their > educational background. These do not change, and if the > child wants to make sense, these are the factors the child > will have to relate to. > > Vygotsky gives the example of a child who is severely > retarded. The child wants to play with other children and > is rejected. The child walks down the street and the other > children follow, laughing. The child is shrieked at, > insulted, but as soon as the humiliation stops, the child > is perfectly happy with himself. Vygotsky points out that > the child is not able to "co-generalize" the > "perizhivanie" of the humiliations: each is unpleasant, > but they are entirely separate and cannot be connected > with any internal sense of inferiority. A normal child, > however, is able to "internalize" these humiliations and > consequently develops a sense of inferiority. We can see > that what has happened is the insertion of what Vygotsky > calls an "intellectual" moment: an inner layer, which is > what distinguishes later Chaplin movies from earlier ones > (again, Vygotsky's example, not mine!) and what brings > about the "loss of directness and naivete" that we see in > pre-schoolers. > > I think that the reason people find "perizhivanie" so hard > to work with is the same reason that they find "word > meaning" hard to work with: it develops. The feeling of > drinking milk as the infant drinks it is perizhivanie, and > the thought of being humiliated when you are mulling it > over and contemplating revenge is also perizhivanie, and > only a profound analysis which includes ontogenetic > development and not just learning will show the inner link > between them. It's for that reason that I think that > "activity" is not a useful unit of analysis and I am much > more inclined to use your word "project", so long as it > can include what Vygotsky calls "inner activeness". > > Vygotsky says: > > > ????? ? ?????????, ?????????? ? ?. ?., ? ???? ???? ? > ?????????? ???????????, ??? ?????????? ???????????? > ??????????????? ????????? ??????????????? ?? ??????? ? > ??????? ?????????????. ??? ??? ????? ????? ?????????? > ?????????? ? ???????? ???????? ??????????? ? ???, ???, ? > ?? ????? ??? ? ?????????? ???????? ??? ?????????? > ???????????? ???????????? ???????????????? ????? ? > ?????????, ??????? ???????????, ? ???????? ???????? ?? > ????? ???????????? ?????????????? ???????????, > ???????????? ??????????? ?????????? ?????????? ?? > ????????? ? ??????? ????????????. ??? ??? ???????, ??????? > ????? ??????????, ? ?? ????? ????? ?? ?????? ??? ????? > ???-??????, ???, ? ???????? ????????? ?????????????? > ??????? ? ?????????? ????????????. > > When I think, remember, etc. I am dealing withinner > activeness; this psychological process of inner activity > is not directly linked to any external activity. The new > form of inner activeness in the School Age consists of > this: that while during the preschool years these inner > activities demonstrated an immediate link with action, > with external activeness, in the school years we have a > relative autonomy which emerges, inner activeness which is > relatively independent of external activities. Here is > already a child who can think, at the same time when he is > doing or seeing something, one in whom has emerged a > differentiation of inner and outer activities. > > David Kellogg > Macquarie University > > > > On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 10:07 AM, Andy Blunden > > wrote: > > David: "Are words really units?" > > Well, firstly, "units" is a *relative* term. That is, > the question is: are words units of something, some > complex process subject to analysis. And which? > > Secondly, according to Vygotsky, "no." The concept > Vygotsky proposes as a unit is "word meaning" which he > says is a unity of sound and meaning. The sound is an > artefact, which, detached from its meaningful > utterance in a transactional context is just a thing, > viz., a word. Whereas "word meaning" is an > arrtefact-mediated action, a unit of human social > activity. > > It is true that words can be countable or mass > according to context, but I wasn't talking about words > was I? I was talking about word meaning. > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Andy Blunden > http://home.mira.net/~andy > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > > On 8/01/2017 7:59 AM, David Kellogg wrote: > > Are words really units? When we look at their > ideational meaning (that is, > their logical and experiential content--their > capacity for representing and > linking together human experiences) they seem to > fall into two very > different categories: lexical words like > "perezhivanie" or "sense" or > "personality" of "individual" and grammatical > words like "of", or "might", > or "is". The lexical words seem to behave like > units--they are bounded, > discrete, and, as Andy would say, "countable" (the > problem is that almost > all nouns are both countable and uncountable > depending on the context you > put them in, so this distinction is really not as > essential as Andy seems > to assume). But the more grammatical words seem to > be elements of some > larger unit, which we can call wording. > > Veresov and Fleer come up against this problem > with "edintsvo" and > "edintsa". Of course, as they say, the two words > are distinct. But this > doesn't necessarily mean that the former always > corresponds to "unity" in > English and the latter is always "unit". If you > look at the paragraph they > translate on 330, you can see that Vygotsky starts > with an idea that is > quite "synoptic" and is well expressed by "unit". > But in the last sentence > there is a sense that "perezhivanie" is a > meta-stable unit--one that > remains self-similar only through a process of > thorough change, like a > bicycle whose every part is replaced--and in > English is it is better to > express this idea with "unity". The problem is > that the differences between > "edintsvo" and "edintsva" in Russian is a matter > of gender (I think) and > not simply abstractness, and as a result the > English version, which cannot > use the resource of gender,has to rely on > abstractness, so the words > "unity" and "unit" are somewhat more distinct and > less linked than > "edintsvo" and "edintsva". > > There are other problems that are similar. When > Gonzalez Rey uses the word > "final moment" to refer to the final period of > Vygotsky's thinking, he > leaves the anglophone reader the impression that > he is referring to > Vygotsky's deathbed thoughts. On the other hand, > when Veresov and Fleer use > "factor" to translate the same Russian word that > Gonzalez Rey is using, > they are giving us something more quantitative > than Vygotsky intended, and > their translation of "dalee nerazloshim'im > chastyami etava edinstva" > into "vital and further indivisible part of the > whole" is quite opaque in > English (notice that here Veresov and Fleer use > "whole" to translate > "edinstva" rather than "unit"!) At some point you > have to accept that you > can change Russian words into English words as if > you were exchanging > rubles for dollars, but you still won't be able to > buy a samovar at Walmart. > > David Kellogg > Macquarie University > > > > On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 5:21 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > > > wrote: > > Larry, all, > > our arguments in the 2014 address a science > education literature in which > the constructivist perspective is the leading > perspective; We note that the > assertion that people learn from experience is > everywhere taken for granted > but nowhere accounted for. We resort to > pragmatist and phenomenological > literature along with Vygotsky's insights to > point out the need to account > for learning as something that cannot be the > result of an individual's > construction; in experience there is always > something in excess of what you > intended, and this is a basic feature of > doing, of performing. I take that > to be your "trans" in the trans/zhivanie word, > Larry, which already is > denoted in the word PERezhivanie. > > But I do not wish to move our discussion too > far away from Marc's paper > and the Perezhivanie special issue. We also > risk disengaging many that have > not have the privilege we've had to have the > time to read so many articles > in just few days into the new year. I think we > are a point in the > discussion where a pretty clear point of > agreement/disagreement, and > therefore of possibility for growth, has been > reached with regard to the > view of perezhivanie as "an experience" and as > the "working over it". I > think that to allow as many as possible to > follow, and hopefully also > engage, I think it will be helpful to bring > the diverse perspectives and > theoretical accounts to matter in accounting > for some actual material. And > there are a number of cases described in the > articles, including Marc's > case of a teacher, as well as everyday facts, > such as those brought by > Beth, and in Beth's article... > > I take the task for myself too, but Saturday > morning need to attend to > other things! > A > > > > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com > > > > Sent: 07 January 2017 18:26 > To: Andy Blunden; Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended > Mind, Culture, Activity; > Larry Purss > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and > Perezhivanie! > > Andy, Peter, i hope the intention to move > beyond politeness to struggle > with this topic materializes. > In this vein i want to introduce exploration > of the ?excess? of actual > over intended meaning as he sketched his > introduction to ?experience?. > > Citing Dewey, Alfredo says that this excess of > actual learning over > intended learning INCLUDES what Dewey refers > to as ?attitudes? and these > ?attitudes? are FUNDAMENTALLY what count in > the future. > Alfredo and Roth then add this summary > statement : > > There is therefore, a need to theorize > experience in terms that do not > assume control and rationality as the sine qua > non of learning. It also > implies a need to develop analytical accounts > that retain the ?uncertainty? > that is an ?integral part? of human experience. > > Where are Alfredo and Roth leading us with > this sketch of experience? To > highlight ?attitudes? that occur in the excess > of actual over intended > learning? The word ?attitudes? generates > images of (atmosphere) and (moods) > that ?flow? like cascading waterfalls that can > be imaged as (force) or as > (receptive). Attitudes that flow to places > where they are received within a > certain attitude of care and concern. Not as > forceful an image as moving > only with control and rationality. > Describing ?weaker? thought that > remains uncertain but that also opens us to > the other?s peril and plight. > Possibly a post-analytic motion that exceeds > the intended by living-through > the actual that develops ?attitudes? that are > fundamentally what count for > the future. > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > From: Andy Blunden > Sent: January 7, 2017 5:00 AM > To: Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, > Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and > Perezhivanie! > > OK Peter, what you say is all very true I am > sure, but it > entails conflating activity and action (as > mass nouns) and > context and mediation, and makes the required > distinction > much like one could find multiple meanings for > the word > "and" by listing the different phrases and > clauses which can > be linked by "and." > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Andy Blunden > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > > On 7/01/2017 11:42 PM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > > Let me try to illustrate. > > Reading as mediated action: The > cultural-historical > context of reading mediates how one?s > attention and > response are channeled in socially > constructed ways. So, > in one setting, say at home or reading in > the company of > friends, a novel might bring a reader to > tears, or invite > readers to share personal stories that > parallel those of > the plot lines, or laugh out loud. But > another setting, a > formal school or university class, would > have historical > values and practices that mute emotional > and personal > responses, and promote a more sober, > analytic way of > reading and talking that fits with > specific historical > critical conventions and genres, and > discourages others. > > Reading as mediating action: The act of > reading can be > transformational. In reading about an > talking about a > character?s actions, a reader might > reconsider a value > system, become more sympathetic to real > people who > resemble oppressed characters, etc. In > other words, > reading a text may serve a mediational > process in which > textual ideas and exemplars enable a > reader to think > differently. > > *From:*Andy Blunden > [mailto:ablunden@mira.net > ] > *Sent:* Saturday, January 7, 2017 6:28 AM > *To:* Peter Smagorinsky >; eXtended Mind, > Culture, Activity > > *Subject:* Re: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year > and Perezhivanie! > > Can you explain in a paragraph or two,. > Peter, rather than > asking us all to read 10,000 words to > extract an answer? > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > Andy Blunden > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > > > On 7/01/2017 11:23 PM, Peter Smagorinsky > wrote: > > Andy and others, I tried to work out > the mediated/mediating question > > in the area of reading....see if this helps. > > Smagorinsky, P., & O'Donnell-Allen, > C. (1998). Reading as mediated > > and mediating action: Composing meaning for > literature through multimedia > interpretive texts. Reading Research > Quarterly, 33, 198-226. Available > athttp://www.petersmagorinsky.net/About/PDF/RRQ/RRQ1998.pdf > > > -----Original Message----- > > From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ > > > mailman.ucsd.edu ] On > Behalf Of Andy Blunden > > Sent: Friday, January 6, 2017 7:12 PM > > To:xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year > and Perezhivanie! > > I have never understood this supposed > distinction, Alfredo, between > > "mediated activity" and "mediating activity" > given that all activity is > mediated and all activity mediates. > > Also, could you spell out what you > mean by the "tension" > > between perezhivanie as meaning and > perezhivanie as struggle. > > Andy > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > Andy Blunden > > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective- > > > decision-making > > On 5/01/2017 6:26 PM, Alfredo Jornet > Gil wrote: > > Thanks Marc for your careful > response. > > I am familiar to Vygotsky's > notion of cultural mediation and I > > am aware and acknowledge that it was > elaborated as a means to overcome > dualism, and that it is not analog to a > computational approach. > > When I brought the computing > analogy, I did so with regard not > > to the concept of cultural mediation in > general, but to the way it can be > (and is) deployed analytically. I react to > what it seems to me a dichotomy > between a "meaning" as something that is > static (thereby a form of > "representation" or reflection of the relation > with the environment instead > of?refraction)?? and the > experiencing-as-struggling, which is described > as?transformation or change. If so, mediation > here would seem to be part of > a methodological device that first dissects "a > type of meaning" from "a > type of activity" (or a given state from the > process that changes that > state), and then unites it by adding the term > "mediation." And this may be > my misreading, but in that (mis)reading (which > perhaps is mostly due to the > fact that in your empirical illustration only > the initial and end product, > i.e., perezhivanie, are described, but not the > experiencing-as-struggle, > that is, the moving between the two), > mediation here seems to do as > analytical concept precisely what you were > afraid our monism was doing: > explaining nothing. Only the end products but > not the process of producing > perezhivanie are revealed. This may be > problematic if one attends to what > Veresov argues in the paper I shared > yesterday, where he defends the notion > of mediation but also specifies that Vygotsky > speaks of *mediating > activity* (as opposed to *mediated* activity). > That is, not mediation by > signs as products, but mediating activity as > the activity of producing > signs (which again is an activity of producing > social relations, perhaps > what you refer as "holistic meanings"?). What > do you think? > > I did not think you were trying > to deny the influence of > > Spinoza, and I do not think we ever said that > Perezhivanie was primarily a > move from Cartesian Dualism to Monism, as you > suggest in your post. I copy > and paste from my prior post: "The fact is > that Vygotsky was building a > theory on the unity of the affect and the > intellect that was to be grounded > on Spinoza, and what we try to do is to > explore how perezhivanie, as a > concept being developed during the same period > (but not finalised or > totally settled!), could be seen from the > perspective of the Spinozist > Vygotsky." > > I totally believe that bringing > the distinction between > > perezhivanie as meaning, and perezhivanie as > struggle, is totally relevant, > and Beth Ferholt's vignettes of Where the Wild > Things Are do indeed > illustrate this. We really need to address > this tension, which as Beth's > examples and as our own everyday experience > shows, is a tension that > matters not just to books and to theories but > to living persons (children, > teachers), a tension that moreover is present > and mentioned in all the > articles of the symposium. The papers offer > different proposals, and I > think is so great we have the chance to > discuss them! I too, as you, am > very interesting in hearing others about the > questions you had concerning > sense and meaning. > > Alfredo > > From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > > > > > > > on behalf of Marc > > Clar? > > > > > > > Sent: 04 January 2017 22:31 > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New > Year and Perezhivanie! > > Thank you very much, Alfredo, for > sharing this excellent paper by > > Veresov, and thanks also for your > responses, which really helped > > me to > > better understand your points. My > main doubt about your proposal > > was/is caused by the statement > that the idea of cultural > > mediation/mediator implies a > cartesian dualism. This shocks me > > because, to me, the idea of > cultural mediation is absolutely > > crucial > > (in fact, the keystone) for the > construction of a monist (and > > scientific) psychology that does > not forget mind ?that is, a > > cultural > > psychology. From your response, > however, I realized that we may > > be > > approaching the idea of mediation > in different ways. I talk of > > mediation and mediators in a > quite restricted way. The starting > > point > > of my understanding of mediation > is a dialectical relationship > > (organic, transactional) between > the subject and the world > > (Vygotsky departs from the scheme > stimulus-response, from reflexology). > > This relationship, that Vygotsky > calls primitive psychological > > functions, would be basically > biological. However, in human > > beings > > this relationship is mediated by > cultural means: signs and > > tools; or > > primary, secondary and terciary > artifacts. These cultural means > > reorganize the primitive > functions (dialectic S-O relationship), > > which > > become then higher psychological > functions (S-M-O) (see for > > example, > > The problem of the cultural > development of the child, in The > > Vygotsky > > Reader). Now, the subject, the > cultural mediators, and the > > object form > > an inseparable dialectical unit, > so that the subject acts on > > (transforms) the object through > the prism of the cultural > > mediators, > > the object acts on (transforms) > the subject also through the > > prism of > > the cultural mediators, and the > cultural means are themselves > > also > > transformed as a consequence of > their mediation in this > > continuous > > dynamic dialectical tension. > Here, for me, it is important the > > idea > > that the cultural means are as > material (if we assume a > > materialist > > monism) as all the rest of the > world; in fact, are parts of the > > material world which become signs > or tools (and can be therefore > > socially distributed). This > permits the introduction of the > > scientific > > study of mind-consciousness (as > mediating systems of signs), > > because > > mind is not anymore something > immaterial and unobservable, but > > it is > > as material and observable as the > rest of the natural world. It > > is > > from this view that, for me, the > idea of cultural mediation is > > the > > keystone of a monist psychology > that includes mind. Thus, when I > > speak > > of mediators, I refer to the > cultural means which mediate in the > > S-O > > dialectics; I am especially > interested in signs/secondary > > artifacts. > > Here, it is perhaps necessary to > insist that when I talk of > > studying > > mediators (and their semantic > structure), this doesn't mean that > > they > > are taken out from the activity > (the flux of live) in which they > > mediate (since out of activity > they are not signs anymore); > > here, I > > think Vygotsky tries again to > overcome another old dichotomy, the > > functionalism-structuralism one. > I hope that all this makes also > > clear the difference between this view and > that of computational > psychologies (which in general are profoundly > and explicitly dualist and > not dialectic). > > Back to perezhivanie, I'm not > obviously trying to deny the > > influence > > of Spinoza on Vygotsky's thinking > (this is explicit in Vygotsky's > > writings, especially in ?The > teaching about emotions?, in the > > Vol.6 of > > the Collected Works). But I have > doubts that Vygotsky's > > introduction > > of the concept of perezhivanie is > to be regarded primarily as a > > movement towards monism (from a > previous cartesian dualism), and > > that > > this movement questions the > concept of cultural mediation. > > Instead, > > and I think that this is in line > with some of Gonz?lez-Rey > > observations in his paper, my > impression is that the > > introduction of > > the concept of perezhivanie > responds more to a movement (a > > further > > step) towards holism (something > that, in my understanding, can > > also be > > found in Spinoza). Thus, I think > that the word meaning is still > > the > > unit of analysis in the last > Vygotsky -and therefore, the idea of > > cultural mediation is still > crucial (in fact, in The problem of > > the > > environment, he connects the > concept of perezhivanie, which has > > just > > introduced, to the development of > word meaning [p.345-346, also > > cited > > in my paper]). However, in my > view, in the last Vygotsky the > > focus is > > not anymore primarily on the > word-meaning as formed for things > > (or > > collections of things, as in the > ontogenetic research with > > Sakharov), but the focus is now in the > formation of meaning for holistic > situations. > > Best regards, > > Marc. > > 2017-01-03 19:16 GMT+01:00 > Alfredo Jornet Gil< > > a.j.gil@iped.uio.no > > > >: > > Hi Marc, all, > > thanks for joining and for > your interesting work, which I > > follow > > since I became aware of it. I > appreciate the way in your > > paper you > > show careful and honest > attention to the texts of the authors > > involved, but perhaps most of > all I appreciate that the > > paper makes > > the transformational > dimension related to struggle and change > > salient, a dimension all > papers deemed central to > > perezhivanie. And I > > have learned more about > Vasilyuk by reading your paper. But > > I also > > see that we have approached > the question of perezhivanie > > differently > > and I think that addressing > the questions that you raise > > concerning > > our article may be a good way > to both respond and discuss > > your paper. > > I am aware that our use of > the term monism may be > > problematic to > > some, and N. Veresov, who has > recently written about this > > (see > > attached article), warns > against the dangers of simply > > moving from > > dualism into an > undifferentiating monism that relativizes > > everything, > > making development > un-studiable. This seems to be the way in > > which > > you have understood our > argument, and of course this is not > > what we are or want to be doing. > > Probably many will think that > *dialectical materialism* > > rather than > > monism is the proper term, > and I could agree with them; we > > do in fact > > use dialectical materialism > there and elsewhere. Yet, we > > wanted to > > emphasise the Spinozist > influence (an influence that also > > runs > > through Marx) and so we found > it appropriate to use the term > > monism, > > a term that Vygotsky uses > before arguing that Spinoza > > "develops an essentially materialistic view" > > (Collected Works, Vol. 6, p. > 124). For us, the aim is > > working out > > ways to empirically examine > and formulate problems in ways > > that do > > not reify a mind-body dualism. > > Although overcoming dualism > is foundational to the CHAT > > paradigm, I > > would however not say that > Vygotsky did get to solve all of > > the > > problems that Cartesian > dualism had created for psychology, > > even > > though he recognised those > problems brilliantly as early as > > in the > > "Crisis". It should suffice > to cite Vygotsky's own remarks, > > which we quote in the paper (and which A.N. > > Leont'ev mentions in the > introduction to the collected > > works), where > > Vygotsky explicitly critiques > some of his own prior ideas > > for failing > > to overcome dualism. We agree > with those who, like F. G. > > Rey, see > > Vygotsky's project as a > developing rather than as a > > finalised one. > > The fact is that Vygotsky was > building a theory on the unity > > of the > > affect and the intellect that > was to be grounded on Spinoza, > > and what > > we try to do is to explore > how perezhivanie, as a concept > > being > > developed during the same > period (but not finalised or > > totally > > settled!), could be seen from > the perspective of the > > Spinozist Vygotsky. > > As you note, in our article > we argue that, if one takes the > > Spinozist > > one-substance approach, > classical concepts used in > > non-classical > > psychology, at least in the > way they are commonly used in > > the current > > literature, should be > revised. One such concept is > > mediation. And I > > personally do not have much > of a problem when mediation is > > used to > > denote the fundamental fact > that every thing exists always > > through > > *another*, never in and of > itself. But I do think that it is > > problematic to identify > MEDIATORS, such as "a meaning", as a > > means to > > account for or explain > developmental processes and learning > > events, > > precisely because it is > there, at least in my view, that > > dualism creeps in. > > For example, I find it > paradoxical that you are concerned > > that our > > monist approach risks turning > perezhivanie into a useless > > category > > because it may be used to > explain everything and nothing, > > and yet you > > do not seem to have a problem > using the term mediation to > > account for > > the transformation of > perezhivanie without clearly > > elaborating on how > > mediation does change > anything or what it looks like as a > > real > > process. How is it different > saying that a perezhivanie > > mediates the > > experiencing-as-struggle from > simply saying that it > > "affects" or > > "determines" it? Indeed, if > perezhivanie mediates > > experiencing-as-struggle, > does not experiencing-as-struglgle > > too > > mediate perezhivanie? And do > not both may be said to mediate > > development, or development mediate them? Is > not this explaining everything > and nothing? > > I do believe you can argue > that there is a difference between > > mediation and classical > psychology's cause-effect relations, > > but to > > show this you need to dig > into the dialectical underpinnings > > of the > > theory. In your paper, you > offer a nice analysis of a lovely > > case of > > a teacher who, in dealing > with a challenge with one of her > > students, > > changes her perezhivanie. I > think you can rightly argue that > > there is > > a semiotic transformation, > and I fully support your > > statement that by > > studying discourse we can > empirically approach questions of > > psychological development. > The contradictions you show as > > being > > involved and resolved > resonate really well with what I > > experience as > > a parent or as a teacher in > the classroom. Yet, without > > unpacking > > what this "mediation" taking > place between one perezhivanie > > and the > > next one means as a concrete > and real, the same analysis > > could be done taking an information processing > approach: > > there is an situation that is > processed (represented?) in > > one way, > > which then leads to a > (cognitive) dissonance, and then there > > is a > > cognitive resolution by means > of which the situation is > > presented > > differently in consciousness > (indeed, when seen in this way, > > the term > > perezhivanie and the term > "representation" become almost > > indistinguishable). How is > mediation, as an analytical > > concept, > > helping here? And most > importantly to the question of > > perezhivanie, > > how is this analysis going to > show the internal connection > > between > > intellect and affect that > Vygotsky formulates as > > constitutive of the notion of perezhivanie? > > I believe that the key lies > in understanding what Vygotsky > > means when > > he says that perezhivanie is > a unit of analysis. I will not > > repeat > > here what already is written > in at least a couple of the > > articles in > > the special issue (Blunden, > ours), that is the difference > > between > > analysis by elements and unit > analysis (Vygotsky 1987). A > > unit > > analysis approach is > consistent with Spinoza, for whom > > cause-effect > > explanations were not > adequate, requiring instead an > > understanding of > > self-development, > perezhivanie as a kernel cell for the > > development > > of personality. And I think > you may be after this in your > > article in > > suggesting a form of > continuous movement from perezhivanie to > > experiencing-as-struggle. But > perhaps the major difficulty I > > find is that, in positing Vygotsky's > perezhivanie as "a type of meaning" > > and Vasilyuk's perezhivanie > (or experiencing-as-struggle) as > > a "type > > of activity," it is difficult > not to see here a division > > between > > product and process, a > division that then is analytically > > bridged by > > the addition of a third term, > mediation, that should bring > > back the > > real movement between the > product and the process. > > A different approach involves > considering the concrete > > extension of > > actual living and lived > social relations, and look at them as > > generative phenomena. What is > there in the encounter between > > Carla > > and the child that leads to > change? For it is not inside the > > mind, > > but in real life, in > consciousness as the real relation > > between people, that Carla is changed. > > How is the semantic structure > that you nicely present and > > attribute > > to Carla a product of the > social relation between her and > > the child? > > I think that to rightfully > situate perezhivanie as a concept > > in a > > Vygotskian framework, we > ought to address its relation to > > the genetic > > law of development. > > There is much more to > disentangle, but this is long enough. > > I hope I > > have succeeded in making > clear these ideas. Thanks so much > > for > > engaging in the discussion! > > Alfredo > > > ________________________________________ > > From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > > > > > > > > on behalf of Marc > > Clar? > > > > > > > Sent: 02 January 2017 22:14 > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, > Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy > New Year and Perezhivanie! > > Hi, all, and thank you so > much, Alfredo, for your kind > > invitation to > > participate in this > discussion. My paper in the MCA special > > issue > > focuses on a distinction > between a type of activity, which I > > argue > > that is what Vasilyuk called > *perezhivanie* (experiencing) > > and a type > > of semiotic mediator, which I > argue that is what Vygotsky, > > in The > > Problem of the Environment, > called *perezhivanie.* I argue, > > following > > Vasilyuk, that in > experiencing activities (Vasilyuk's > > perezhivanie), > > this type of mediator is > profoundly transformed ? in fact, > > that > > experiencing activities > consist of the semiotic > > transformation of this type of mediator. > > As Veresov and Fleer argue in > their commentary, perezhivanie > > (as a > > type of > > mediator) is for me a > psychological phenomenon, one which is > > of > > course conceptualized from a > specific theoretical framework. > > But the > > phenomenon is also visible > from other theoretical frameworks > > as well, > > as I mention in the paper. > This phenomenon is my main > > interest, and > > it is from this interest that > I arrived at the concept of > > perezhivanie (not the other way around). > > Now, the phenomenon is that > at least emotion, reasoning, and > > volition > > (formation of conscious > purposes) seem to be decisively > > mediated by > > holistic situational meaning. > My current research concern is > > trying > > to find ways to study and > understand how this mediation > > occurs and > > how these semiotic mediators > are transformed and > > distributed. From > > this view, I think that > experiencing activities (Vasilyuk's > > perezhivanie) may provide a > good terrain to study these > > issues > > (especially regarding the > mediation of emotion), as I tried > > to exemplify in the paper. > > Studying semiotic mediation, > however, is of course not easy. > > Following Vygotsky, I assume > that extended discourse is the > > manifestation of thinking > within certain psychological > > conditions > > (Vygotsky's Thinking and > Speech, chapter 7), and I also > > assume the > > Vygotsky's law of the unity > of the structure and function of > > thinking > > (Vygotsky's Thinking and > Speech, chapter 6). From these two > > assumptions, I propose that > meaning (and its functions in > > human > > activity) can be > scientifically studied by structurally > > analyzing the > > narratives generated by > subjects, considering that the > > discourse > > produced in the narrative is > the point of departure of this > > study, > > but that considerable > analytical work must be done to move > > from this > > discourse to the full > characterization of meaning. It is in > > that > > point where I find useful the > work developed by Greimas, the > > usefulness of which I only suggest in the paper. > > >From this background, I > found many interesting ideas and > > questions > > in the > > other papers of the special > issue. In this first post I will > > propose > > two of them for possible > discussion. The first one was > > raised by > > Gonz?lez-Rey, when he > introduces, in connection with > > perezhivanie, > > the concepts of personality, > and especially, of sense. So, > > which is > > the conceptual (and-or > > phenomenal) relation between > perezhivanie and sense? > > Gonz?lez-Rey > > suggests that both concepts > are somewhat similar (and > > overcome by the > > concept of ?subjective > sense?); my opinion, partly expressed > > in my > > commentary, is that > perezhivanie is a type of meaning, which > > includes > > different levels of depth, > and that sense corresponds to the > > deepest > > level of meaning (which can > be characterized as a system of > > semic > > oppositions). Therefore, > sense wouldn't be in opposition to > > meaning > > (as ?a microcosm of human > consciousness?, as Kozulin > > remembers in his > > commentary), although it > would be in opposition to > > manifested meaning (the surface level of meaning). > > The second issue was raised > by Roth and Jornet, and I think > > it goes > > beyond the issue of > perezhivanie itself. If I understand > > them well, > > they argue that Vygotsky's > core proposal of cultural > > mediation is > > influenced by the Cartesian > dualism (mind-matter), and that a > > promising approach to > Cultural Psychology would be a > > Spinozist > > monism. I am actually very > interested on the issue of which > > epistemological position can > best substantiate the > > construction of a > > cultural psychology, and > that's why I feel inclined to take > > the > > opportunity to ask for your > opinions about that. About the > > proposal > > of Roth and Jornet, I have > some doubts. First, I don't see > > why > > Vygotsky's proposals can be > seen as dualist (in the > > Cartesian sense) > > -I suspect that it is because > of the analytical > > distinctions?. > > Anyway, in my understanding, > Vygotsky explicitly assumes a > > materialist monism (for > example in The Crisis), and in fact > > he constructs his proposal on mediation upon > reflexology, which also > explicitly assumed a materialist monism (e.g. > > Sechenov). Would a Spinozist > monism be a better point of > > departure? I > > don't know, in my > understanding it is a more idealist > > monism, and I > > don't clearly see what could > be gained. In my opinion, a > > scientific > > psychology which includes the > study of mind is only possible > > if any > > type of monism is assumed. > However, in my view, for a > > scientific > > psychology, the ontological > nature of the world is perhaps > > less > > important (it is an issue for > metaphysics?), and I am > > inclined to assume a neutral monism (e.g. > Russell). > > So from this view, a > materialist monism and a Spinozist > > monism > > wouldn't be so different, so > from both views it could be > > assumed that > > all is of the same nature and > all is similarly knowable > > (including > > mind) [which is the > ontological nature of the world and to > > what > > degree it is knowable are > issues that can be left to > > philosophy]. > > However, in my opinion, this > does not mean that, while > > assuming a > > monism, analytical > distinctions cannot be done when studying > > the > > world. In that sense, I had > the impression that Roth and > > Jornet > > tended to dilute analytical > distinctions in the name of > > monism; I > > repeat that I don't know if I > understood them well, but if > > this was > > the case, in my opinion, > analysis would be impossible within > > the new > > psychology suggested by Roth > and Jornet, and, regarding > > perezhivanie, > > there would be the danger, > noted by Vygotsky in The Crisis > > and > > cautioned by Kozulin in his > commentary, that by meaning > > everything, perezhivanie ends by meaning nothing. > > Best regards and happy new year, > > Marc. > > 2017-01-02 9:12 GMT+01:00 > Alfredo Jornet Gil< > > a.j.gil@iped.uio.no > > > >: > > Dear all, > > I would like to join > David, Luisa, Ana, Henry and the > > others to wish > > you all a Happy New Year! > May it be full of joy, peace, > > and opportunity. > > I also would like to > begin the year announcing our first > > ?MCA > > article discussion, > ?although in fact corresponds to the > > last issue > > of the year > > we > > just passed, Issue 4 on > Perezhivanie. This is a very > > special > > *special* issue, not only > because its topic has raised > > lots of > > interest lately in > > the > > CHAT community but also > because, greatly coordinated by > > Andy Blunden > > and the rest of the > editorial team, the issue takes the > > form of a > > symposium where authors > get the chance to present and > > respond to > > each others' ideas on the > subject. In my view, this > > allows having a > > rich and > > multidimensional > > approach to a subject as > important as perezhivanie. > > Following with the > dialogical spirit in which the > > special issue was > > assembled, we will focus > on one lead article, but hoping > > to also > > engage ideas and insights > present in or relevant to other > > contributions in the > issue. ?Marc Clar?'s "Vygotsky and > > Vasilyuk on > > Perezhivanie: Two Notions > and One Word" will be our > > focus. The > > article very nicely > engages the lead work of Vygotsky, > > but also the > > less known ??(?in > educational literature) but totally > > relevant works > > of psychologist ?F. > Vasilyuk and semiotician > > A. > > J. Greimas, mobilising a > number of key concepts > > including those of > > semiotic > > mediation and transformation. > > ?In addition to Marc, who > will soon join us, I have > > encouraged some > > of > > the > > other authors in the > special issue to also join as > > "relevant > > others," if time and > circumstances allow them. Let's > > hope that this > > will help keeping the > symposium spirit up. > > Marc's article is > attached to this e-mail and will be > > made open > > access at the T&F pages > as soon as people is back from > > the holidays. > > The T&F link > > is > > this: > > http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039 > . > > 2016.1186194 > > The link to the MCA Forum > pages, where we announce our > > discussions > > and other xmca things, is > here:http://lchc.ucsd.edu/MCA/ > > I wish us all a very > productive and interesting > > discussion. > > Alfredo > > > > > From mcole@ucsd.edu Tue Jan 10 18:01:32 2017 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2017 18:01:32 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! In-Reply-To: References: <1483344752182.40904@iped.uio.no> <1483467423798.57819@iped.uio.no> <1483601196884.31418@iped.uio.no> <5df5e870-3ef8-70d6-0c17-f8647ba17e62@mira.net> <587124d9.d957620a.4a5a8.bd56@mx.google.com> <1483820996800.91513@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: You believe the following, David? Neither the biological nor the social endowment of the child greatly changes in the acquisition of speech; nevertheless,..... mike On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 3:24 PM, David Kellogg wrote: > Andy: > > A good paradox! Word meaning is a unit, but the spoken word itself is just > an element--a thing. We can see that this is, on the face of it, > impossible: within a single holistic analysis, an element can be a part of > a unit, but a unit can never be a part of an element. So what you are > referring to when you say that the word is a thing is the "sonic" or > "phasal" quality of the word: its "acoustic" properties, its "phonetics". > > But not its phonology. The word that Vygotsky uses for "phoneme" refers to > the 1929 work of the Prague Circle, originally the Moscow Circle. He is a > LITTLE coy about this, because the founders, Jakobson and Trubetskoy, were > not very popular with the authorities and Vygotsky already had plenty of > heterodox acquaintances to worry about. Nevertheless, whenever Vygotsky > says "phoneme", we know he really means what Jakobson and Trubetskoy called > "morphophonemes". We know this because the examples he actually > gives--Russian case endings--are morpho-phonemes and not simply phonemes: > so for example in English the sound /s/ is a simple phoneme when I say the > word "self" but if I say "Andy's" the sound /s/ is a morpho-phoneme: a > difference in sounding that makes a difference in meaning. The system (that > is, the paradigmatic menu) of these differences in soundings are what the > Moscow and Prague Circles called "phonology" (as OPPOSED to phonetics), and > this is the kind of "phoneme" that Vygotsky is really talking about. > > Still, you can see that it is not what he is talking about when he says > word meaning, because these units are still nowhere near big enough to > describe the kinds of changes which must occur when verbal thinking > develops. I feel the same way about a lot of the examples offered of > "perezhivanie", including Marc's. If MacDuff's grief or Carla's epiphany > about the misbehavior of her kids being due to "outside influences" really > is the unit of personality and experience that Vygotsky wants us to use > when we analyse the ontogenesis of personality, then it is no more > appropriate than using the morpho-phoneme to analyse the whole of verbal > thinking. Just as evolution (of species) requires very different units from > history (of classes), development, whether we are talking about verbal > thinking or the personality as a whole, is going to require very different > units from learning, whether we are talking about MacDuff or Carla. The > units must be able to develop; that is, the relationship of the elements > within them must be susceptible to many changes over time. > > Let me give three examples of how this happens in different "perezhivanie". > They are not mine; they are Vygotsky's, and they are all from the > Pedological Lectures. > > First, the Crisis at One. Neither the biological nor the social endowment > of the child greatly changes in the acquisition of speech; nevertheless, > the relationship between the personality and the environment, of which > both personality moments and environmental ones are constituent elements, > is entirely transformed. Here we are not talking about phonemes, or even > morpho-phonemes: we are talking about "wordings"--whole utterances. In > Melbourne I presented some data that demonstrated this beautifully--a > child's first word is actually an attempt to imitate a whole conversation. > > Second, the Crisis at Three. Vygotsky spends a lot of time discussing the > "Seven Stars"--the symptoms of the "Terrible Twos" and "Threenagehood" > noted by harried parents everywhere. But by the end of his analysis it's > clear that what really happens is a new relationship between wish and > will: in extreme cases, the child actually wishes for one thing (e.g. > compromise) and wills the opposite (the everlasting "No!"). Again, neither > the personality moments as such nor the environmental ones change, but > there is a separation and a sorting which allows the subordination of wish > to will that we see in play. This isn't the kind of "aha" moment that Marc > is offering us at all: Vygotsky actually calls it the "antipode" of future > will, because instead of enabling will it actually paralyzes it. But it is > indubitably a key moment in the development of the relation of personality > to environmental moments that we see in "perizhivanie". > > Thirdly, the Crisis at Seven. I think Gonzalez Rey makes a total hash of > this, and I get very cross when I read his article. It is not true that the > essence of perizhivanie remained a mystery to Vygotsky simply because he no > longer subscribes to "the aesthetic reaction" and "catharsis" and other > notions that he toyed with in Psych of Art (he's no longer doing > experiments on changes in breathing rate when people read the works of > Bunin either!). It might be true that he never offered a system of facts > and methodological procedures for perezivanie, but that was only because > one already existed, for example in the work of Wallon and Stern > and others. It is demonstrably not true that when Vygotsky says that the > speech environment of those around him does not change when the child > learns to talk at one, he is not "profoundly contradictory with the concept > of sense": when you read the quotation in context, it is very clear that > what he is referring to are the kinds of absolute indicators used by > Zalkind: how often the parents read the newspapers, the dialect they speak, > and their educational background. These do not change, and if the child > wants to make sense, these are the factors the child will have to relate > to. > > Vygotsky gives the example of a child who is severely retarded. The child > wants to play with other children and is rejected. The child walks down the > street and the other children follow, laughing. The child is shrieked at, > insulted, but as soon as the humiliation stops, the child is perfectly > happy with himself. Vygotsky points out that the child is not able > to "co-generalize" the "perizhivanie" of the humiliations: each is > unpleasant, but they are entirely separate and cannot be connected with any > internal sense of inferiority. A normal child, however, is able to > "internalize" these humiliations and consequently develops a sense of > inferiority. We can see that what has happened is the insertion of what > Vygotsky calls an "intellectual" moment: an inner layer, which is what > distinguishes later Chaplin movies from earlier ones (again, Vygotsky's > example, not mine!) and what brings about the "loss of directness and > naivete" that we see in pre-schoolers. > > I think that the reason people find "perizhivanie" so hard to work with is > the same reason that they find "word meaning" hard to work with: it > develops. The feeling of drinking milk as the infant drinks it is > perizhivanie, and the thought of being humiliated when you are mulling it > over and contemplating revenge is also perizhivanie, and only a profound > analysis which includes ontogenetic development and not just learning will > show the inner link between them. It's for that reason that I think that > "activity" is not a useful unit of analysis and I am much more inclined to > use your word "project", so long as it can include what Vygotsky calls > "inner activeness". > > Vygotsky says: > > > ????? ? ?????????, ?????????? ? ?. ?., ? ???? ???? ? ?????????? > ???????????, ??? ?????????? ???????????? ??????????????? ????????? > ??????????????? ?? ??????? ? ??????? ?????????????. ??? ??? ????? ????? > ?????????? ?????????? ? ???????? ???????? ??????????? ? ???, ???, ? ?? > ????? ??? ? ?????????? ???????? ??? ?????????? ???????????? ???????????? > ???????????????? ????? ? ?????????, ??????? ???????????, ? ???????? > ???????? ?? ????? ???????????? ?????????????? ???????????, ???????????? > ??????????? ?????????? ?????????? ?? ????????? ? ??????? ????????????. ??? > ??? ???????, ??????? ????? ??????????, ? ?? ????? ????? ?? ?????? ??? ????? > ???-??????, ???, ? ???????? ????????? ?????????????? ??????? ? ?????????? > ????????????. > > When I think, remember, etc. I am dealing with inner activeness; this > psychological process of inner activity is not directly linked to any > external activity. The new form of inner activeness in the School Age > consists of this: that while during the preschool years these inner > activities demonstrated an immediate link with action, with external > activeness, in the school years we have a relative autonomy which emerges, > inner activeness which is relatively independent of external activities. > Here is already a child who can think, at the same time when he is doing or > seeing something, one in whom has emerged a differentiation of inner and > outer activities. > David Kellogg > Macquarie University > > > > On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 10:07 AM, Andy Blunden wrote: > > > David: "Are words really units?" > > > > Well, firstly, "units" is a *relative* term. That is, the question is: > are > > words units of something, some complex process subject to analysis. And > > which? > > > > Secondly, according to Vygotsky, "no." The concept Vygotsky proposes as a > > unit is "word meaning" which he says is a unity of sound and meaning. The > > sound is an artefact, which, detached from its meaningful utterance in a > > transactional context is just a thing, viz., a word. Whereas "word > meaning" > > is an arrtefact-mediated action, a unit of human social activity. > > > > It is true that words can be countable or mass according to context, but > I > > wasn't talking about words was I? I was talking about word meaning. > > > > Andy > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > Andy Blunden > > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > On 8/01/2017 7:59 AM, David Kellogg wrote: > > > >> Are words really units? When we look at their ideational meaning (that > is, > >> their logical and experiential content--their capacity for representing > >> and > >> linking together human experiences) they seem to fall into two very > >> different categories: lexical words like "perezhivanie" or "sense" or > >> "personality" of "individual" and grammatical words like "of", or > "might", > >> or "is". The lexical words seem to behave like units--they are bounded, > >> discrete, and, as Andy would say, "countable" (the problem is that > almost > >> all nouns are both countable and uncountable depending on the context > you > >> put them in, so this distinction is really not as essential as Andy > seems > >> to assume). But the more grammatical words seem to be elements of some > >> larger unit, which we can call wording. > >> > >> Veresov and Fleer come up against this problem with "edintsvo" and > >> "edintsa". Of course, as they say, the two words are distinct. But this > >> doesn't necessarily mean that the former always corresponds to "unity" > in > >> English and the latter is always "unit". If you look at the paragraph > they > >> translate on 330, you can see that Vygotsky starts with an idea that is > >> quite "synoptic" and is well expressed by "unit". But in the last > sentence > >> there is a sense that "perezhivanie" is a meta-stable unit--one that > >> remains self-similar only through a process of thorough change, like a > >> bicycle whose every part is replaced--and in English is it is better to > >> express this idea with "unity". The problem is that the differences > >> between > >> "edintsvo" and "edintsva" in Russian is a matter of gender (I think) and > >> not simply abstractness, and as a result the English version, which > cannot > >> use the resource of gender,has to rely on abstractness, so the words > >> "unity" and "unit" are somewhat more distinct and less linked than > >> "edintsvo" and "edintsva". > >> > >> There are other problems that are similar. When Gonzalez Rey uses the > word > >> "final moment" to refer to the final period of Vygotsky's thinking, he > >> leaves the anglophone reader the impression that he is referring to > >> Vygotsky's deathbed thoughts. On the other hand, when Veresov and Fleer > >> use > >> "factor" to translate the same Russian word that Gonzalez Rey is using, > >> they are giving us something more quantitative than Vygotsky intended, > and > >> their translation of "dalee nerazloshim'im chastyami etava edinstva" > >> into "vital and further indivisible part of the whole" is quite opaque > in > >> English (notice that here Veresov and Fleer use "whole" to translate > >> "edinstva" rather than "unit"!) At some point you have to accept that > you > >> can change Russian words into English words as if you were exchanging > >> rubles for dollars, but you still won't be able to buy a samovar at > >> Walmart. > >> > >> David Kellogg > >> Macquarie University > >> > >> > >> > >> On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 5:21 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > > >> wrote: > >> > >> Larry, all, > >>> > >>> our arguments in the 2014 address a science education literature in > which > >>> the constructivist perspective is the leading perspective; We note that > >>> the > >>> assertion that people learn from experience is everywhere taken for > >>> granted > >>> but nowhere accounted for. We resort to pragmatist and phenomenological > >>> literature along with Vygotsky's insights to point out the need to > >>> account > >>> for learning as something that cannot be the result of an individual's > >>> construction; in experience there is always something in excess of what > >>> you > >>> intended, and this is a basic feature of doing, of performing. I take > >>> that > >>> to be your "trans" in the trans/zhivanie word, Larry, which already is > >>> denoted in the word PERezhivanie. > >>> > >>> But I do not wish to move our discussion too far away from Marc's paper > >>> and the Perezhivanie special issue. We also risk disengaging many that > >>> have > >>> not have the privilege we've had to have the time to read so many > >>> articles > >>> in just few days into the new year. I think we are a point in the > >>> discussion where a pretty clear point of agreement/disagreement, and > >>> therefore of possibility for growth, has been reached with regard to > the > >>> view of perezhivanie as "an experience" and as the "working over it". I > >>> think that to allow as many as possible to follow, and hopefully also > >>> engage, I think it will be helpful to bring the diverse perspectives > and > >>> theoretical accounts to matter in accounting for some actual material. > >>> And > >>> there are a number of cases described in the articles, including Marc's > >>> case of a teacher, as well as everyday facts, such as those brought by > >>> Beth, and in Beth's article... > >>> > >>> I take the task for myself too, but Saturday morning need to attend to > >>> other things! > >>> A > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> ________________________________________ > >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >>> on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com > >>> Sent: 07 January 2017 18:26 > >>> To: Andy Blunden; Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; > >>> Larry Purss > >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > >>> > >>> Andy, Peter, i hope the intention to move beyond politeness to struggle > >>> with this topic materializes. > >>> In this vein i want to introduce exploration of the ?excess? of actual > >>> over intended meaning as he sketched his introduction to ?experience?. > >>> > >>> Citing Dewey, Alfredo says that this excess of actual learning over > >>> intended learning INCLUDES what Dewey refers to as ?attitudes? and > these > >>> ?attitudes? are FUNDAMENTALLY what count in the future. > >>> Alfredo and Roth then add this summary statement : > >>> > >>> There is therefore, a need to theorize experience in terms that do not > >>> assume control and rationality as the sine qua non of learning. It also > >>> implies a need to develop analytical accounts that retain the > >>> ?uncertainty? > >>> that is an ?integral part? of human experience. > >>> > >>> Where are Alfredo and Roth leading us with this sketch of experience? > To > >>> highlight ?attitudes? that occur in the excess of actual over intended > >>> learning? The word ?attitudes? generates images of (atmosphere) and > >>> (moods) > >>> that ?flow? like cascading waterfalls that can be imaged as (force) or > as > >>> (receptive). Attitudes that flow to places where they are received > >>> within a > >>> certain attitude of care and concern. Not as forceful an image as > moving > >>> only with control and rationality. Describing ?weaker? thought that > >>> remains uncertain but that also opens us to the other?s peril and > plight. > >>> Possibly a post-analytic motion that exceeds the intended by > >>> living-through > >>> the actual that develops ?attitudes? that are fundamentally what count > >>> for > >>> the future. > >>> > >>> > >>> Sent from my Windows 10 phone > >>> > >>> From: Andy Blunden > >>> Sent: January 7, 2017 5:00 AM > >>> To: Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > >>> > >>> OK Peter, what you say is all very true I am sure, but it > >>> entails conflating activity and action (as mass nouns) and > >>> context and mediation, and makes the required distinction > >>> much like one could find multiple meanings for the word > >>> "and" by listing the different phrases and clauses which can > >>> be linked by "and." > >>> > >>> Andy > >>> > >>> ------------------------------------------------------------ > >>> Andy Blunden > >>> http://home.mira.net/~andy > >>> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > >>> > >>> On 7/01/2017 11:42 PM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > >>> > >>>> Let me try to illustrate. > >>>> > >>>> Reading as mediated action: The cultural-historical > >>>> context of reading mediates how one?s attention and > >>>> response are channeled in socially constructed ways. So, > >>>> in one setting, say at home or reading in the company of > >>>> friends, a novel might bring a reader to tears, or invite > >>>> readers to share personal stories that parallel those of > >>>> the plot lines, or laugh out loud. But another setting, a > >>>> formal school or university class, would have historical > >>>> values and practices that mute emotional and personal > >>>> responses, and promote a more sober, analytic way of > >>>> reading and talking that fits with specific historical > >>>> critical conventions and genres, and discourages others. > >>>> > >>>> Reading as mediating action: The act of reading can be > >>>> transformational. In reading about an talking about a > >>>> character?s actions, a reader might reconsider a value > >>>> system, become more sympathetic to real people who > >>>> resemble oppressed characters, etc. In other words, > >>>> reading a text may serve a mediational process in which > >>>> textual ideas and exemplars enable a reader to think > >>>> differently. > >>>> > >>>> *From:*Andy Blunden [mailto:ablunden@mira.net] > >>>> *Sent:* Saturday, January 7, 2017 6:28 AM > >>>> *To:* Peter Smagorinsky ; eXtended Mind, > >>>> Culture, Activity > >>>> *Subject:* Re: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > >>>> > >>>> Can you explain in a paragraph or two,. Peter, rather than > >>>> asking us all to read 10,000 words to extract an answer? > >>>> > >>>> Andy > >>>> > >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ > >>>> > >>>> Andy Blunden > >>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy > >>>> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On 7/01/2017 11:23 PM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Andy and others, I tried to work out the mediated/mediating > >>>> question > >>>> > >>> in the area of reading....see if this helps. > >>> > >>>> Smagorinsky, P., & O'Donnell-Allen, C. (1998). Reading as > mediated > >>>> > >>> and mediating action: Composing meaning for literature through > multimedia > >>> interpretive texts. Reading Research Quarterly, 33, 198-226. Available > >>> athttp://www.petersmagorinsky.net/About/PDF/RRQ/RRQ1998.pdf > >>> > >>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>> > >>>> From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > >>>> [mailto: > xmca-l-bounces@ > >>>> > >>> mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden > >>> > >>>> Sent: Friday, January 6, 2017 7:12 PM > >>>> > >>>> To:xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu > >>>> > >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > >>>> > >>>> I have never understood this supposed distinction, Alfredo, > between > >>>> > >>> "mediated activity" and "mediating activity" given that all activity is > >>> mediated and all activity mediates. > >>> > >>>> Also, could you spell out what you mean by the "tension" > >>>> > >>>> between perezhivanie as meaning and perezhivanie as struggle. > >>>> > >>>> Andy > >>>> > >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ > >>>> > >>>> Andy Blunden > >>>> > >>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy > >>>> > >>>> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective- > >>>> > >>> decision-making > >>> > >>>> On 5/01/2017 6:26 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Thanks Marc for your careful response. > >>>> > >>>> I am familiar to Vygotsky's notion of cultural mediation and > I > >>>> > >>> am aware and acknowledge that it was elaborated as a means to overcome > >>> dualism, and that it is not analog to a computational approach. > >>> > >>>> When I brought the computing analogy, I did so with regard > not > >>>> > >>> to the concept of cultural mediation in general, but to the way it can > be > >>> (and is) deployed analytically. I react to what it seems to me a > >>> dichotomy > >>> between a "meaning" as something that is static (thereby a form of > >>> "representation" or reflection of the relation with the environment > >>> instead > >>> of?refraction)?? and the experiencing-as-struggling, which is > described > >>> as?transformation or change. If so, mediation here would seem to be > part > >>> of > >>> a methodological device that first dissects "a type of meaning" from "a > >>> type of activity" (or a given state from the process that changes that > >>> state), and then unites it by adding the term "mediation." And this may > >>> be > >>> my misreading, but in that (mis)reading (which perhaps is mostly due to > >>> the > >>> fact that in your empirical illustration only the initial and end > >>> product, > >>> i.e., perezhivanie, are described, but not the > experiencing-as-struggle, > >>> that is, the moving between the two), mediation here seems to do as > >>> analytical concept precisely what you were afraid our monism was doing: > >>> explaining nothing. Only the end products but not the process of > >>> producing > >>> perezhivanie are revealed. This may be problematic if one attends to > what > >>> Veresov argues in the paper I shared yesterday, where he defends the > >>> notion > >>> of mediation but also specifies that Vygotsky speaks of *mediating > >>> activity* (as opposed to *mediated* activity). That is, not mediation > by > >>> signs as products, but mediating activity as the activity of producing > >>> signs (which again is an activity of producing social relations, > perhaps > >>> what you refer as "holistic meanings"?). What do you think? > >>> > >>>> I did not think you were trying to deny the influence of > >>>> > >>> Spinoza, and I do not think we ever said that Perezhivanie was > primarily > >>> a > >>> move from Cartesian Dualism to Monism, as you suggest in your post. I > >>> copy > >>> and paste from my prior post: "The fact is that Vygotsky was building > a > >>> theory on the unity of the affect and the intellect that was to be > >>> grounded > >>> on Spinoza, and what we try to do is to explore how perezhivanie, as a > >>> concept being developed during the same period (but not finalised or > >>> totally settled!), could be seen from the perspective of the Spinozist > >>> Vygotsky." > >>> > >>>> I totally believe that bringing the distinction between > >>>> > >>> perezhivanie as meaning, and perezhivanie as struggle, is totally > >>> relevant, > >>> and Beth Ferholt's vignettes of Where the Wild Things Are do indeed > >>> illustrate this. We really need to address this tension, which as > Beth's > >>> examples and as our own everyday experience shows, is a tension that > >>> matters not just to books and to theories but to living persons > >>> (children, > >>> teachers), a tension that moreover is present and mentioned in all the > >>> articles of the symposium. The papers offer different proposals, and I > >>> think is so great we have the chance to discuss them! I too, as you, am > >>> very interesting in hearing others about the questions you had > concerning > >>> sense and meaning. > >>> > >>>> Alfredo > >>>> > >>>> From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> on behalf of Marc > >>>> > >>> Clar? > >>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Sent: 04 January 2017 22:31 > >>>> > >>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > >>>> > >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > >>>> > >>>> Thank you very much, Alfredo, for sharing this excellent > paper > >>>> by > >>>> > >>>> Veresov, and thanks also for your responses, which really > >>>> helped > >>>> > >>> me to > >>> > >>>> better understand your points. My main doubt about your > >>>> proposal > >>>> > >>>> was/is caused by the statement that the idea of cultural > >>>> > >>>> mediation/mediator implies a cartesian dualism. This shocks > me > >>>> > >>>> because, to me, the idea of cultural mediation is absolutely > >>>> > >>> crucial > >>> > >>>> (in fact, the keystone) for the construction of a monist (and > >>>> > >>>> scientific) psychology that does not forget mind ?that is, a > >>>> > >>> cultural > >>> > >>>> psychology. From your response, however, I realized that we > may > >>>> > >>> be > >>> > >>>> approaching the idea of mediation in different ways. I talk > of > >>>> > >>>> mediation and mediators in a quite restricted way. The > starting > >>>> > >>> point > >>> > >>>> of my understanding of mediation is a dialectical > relationship > >>>> > >>>> (organic, transactional) between the subject and the world > >>>> > >>> (Vygotsky departs from the scheme stimulus-response, from reflexology). > >>> > >>>> This relationship, that Vygotsky calls primitive > psychological > >>>> > >>>> functions, would be basically biological. However, in human > >>>> > >>> beings > >>> > >>>> this relationship is mediated by cultural means: signs and > >>>> > >>> tools; or > >>> > >>>> primary, secondary and terciary artifacts. These cultural > means > >>>> > >>>> reorganize the primitive functions (dialectic S-O > >>>> relationship), > >>>> > >>> which > >>> > >>>> become then higher psychological functions (S-M-O) (see for > >>>> > >>> example, > >>> > >>>> The problem of the cultural development of the child, in The > >>>> > >>> Vygotsky > >>> > >>>> Reader). Now, the subject, the cultural mediators, and the > >>>> > >>> object form > >>> > >>>> an inseparable dialectical unit, so that the subject acts on > >>>> > >>>> (transforms) the object through the prism of the cultural > >>>> > >>> mediators, > >>> > >>>> the object acts on (transforms) the subject also through the > >>>> > >>> prism of > >>> > >>>> the cultural mediators, and the cultural means are themselves > >>>> > >>> also > >>> > >>>> transformed as a consequence of their mediation in this > >>>> > >>> continuous > >>> > >>>> dynamic dialectical tension. Here, for me, it is important > the > >>>> > >>> idea > >>> > >>>> that the cultural means are as material (if we assume a > >>>> > >>> materialist > >>> > >>>> monism) as all the rest of the world; in fact, are parts of > the > >>>> > >>>> material world which become signs or tools (and can be > >>>> therefore > >>>> > >>>> socially distributed). This permits the introduction of the > >>>> > >>> scientific > >>> > >>>> study of mind-consciousness (as mediating systems of signs), > >>>> > >>> because > >>> > >>>> mind is not anymore something immaterial and unobservable, > but > >>>> > >>> it is > >>> > >>>> as material and observable as the rest of the natural world. > It > >>>> > >>> is > >>> > >>>> from this view that, for me, the idea of cultural mediation > is > >>>> > >>> the > >>> > >>>> keystone of a monist psychology that includes mind. Thus, > when > >>>> I > >>>> > >>> speak > >>> > >>>> of mediators, I refer to the cultural means which mediate in > >>>> the > >>>> > >>> S-O > >>> > >>>> dialectics; I am especially interested in signs/secondary > >>>> > >>> artifacts. > >>> > >>>> Here, it is perhaps necessary to insist that when I talk of > >>>> > >>> studying > >>> > >>>> mediators (and their semantic structure), this doesn't mean > >>>> that > >>>> > >>> they > >>> > >>>> are taken out from the activity (the flux of live) in which > >>>> they > >>>> > >>>> mediate (since out of activity they are not signs anymore); > >>>> > >>> here, I > >>> > >>>> think Vygotsky tries again to overcome another old dichotomy, > >>>> the > >>>> > >>>> functionalism-structuralism one. I hope that all this makes > >>>> also > >>>> > >>> clear the difference between this view and that of computational > >>> psychologies (which in general are profoundly and explicitly dualist > and > >>> not dialectic). > >>> > >>>> Back to perezhivanie, I'm not obviously trying to deny the > >>>> > >>> influence > >>> > >>>> of Spinoza on Vygotsky's thinking (this is explicit in > >>>> Vygotsky's > >>>> > >>>> writings, especially in ?The teaching about emotions?, in the > >>>> > >>> Vol.6 of > >>> > >>>> the Collected Works). But I have doubts that Vygotsky's > >>>> > >>> introduction > >>> > >>>> of the concept of perezhivanie is to be regarded primarily > as a > >>>> > >>>> movement towards monism (from a previous cartesian dualism), > >>>> and > >>>> > >>> that > >>> > >>>> this movement questions the concept of cultural mediation. > >>>> > >>> Instead, > >>> > >>>> and I think that this is in line with some of Gonz?lez-Rey > >>>> > >>>> observations in his paper, my impression is that the > >>>> > >>> introduction of > >>> > >>>> the concept of perezhivanie responds more to a movement (a > >>>> > >>> further > >>> > >>>> step) towards holism (something that, in my understanding, > can > >>>> > >>> also be > >>> > >>>> found in Spinoza). Thus, I think that the word meaning is > still > >>>> > >>> the > >>> > >>>> unit of analysis in the last Vygotsky -and therefore, the > idea > >>>> of > >>>> > >>>> cultural mediation is still crucial (in fact, in The problem > of > >>>> > >>> the > >>> > >>>> environment, he connects the concept of perezhivanie, which > has > >>>> > >>> just > >>> > >>>> introduced, to the development of word meaning [p.345-346, > also > >>>> > >>> cited > >>> > >>>> in my paper]). However, in my view, in the last Vygotsky the > >>>> > >>> focus is > >>> > >>>> not anymore primarily on the word-meaning as formed for > things > >>>> > >>> (or > >>> > >>>> collections of things, as in the ontogenetic research with > >>>> > >>> Sakharov), but the focus is now in the formation of meaning for > holistic > >>> situations. > >>> > >>>> Best regards, > >>>> > >>>> Marc. > >>>> > >>>> 2017-01-03 19:16 GMT+01:00 Alfredo Jornet Gil< > >>>> > >>> a.j.gil@iped.uio.no> : > >>> > >>>> Hi Marc, all, > >>>> > >>>> thanks for joining and for your interesting work, which I > >>>> > >>> follow > >>> > >>>> since I became aware of it. I appreciate the way in your > >>>> > >>> paper you > >>> > >>>> show careful and honest attention to the texts of the > >>>> authors > >>>> > >>>> involved, but perhaps most of all I appreciate that the > >>>> > >>> paper makes > >>> > >>>> the transformational dimension related to struggle and > >>>> change > >>>> > >>>> salient, a dimension all papers deemed central to > >>>> > >>> perezhivanie. And I > >>> > >>>> have learned more about Vasilyuk by reading your paper. > But > >>>> > >>> I also > >>> > >>>> see that we have approached the question of perezhivanie > >>>> > >>> differently > >>> > >>>> and I think that addressing the questions that you raise > >>>> > >>> concerning > >>> > >>>> our article may be a good way to both respond and discuss > >>>> > >>> your paper. > >>> > >>>> I am aware that our use of the term monism may be > >>>> > >>> problematic to > >>> > >>>> some, and N. Veresov, who has recently written about this > >>>> > >>> (see > >>> > >>>> attached article), warns against the dangers of simply > >>>> > >>> moving from > >>> > >>>> dualism into an undifferentiating monism that relativizes > >>>> > >>> everything, > >>> > >>>> making development un-studiable. This seems to be the way > >>>> in > >>>> > >>> which > >>> > >>>> you have understood our argument, and of course this is > not > >>>> > >>> what we are or want to be doing. > >>> > >>>> Probably many will think that *dialectical materialism* > >>>> > >>> rather than > >>> > >>>> monism is the proper term, and I could agree with them; > we > >>>> > >>> do in fact > >>> > >>>> use dialectical materialism there and elsewhere. Yet, we > >>>> > >>> wanted to > >>> > >>>> emphasise the Spinozist influence (an influence that also > >>>> > >>> runs > >>> > >>>> through Marx) and so we found it appropriate to use the > >>>> term > >>>> > >>> monism, > >>> > >>>> a term that Vygotsky uses before arguing that Spinoza > >>>> > >>> "develops an essentially materialistic view" > >>> > >>>> (Collected Works, Vol. 6, p. 124). For us, the aim is > >>>> > >>> working out > >>> > >>>> ways to empirically examine and formulate problems in > ways > >>>> > >>> that do > >>> > >>>> not reify a mind-body dualism. > >>>> > >>>> Although overcoming dualism is foundational to the CHAT > >>>> > >>> paradigm, I > >>> > >>>> would however not say that Vygotsky did get to solve all > of > >>>> > >>> the > >>> > >>>> problems that Cartesian dualism had created for > psychology, > >>>> > >>> even > >>> > >>>> though he recognised those problems brilliantly as early > as > >>>> > >>> in the > >>> > >>>> "Crisis". It should suffice to cite Vygotsky's own > remarks, > >>>> > >>> which we quote in the paper (and which A.N. > >>> > >>>> Leont'ev mentions in the introduction to the collected > >>>> > >>> works), where > >>> > >>>> Vygotsky explicitly critiques some of his own prior ideas > >>>> > >>> for failing > >>> > >>>> to overcome dualism. We agree with those who, like F. G. > >>>> > >>> Rey, see > >>> > >>>> Vygotsky's project as a developing rather than as a > >>>> > >>> finalised one. > >>> > >>>> The fact is that Vygotsky was building a theory on the > >>>> unity > >>>> > >>> of the > >>> > >>>> affect and the intellect that was to be grounded on > >>>> Spinoza, > >>>> > >>> and what > >>> > >>>> we try to do is to explore how perezhivanie, as a concept > >>>> > >>> being > >>> > >>>> developed during the same period (but not finalised or > >>>> > >>> totally > >>> > >>>> settled!), could be seen from the perspective of the > >>>> > >>> Spinozist Vygotsky. > >>> > >>>> As you note, in our article we argue that, if one takes > the > >>>> > >>> Spinozist > >>> > >>>> one-substance approach, classical concepts used in > >>>> > >>> non-classical > >>> > >>>> psychology, at least in the way they are commonly used in > >>>> > >>> the current > >>> > >>>> literature, should be revised. One such concept is > >>>> > >>> mediation. And I > >>> > >>>> personally do not have much of a problem when mediation > is > >>>> > >>> used to > >>> > >>>> denote the fundamental fact that every thing exists > always > >>>> > >>> through > >>> > >>>> *another*, never in and of itself. But I do think that it > >>>> is > >>>> > >>>> problematic to identify MEDIATORS, such as "a meaning", > as > >>>> a > >>>> > >>> means to > >>> > >>>> account for or explain developmental processes and > learning > >>>> > >>> events, > >>> > >>>> precisely because it is there, at least in my view, that > >>>> > >>> dualism creeps in. > >>> > >>>> For example, I find it paradoxical that you are concerned > >>>> > >>> that our > >>> > >>>> monist approach risks turning perezhivanie into a useless > >>>> > >>> category > >>> > >>>> because it may be used to explain everything and nothing, > >>>> > >>> and yet you > >>> > >>>> do not seem to have a problem using the term mediation to > >>>> > >>> account for > >>> > >>>> the transformation of perezhivanie without clearly > >>>> > >>> elaborating on how > >>> > >>>> mediation does change anything or what it looks like as a > >>>> > >>> real > >>> > >>>> process. How is it different saying that a perezhivanie > >>>> > >>> mediates the > >>> > >>>> experiencing-as-struggle from simply saying that it > >>>> > >>> "affects" or > >>> > >>>> "determines" it? Indeed, if perezhivanie mediates > >>>> > >>>> experiencing-as-struggle, does not > >>>> experiencing-as-struglgle > >>>> > >>> too > >>> > >>>> mediate perezhivanie? And do not both may be said to > >>>> mediate > >>>> > >>> development, or development mediate them? Is not this explaining > >>> everything > >>> and nothing? > >>> > >>>> I do believe you can argue that there is a difference > >>>> between > >>>> > >>>> mediation and classical psychology's cause-effect > >>>> relations, > >>>> > >>> but to > >>> > >>>> show this you need to dig into the dialectical > >>>> underpinnings > >>>> > >>> of the > >>> > >>>> theory. In your paper, you offer a nice analysis of a > >>>> lovely > >>>> > >>> case of > >>> > >>>> a teacher who, in dealing with a challenge with one of > her > >>>> > >>> students, > >>> > >>>> changes her perezhivanie. I think you can rightly argue > >>>> that > >>>> > >>> there is > >>> > >>>> a semiotic transformation, and I fully support your > >>>> > >>> statement that by > >>> > >>>> studying discourse we can empirically approach questions > of > >>>> > >>>> psychological development. The contradictions you show as > >>>> > >>> being > >>> > >>>> involved and resolved resonate really well with what I > >>>> > >>> experience as > >>> > >>>> a parent or as a teacher in the classroom. Yet, without > >>>> > >>> unpacking > >>> > >>>> what this "mediation" taking place between one > perezhivanie > >>>> > >>> and the > >>> > >>>> next one means as a concrete and real, the same analysis > >>>> > >>> could be done taking an information processing approach: > >>> > >>>> there is an situation that is processed (represented?) in > >>>> > >>> one way, > >>> > >>>> which then leads to a (cognitive) dissonance, and then > >>>> there > >>>> > >>> is a > >>> > >>>> cognitive resolution by means of which the situation is > >>>> > >>> presented > >>> > >>>> differently in consciousness (indeed, when seen in this > >>>> way, > >>>> > >>> the term > >>> > >>>> perezhivanie and the term "representation" become almost > >>>> > >>>> indistinguishable). How is mediation, as an analytical > >>>> > >>> concept, > >>> > >>>> helping here? And most importantly to the question of > >>>> > >>> perezhivanie, > >>> > >>>> how is this analysis going to show the internal > connection > >>>> > >>> between > >>> > >>>> intellect and affect that Vygotsky formulates as > >>>> > >>> constitutive of the notion of perezhivanie? > >>> > >>>> I believe that the key lies in understanding what > Vygotsky > >>>> > >>> means when > >>> > >>>> he says that perezhivanie is a unit of analysis. I will > not > >>>> > >>> repeat > >>> > >>>> here what already is written in at least a couple of the > >>>> > >>> articles in > >>> > >>>> the special issue (Blunden, ours), that is the difference > >>>> > >>> between > >>> > >>>> analysis by elements and unit analysis (Vygotsky 1987). A > >>>> > >>> unit > >>> > >>>> analysis approach is consistent with Spinoza, for whom > >>>> > >>> cause-effect > >>> > >>>> explanations were not adequate, requiring instead an > >>>> > >>> understanding of > >>> > >>>> self-development, perezhivanie as a kernel cell for the > >>>> > >>> development > >>> > >>>> of personality. And I think you may be after this in your > >>>> > >>> article in > >>> > >>>> suggesting a form of continuous movement from > perezhivanie > >>>> to > >>>> > >>>> experiencing-as-struggle. But perhaps the major > difficulty > >>>> I > >>>> > >>> find is that, in positing Vygotsky's perezhivanie as "a type of > meaning" > >>> > >>>> and Vasilyuk's perezhivanie (or experiencing-as-struggle) > >>>> as > >>>> > >>> a "type > >>> > >>>> of activity," it is difficult not to see here a division > >>>> > >>> between > >>> > >>>> product and process, a division that then is analytically > >>>> > >>> bridged by > >>> > >>>> the addition of a third term, mediation, that should > bring > >>>> > >>> back the > >>> > >>>> real movement between the product and the process. > >>>> > >>>> A different approach involves considering the concrete > >>>> > >>> extension of > >>> > >>>> actual living and lived social relations, and look at > them > >>>> as > >>>> > >>>> generative phenomena. What is there in the encounter > >>>> between > >>>> > >>> Carla > >>> > >>>> and the child that leads to change? For it is not inside > >>>> the > >>>> > >>> mind, > >>> > >>>> but in real life, in consciousness as the real relation > >>>> > >>> between people, that Carla is changed. > >>> > >>>> How is the semantic structure that you nicely present and > >>>> > >>> attribute > >>> > >>>> to Carla a product of the social relation between her and > >>>> > >>> the child? > >>> > >>>> I think that to rightfully situate perezhivanie as a > >>>> concept > >>>> > >>> in a > >>> > >>>> Vygotskian framework, we ought to address its relation to > >>>> > >>> the genetic > >>> > >>>> law of development. > >>>> > >>>> There is much more to disentangle, but this is long > enough. > >>>> > >>> I hope I > >>> > >>>> have succeeded in making clear these ideas. Thanks so > much > >>>> > >>> for > >>> > >>>> engaging in the discussion! > >>>> > >>>> Alfredo > >>>> > >>>> ________________________________________ > >>>> > >>>> From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> on behalf of > >>>> Marc > >>>> > >>> Clar? > >>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Sent: 02 January 2017 22:14 > >>>> > >>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > >>>> > >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > >>>> > >>>> Hi, all, and thank you so much, Alfredo, for your kind > >>>> > >>> invitation to > >>> > >>>> participate in this discussion. My paper in the MCA > special > >>>> > >>> issue > >>> > >>>> focuses on a distinction between a type of activity, > which > >>>> I > >>>> > >>> argue > >>> > >>>> that is what Vasilyuk called *perezhivanie* > (experiencing) > >>>> > >>> and a type > >>> > >>>> of semiotic mediator, which I argue that is what > Vygotsky, > >>>> > >>> in The > >>> > >>>> Problem of the Environment, called *perezhivanie.* I > argue, > >>>> > >>> following > >>> > >>>> Vasilyuk, that in experiencing activities (Vasilyuk's > >>>> > >>> perezhivanie), > >>> > >>>> this type of mediator is profoundly transformed ? in > fact, > >>>> > >>> that > >>> > >>>> experiencing activities consist of the semiotic > >>>> > >>> transformation of this type of mediator. > >>> > >>>> As Veresov and Fleer argue in their commentary, > >>>> perezhivanie > >>>> > >>> (as a > >>> > >>>> type of > >>>> > >>>> mediator) is for me a psychological phenomenon, one which > >>>> is > >>>> > >>> of > >>> > >>>> course conceptualized from a specific theoretical > >>>> framework. > >>>> > >>> But the > >>> > >>>> phenomenon is also visible from other theoretical > >>>> frameworks > >>>> > >>> as well, > >>> > >>>> as I mention in the paper. This phenomenon is my main > >>>> > >>> interest, and > >>> > >>>> it is from this interest that I arrived at the concept of > >>>> > >>> perezhivanie (not the other way around). > >>> > >>>> Now, the phenomenon is that at least emotion, reasoning, > >>>> and > >>>> > >>> volition > >>> > >>>> (formation of conscious purposes) seem to be decisively > >>>> > >>> mediated by > >>> > >>>> holistic situational meaning. My current research concern > >>>> is > >>>> > >>> trying > >>> > >>>> to find ways to study and understand how this mediation > >>>> > >>> occurs and > >>> > >>>> how these semiotic mediators are transformed and > >>>> > >>> distributed. From > >>> > >>>> this view, I think that experiencing activities > (Vasilyuk's > >>>> > >>>> perezhivanie) may provide a good terrain to study these > >>>> > >>> issues > >>> > >>>> (especially regarding the mediation of emotion), as I > tried > >>>> > >>> to exemplify in the paper. > >>> > >>>> Studying semiotic mediation, however, is of course not > >>>> easy. > >>>> > >>>> Following Vygotsky, I assume that extended discourse is > the > >>>> > >>>> manifestation of thinking within certain psychological > >>>> > >>> conditions > >>> > >>>> (Vygotsky's Thinking and Speech, chapter 7), and I also > >>>> > >>> assume the > >>> > >>>> Vygotsky's law of the unity of the structure and function > >>>> of > >>>> > >>> thinking > >>> > >>>> (Vygotsky's Thinking and Speech, chapter 6). From these > two > >>>> > >>>> assumptions, I propose that meaning (and its functions in > >>>> > >>> human > >>> > >>>> activity) can be scientifically studied by structurally > >>>> > >>> analyzing the > >>> > >>>> narratives generated by subjects, considering that the > >>>> > >>> discourse > >>> > >>>> produced in the narrative is the point of departure of > this > >>>> > >>> study, > >>> > >>>> but that considerable analytical work must be done to > move > >>>> > >>> from this > >>> > >>>> discourse to the full characterization of meaning. It is > in > >>>> > >>> that > >>> > >>>> point where I find useful the work developed by Greimas, > >>>> the > >>>> > >>> usefulness of which I only suggest in the paper. > >>> > >>>> >From this background, I found many interesting ideas and > >>>> > >>> questions > >>> > >>>> in the > >>>> > >>>> other papers of the special issue. In this first post I > >>>> will > >>>> > >>> propose > >>> > >>>> two of them for possible discussion. The first one was > >>>> > >>> raised by > >>> > >>>> Gonz?lez-Rey, when he introduces, in connection with > >>>> > >>> perezhivanie, > >>> > >>>> the concepts of personality, and especially, of sense. > So, > >>>> > >>> which is > >>> > >>>> the conceptual (and-or > >>>> > >>>> phenomenal) relation between perezhivanie and sense? > >>>> > >>> Gonz?lez-Rey > >>> > >>>> suggests that both concepts are somewhat similar (and > >>>> > >>> overcome by the > >>> > >>>> concept of ?subjective sense?); my opinion, partly > >>>> expressed > >>>> > >>> in my > >>> > >>>> commentary, is that perezhivanie is a type of meaning, > >>>> which > >>>> > >>> includes > >>> > >>>> different levels of depth, and that sense corresponds to > >>>> the > >>>> > >>> deepest > >>> > >>>> level of meaning (which can be characterized as a system > of > >>>> > >>> semic > >>> > >>>> oppositions). Therefore, sense wouldn't be in opposition > to > >>>> > >>> meaning > >>> > >>>> (as ?a microcosm of human consciousness?, as Kozulin > >>>> > >>> remembers in his > >>> > >>>> commentary), although it would be in opposition to > >>>> > >>> manifested meaning (the surface level of meaning). > >>> > >>>> The second issue was raised by Roth and Jornet, and I > think > >>>> > >>> it goes > >>> > >>>> beyond the issue of perezhivanie itself. If I understand > >>>> > >>> them well, > >>> > >>>> they argue that Vygotsky's core proposal of cultural > >>>> > >>> mediation is > >>> > >>>> influenced by the Cartesian dualism (mind-matter), and > >>>> that a > >>>> > >>>> promising approach to Cultural Psychology would be a > >>>> > >>> Spinozist > >>> > >>>> monism. I am actually very interested on the issue of > which > >>>> > >>>> epistemological position can best substantiate the > >>>> > >>> construction of a > >>> > >>>> cultural psychology, and that's why I feel inclined to > take > >>>> > >>> the > >>> > >>>> opportunity to ask for your opinions about that. About > the > >>>> > >>> proposal > >>> > >>>> of Roth and Jornet, I have some doubts. First, I don't > see > >>>> > >>> why > >>> > >>>> Vygotsky's proposals can be seen as dualist (in the > >>>> > >>> Cartesian sense) > >>> > >>>> -I suspect that it is because of the analytical > >>>> > >>> distinctions?. > >>> > >>>> Anyway, in my understanding, Vygotsky explicitly assumes > a > >>>> > >>>> materialist monism (for example in The Crisis), and in > fact > >>>> > >>> he constructs his proposal on mediation upon reflexology, which also > >>> explicitly assumed a materialist monism (e.g. > >>> > >>>> Sechenov). Would a Spinozist monism be a better point of > >>>> > >>> departure? I > >>> > >>>> don't know, in my understanding it is a more idealist > >>>> > >>> monism, and I > >>> > >>>> don't clearly see what could be gained. In my opinion, a > >>>> > >>> scientific > >>> > >>>> psychology which includes the study of mind is only > >>>> possible > >>>> > >>> if any > >>> > >>>> type of monism is assumed. However, in my view, for a > >>>> > >>> scientific > >>> > >>>> psychology, the ontological nature of the world is > perhaps > >>>> > >>> less > >>> > >>>> important (it is an issue for metaphysics?), and I am > >>>> > >>> inclined to assume a neutral monism (e.g. Russell). > >>> > >>>> So from this view, a materialist monism and a Spinozist > >>>> > >>> monism > >>> > >>>> wouldn't be so different, so from both views it could be > >>>> > >>> assumed that > >>> > >>>> all is of the same nature and all is similarly knowable > >>>> > >>> (including > >>> > >>>> mind) [which is the ontological nature of the world and > to > >>>> > >>> what > >>> > >>>> degree it is knowable are issues that can be left to > >>>> > >>> philosophy]. > >>> > >>>> However, in my opinion, this does not mean that, while > >>>> > >>> assuming a > >>> > >>>> monism, analytical distinctions cannot be done when > >>>> studying > >>>> > >>> the > >>> > >>>> world. In that sense, I had the impression that Roth and > >>>> > >>> Jornet > >>> > >>>> tended to dilute analytical distinctions in the name of > >>>> > >>> monism; I > >>> > >>>> repeat that I don't know if I understood them well, but > if > >>>> > >>> this was > >>> > >>>> the case, in my opinion, analysis would be impossible > >>>> within > >>>> > >>> the new > >>> > >>>> psychology suggested by Roth and Jornet, and, regarding > >>>> > >>> perezhivanie, > >>> > >>>> there would be the danger, noted by Vygotsky in The > Crisis > >>>> > >>> and > >>> > >>>> cautioned by Kozulin in his commentary, that by meaning > >>>> > >>> everything, perezhivanie ends by meaning nothing. > >>> > >>>> Best regards and happy new year, > >>>> > >>>> Marc. > >>>> > >>>> 2017-01-02 9:12 GMT+01:00 Alfredo Jornet Gil< > >>>> > >>> a.j.gil@iped.uio.no> : > >>> > >>>> Dear all, > >>>> > >>>> I would like to join David, Luisa, Ana, Henry and the > >>>> > >>> others to wish > >>> > >>>> you all a Happy New Year! May it be full of joy, > peace, > >>>> > >>> and opportunity. > >>> > >>>> I also would like to begin the year announcing our > >>>> first > >>>> > >>> ?MCA > >>> > >>>> article discussion, ?although in fact corresponds to > >>>> the > >>>> > >>> last issue > >>> > >>>> of the year > >>>> > >>>> we > >>>> > >>>> just passed, Issue 4 on Perezhivanie. This is a very > >>>> > >>> special > >>> > >>>> *special* issue, not only because its topic has > raised > >>>> > >>> lots of > >>> > >>>> interest lately in > >>>> > >>>> the > >>>> > >>>> CHAT community but also because, greatly coordinated > by > >>>> > >>> Andy Blunden > >>> > >>>> and the rest of the editorial team, the issue takes > the > >>>> > >>> form of a > >>> > >>>> symposium where authors get the chance to present and > >>>> > >>> respond to > >>> > >>>> each others' ideas on the subject. In my view, this > >>>> > >>> allows having a > >>> > >>>> rich and > >>>> > >>>> multidimensional > >>>> > >>>> approach to a subject as important as perezhivanie. > >>>> > >>>> Following with the dialogical spirit in which the > >>>> > >>> special issue was > >>> > >>>> assembled, we will focus on one lead article, but > >>>> hoping > >>>> > >>> to also > >>> > >>>> engage ideas and insights present in or relevant to > >>>> other > >>>> > >>>> contributions in the issue. ?Marc Clar?'s "Vygotsky > and > >>>> > >>> Vasilyuk on > >>> > >>>> Perezhivanie: Two Notions and One Word" will be our > >>>> > >>> focus. The > >>> > >>>> article very nicely engages the lead work of > Vygotsky, > >>>> > >>> but also the > >>> > >>>> less known ??(?in educational literature) but totally > >>>> > >>> relevant works > >>> > >>>> of psychologist ?F. Vasilyuk and semiotician > >>>> > >>>> A. > >>>> > >>>> J. Greimas, mobilising a number of key concepts > >>>> > >>> including those of > >>> > >>>> semiotic > >>>> > >>>> mediation and transformation. > >>>> > >>>> ?In addition to Marc, who will soon join us, I have > >>>> > >>> encouraged some > >>> > >>>> of > >>>> > >>>> the > >>>> > >>>> other authors in the special issue to also join as > >>>> > >>> "relevant > >>> > >>>> others," if time and circumstances allow them. Let's > >>>> > >>> hope that this > >>> > >>>> will help keeping the symposium spirit up. > >>>> > >>>> Marc's article is attached to this e-mail and will be > >>>> > >>> made open > >>> > >>>> access at the T&F pages as soon as people is back > from > >>>> > >>> the holidays. > >>> > >>>> The T&F link > >>>> > >>>> is > >>>> > >>>> this: > >>>> > >>>> http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039 > . > >>>> > >>> 2016.1186194 > >>> > >>>> The link to the MCA Forum pages, where we announce > our > >>>> > >>> discussions > >>> > >>>> and other xmca things, is here: > >>>> http://lchc.ucsd.edu/MCA/ > >>>> > >>>> I wish us all a very productive and interesting > >>>> > >>> discussion. > >>> > >>>> Alfredo > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >> > > > From dkellogg60@gmail.com Tue Jan 10 19:29:12 2017 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2017 14:29:12 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! In-Reply-To: References: <1483344752182.40904@iped.uio.no> <1483467423798.57819@iped.uio.no> <1483601196884.31418@iped.uio.no> <5df5e870-3ef8-70d6-0c17-f8647ba17e62@mira.net> <587124d9.d957620a.4a5a8.bd56@mx.google.com> <1483820996800.91513@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: Tenaciously, Mike. The word "endowment" is a metaphor for something given, like the endowment of a university, or the patrimony of an investment fund. The child's biological endowment is given to the child by heredity and speech doesn't change that endowment. The most important part of the child's social endowment is, as Bronfenbrenner points out, largely unseen by the child: it's what Mommy and Daddy do for a living. That is not changed by the child's learning speech either. Vygotsky's a semiotician: not an environmentalist and he's also not a constructivist. The semiotic truth isn't in the middle; it's simultaneously beyond both extremes. It's beyond environmentalism because what the child obtains from the social and cultural environment is a semiotic and not simply an interpersonal one; it's the context of culture and the resources of the language system and not simply the immediate text and the immediate situation. It's beyond constructivism, because what the child construes in building up a grammar is not simply the meanings but the meaning potentials; not just seen paths for the taking but also the unseen ones not taken. That's why even the most social-behavioristic psychologists can underestimate the influence of the environment and even the most "childist" constructivists can understate the creativity involved; why people like Chomsky end up invoking biology and conversely people like Skinner end up invoking culture and environment to make up the deficit. Both assume that language has to be literally "acquired" or "built up" and cannot see a way to do this with finite materials. But the resources are not material at all; they are semiotic, and "construction", like "endowment," is simply a metaphor we use to lend the weightlessness of word meaning a little mass. David Kellogg Macquarie University On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 1:01 PM, mike cole wrote: > You believe the following, David? > > Neither the biological nor the social endowment > of the child greatly changes in the acquisition of speech; > nevertheless,..... > > mike > > On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 3:24 PM, David Kellogg > wrote: > > > Andy: > > > > A good paradox! Word meaning is a unit, but the spoken word itself is > just > > an element--a thing. We can see that this is, on the face of it, > > impossible: within a single holistic analysis, an element can be a part > of > > a unit, but a unit can never be a part of an element. So what you are > > referring to when you say that the word is a thing is the "sonic" or > > "phasal" quality of the word: its "acoustic" properties, its "phonetics". > > > > But not its phonology. The word that Vygotsky uses for "phoneme" refers > to > > the 1929 work of the Prague Circle, originally the Moscow Circle. He is a > > LITTLE coy about this, because the founders, Jakobson and Trubetskoy, > were > > not very popular with the authorities and Vygotsky already had plenty of > > heterodox acquaintances to worry about. Nevertheless, whenever Vygotsky > > says "phoneme", we know he really means what Jakobson and Trubetskoy > called > > "morphophonemes". We know this because the examples he actually > > gives--Russian case endings--are morpho-phonemes and not simply phonemes: > > so for example in English the sound /s/ is a simple phoneme when I say > the > > word "self" but if I say "Andy's" the sound /s/ is a morpho-phoneme: a > > difference in sounding that makes a difference in meaning. The system > (that > > is, the paradigmatic menu) of these differences in soundings are what the > > Moscow and Prague Circles called "phonology" (as OPPOSED to phonetics), > and > > this is the kind of "phoneme" that Vygotsky is really talking about. > > > > Still, you can see that it is not what he is talking about when he says > > word meaning, because these units are still nowhere near big enough to > > describe the kinds of changes which must occur when verbal thinking > > develops. I feel the same way about a lot of the examples offered of > > "perezhivanie", including Marc's. If MacDuff's grief or Carla's epiphany > > about the misbehavior of her kids being due to "outside influences" > really > > is the unit of personality and experience that Vygotsky wants us to use > > when we analyse the ontogenesis of personality, then it is no more > > appropriate than using the morpho-phoneme to analyse the whole of verbal > > thinking. Just as evolution (of species) requires very different units > from > > history (of classes), development, whether we are talking about verbal > > thinking or the personality as a whole, is going to require very > different > > units from learning, whether we are talking about MacDuff or Carla. The > > units must be able to develop; that is, the relationship of the elements > > within them must be susceptible to many changes over time. > > > > Let me give three examples of how this happens in different > "perezhivanie". > > They are not mine; they are Vygotsky's, and they are all from the > > Pedological Lectures. > > > > First, the Crisis at One. Neither the biological nor the social endowment > > of the child greatly changes in the acquisition of speech; nevertheless, > > the relationship between the personality and the environment, of which > > both personality moments and environmental ones are constituent elements, > > is entirely transformed. Here we are not talking about phonemes, or even > > morpho-phonemes: we are talking about "wordings"--whole utterances. In > > Melbourne I presented some data that demonstrated this beautifully--a > > child's first word is actually an attempt to imitate a whole > conversation. > > > > Second, the Crisis at Three. Vygotsky spends a lot of time discussing the > > "Seven Stars"--the symptoms of the "Terrible Twos" and "Threenagehood" > > noted by harried parents everywhere. But by the end of his analysis it's > > clear that what really happens is a new relationship between wish and > > will: in extreme cases, the child actually wishes for one thing (e.g. > > compromise) and wills the opposite (the everlasting "No!"). Again, > neither > > the personality moments as such nor the environmental ones change, but > > there is a separation and a sorting which allows the subordination of > wish > > to will that we see in play. This isn't the kind of "aha" moment that > Marc > > is offering us at all: Vygotsky actually calls it the "antipode" of > future > > will, because instead of enabling will it actually paralyzes it. But it > is > > indubitably a key moment in the development of the relation of > personality > > to environmental moments that we see in "perizhivanie". > > > > Thirdly, the Crisis at Seven. I think Gonzalez Rey makes a total hash of > > this, and I get very cross when I read his article. It is not true that > the > > essence of perizhivanie remained a mystery to Vygotsky simply because he > no > > longer subscribes to "the aesthetic reaction" and "catharsis" and other > > notions that he toyed with in Psych of Art (he's no longer doing > > experiments on changes in breathing rate when people read the works of > > Bunin either!). It might be true that he never offered a system of facts > > and methodological procedures for perezivanie, but that was only because > > one already existed, for example in the work of Wallon and Stern > > and others. It is demonstrably not true that when Vygotsky says that the > > speech environment of those around him does not change when the child > > learns to talk at one, he is not "profoundly contradictory with the > concept > > of sense": when you read the quotation in context, it is very clear that > > what he is referring to are the kinds of absolute indicators used by > > Zalkind: how often the parents read the newspapers, the dialect they > speak, > > and their educational background. These do not change, and if the child > > wants to make sense, these are the factors the child will have to relate > > to. > > > > Vygotsky gives the example of a child who is severely retarded. The child > > wants to play with other children and is rejected. The child walks down > the > > street and the other children follow, laughing. The child is shrieked at, > > insulted, but as soon as the humiliation stops, the child is perfectly > > happy with himself. Vygotsky points out that the child is not able > > to "co-generalize" the "perizhivanie" of the humiliations: each is > > unpleasant, but they are entirely separate and cannot be connected with > any > > internal sense of inferiority. A normal child, however, is able to > > "internalize" these humiliations and consequently develops a sense of > > inferiority. We can see that what has happened is the insertion of what > > Vygotsky calls an "intellectual" moment: an inner layer, which is what > > distinguishes later Chaplin movies from earlier ones (again, Vygotsky's > > example, not mine!) and what brings about the "loss of directness and > > naivete" that we see in pre-schoolers. > > > > I think that the reason people find "perizhivanie" so hard to work with > is > > the same reason that they find "word meaning" hard to work with: it > > develops. The feeling of drinking milk as the infant drinks it is > > perizhivanie, and the thought of being humiliated when you are mulling it > > over and contemplating revenge is also perizhivanie, and only a profound > > analysis which includes ontogenetic development and not just learning > will > > show the inner link between them. It's for that reason that I think that > > "activity" is not a useful unit of analysis and I am much more inclined > to > > use your word "project", so long as it can include what Vygotsky calls > > "inner activeness". > > > > Vygotsky says: > > > > > > ????? ? ?????????, ?????????? ? ?. ?., ? ???? ???? ? ?????????? > > ???????????, ??? ?????????? ???????????? ??????????????? ????????? > > ??????????????? ?? ??????? ? ??????? ?????????????. ??? ??? ????? ????? > > ?????????? ?????????? ? ???????? ???????? ??????????? ? ???, ???, ? ?? > > ????? ??? ? ?????????? ???????? ??? ?????????? ???????????? ???????????? > > ???????????????? ????? ? ?????????, ??????? ???????????, ? ???????? > > ???????? ?? ????? ???????????? ?????????????? ???????????, ???????????? > > ??????????? ?????????? ?????????? ?? ????????? ? ??????? ????????????. > ??? > > ??? ???????, ??????? ????? ??????????, ? ?? ????? ????? ?? ?????? ??? > ????? > > ???-??????, ???, ? ???????? ????????? ?????????????? ??????? ? ?????????? > > ????????????. > > > > When I think, remember, etc. I am dealing with inner activeness; this > > psychological process of inner activity is not directly linked to any > > external activity. The new form of inner activeness in the School Age > > consists of this: that while during the preschool years these inner > > activities demonstrated an immediate link with action, with external > > activeness, in the school years we have a relative autonomy which > emerges, > > inner activeness which is relatively independent of external activities. > > Here is already a child who can think, at the same time when he is doing > or > > seeing something, one in whom has emerged a differentiation of inner and > > outer activities. > > David Kellogg > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 10:07 AM, Andy Blunden wrote: > > > > > David: "Are words really units?" > > > > > > Well, firstly, "units" is a *relative* term. That is, the question is: > > are > > > words units of something, some complex process subject to analysis. And > > > which? > > > > > > Secondly, according to Vygotsky, "no." The concept Vygotsky proposes > as a > > > unit is "word meaning" which he says is a unity of sound and meaning. > The > > > sound is an artefact, which, detached from its meaningful utterance in > a > > > transactional context is just a thing, viz., a word. Whereas "word > > meaning" > > > is an arrtefact-mediated action, a unit of human social activity. > > > > > > It is true that words can be countable or mass according to context, > but > > I > > > wasn't talking about words was I? I was talking about word meaning. > > > > > > Andy > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > Andy Blunden > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > > On 8/01/2017 7:59 AM, David Kellogg wrote: > > > > > >> Are words really units? When we look at their ideational meaning (that > > is, > > >> their logical and experiential content--their capacity for > representing > > >> and > > >> linking together human experiences) they seem to fall into two very > > >> different categories: lexical words like "perezhivanie" or "sense" or > > >> "personality" of "individual" and grammatical words like "of", or > > "might", > > >> or "is". The lexical words seem to behave like units--they are > bounded, > > >> discrete, and, as Andy would say, "countable" (the problem is that > > almost > > >> all nouns are both countable and uncountable depending on the context > > you > > >> put them in, so this distinction is really not as essential as Andy > > seems > > >> to assume). But the more grammatical words seem to be elements of some > > >> larger unit, which we can call wording. > > >> > > >> Veresov and Fleer come up against this problem with "edintsvo" and > > >> "edintsa". Of course, as they say, the two words are distinct. But > this > > >> doesn't necessarily mean that the former always corresponds to "unity" > > in > > >> English and the latter is always "unit". If you look at the paragraph > > they > > >> translate on 330, you can see that Vygotsky starts with an idea that > is > > >> quite "synoptic" and is well expressed by "unit". But in the last > > sentence > > >> there is a sense that "perezhivanie" is a meta-stable unit--one that > > >> remains self-similar only through a process of thorough change, like a > > >> bicycle whose every part is replaced--and in English is it is better > to > > >> express this idea with "unity". The problem is that the differences > > >> between > > >> "edintsvo" and "edintsva" in Russian is a matter of gender (I think) > and > > >> not simply abstractness, and as a result the English version, which > > cannot > > >> use the resource of gender,has to rely on abstractness, so the words > > >> "unity" and "unit" are somewhat more distinct and less linked than > > >> "edintsvo" and "edintsva". > > >> > > >> There are other problems that are similar. When Gonzalez Rey uses the > > word > > >> "final moment" to refer to the final period of Vygotsky's thinking, he > > >> leaves the anglophone reader the impression that he is referring to > > >> Vygotsky's deathbed thoughts. On the other hand, when Veresov and > Fleer > > >> use > > >> "factor" to translate the same Russian word that Gonzalez Rey is > using, > > >> they are giving us something more quantitative than Vygotsky intended, > > and > > >> their translation of "dalee nerazloshim'im chastyami etava edinstva" > > >> into "vital and further indivisible part of the whole" is quite > opaque > > in > > >> English (notice that here Veresov and Fleer use "whole" to translate > > >> "edinstva" rather than "unit"!) At some point you have to accept that > > you > > >> can change Russian words into English words as if you were exchanging > > >> rubles for dollars, but you still won't be able to buy a samovar at > > >> Walmart. > > >> > > >> David Kellogg > > >> Macquarie University > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 5:21 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil < > a.j.gil@iped.uio.no > > > > > >> wrote: > > >> > > >> Larry, all, > > >>> > > >>> our arguments in the 2014 address a science education literature in > > which > > >>> the constructivist perspective is the leading perspective; We note > that > > >>> the > > >>> assertion that people learn from experience is everywhere taken for > > >>> granted > > >>> but nowhere accounted for. We resort to pragmatist and > phenomenological > > >>> literature along with Vygotsky's insights to point out the need to > > >>> account > > >>> for learning as something that cannot be the result of an > individual's > > >>> construction; in experience there is always something in excess of > what > > >>> you > > >>> intended, and this is a basic feature of doing, of performing. I take > > >>> that > > >>> to be your "trans" in the trans/zhivanie word, Larry, which already > is > > >>> denoted in the word PERezhivanie. > > >>> > > >>> But I do not wish to move our discussion too far away from Marc's > paper > > >>> and the Perezhivanie special issue. We also risk disengaging many > that > > >>> have > > >>> not have the privilege we've had to have the time to read so many > > >>> articles > > >>> in just few days into the new year. I think we are a point in the > > >>> discussion where a pretty clear point of agreement/disagreement, and > > >>> therefore of possibility for growth, has been reached with regard to > > the > > >>> view of perezhivanie as "an experience" and as the "working over > it". I > > >>> think that to allow as many as possible to follow, and hopefully also > > >>> engage, I think it will be helpful to bring the diverse perspectives > > and > > >>> theoretical accounts to matter in accounting for some actual > material. > > >>> And > > >>> there are a number of cases described in the articles, including > Marc's > > >>> case of a teacher, as well as everyday facts, such as those brought > by > > >>> Beth, and in Beth's article... > > >>> > > >>> I take the task for myself too, but Saturday morning need to attend > to > > >>> other things! > > >>> A > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> ________________________________________ > > >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu edu > > > > > >>> on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com > > >>> Sent: 07 January 2017 18:26 > > >>> To: Andy Blunden; Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, > Activity; > > >>> Larry Purss > > >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > >>> > > >>> Andy, Peter, i hope the intention to move beyond politeness to > struggle > > >>> with this topic materializes. > > >>> In this vein i want to introduce exploration of the ?excess? of > actual > > >>> over intended meaning as he sketched his introduction to > ?experience?. > > >>> > > >>> Citing Dewey, Alfredo says that this excess of actual learning over > > >>> intended learning INCLUDES what Dewey refers to as ?attitudes? and > > these > > >>> ?attitudes? are FUNDAMENTALLY what count in the future. > > >>> Alfredo and Roth then add this summary statement : > > >>> > > >>> There is therefore, a need to theorize experience in terms that do > not > > >>> assume control and rationality as the sine qua non of learning. It > also > > >>> implies a need to develop analytical accounts that retain the > > >>> ?uncertainty? > > >>> that is an ?integral part? of human experience. > > >>> > > >>> Where are Alfredo and Roth leading us with this sketch of experience? > > To > > >>> highlight ?attitudes? that occur in the excess of actual over > intended > > >>> learning? The word ?attitudes? generates images of (atmosphere) and > > >>> (moods) > > >>> that ?flow? like cascading waterfalls that can be imaged as (force) > or > > as > > >>> (receptive). Attitudes that flow to places where they are received > > >>> within a > > >>> certain attitude of care and concern. Not as forceful an image as > > moving > > >>> only with control and rationality. Describing ?weaker? thought that > > >>> remains uncertain but that also opens us to the other?s peril and > > plight. > > >>> Possibly a post-analytic motion that exceeds the intended by > > >>> living-through > > >>> the actual that develops ?attitudes? that are fundamentally what > count > > >>> for > > >>> the future. > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > >>> > > >>> From: Andy Blunden > > >>> Sent: January 7, 2017 5:00 AM > > >>> To: Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > >>> > > >>> OK Peter, what you say is all very true I am sure, but it > > >>> entails conflating activity and action (as mass nouns) and > > >>> context and mediation, and makes the required distinction > > >>> much like one could find multiple meanings for the word > > >>> "and" by listing the different phrases and clauses which can > > >>> be linked by "and." > > >>> > > >>> Andy > > >>> > > >>> ------------------------------------------------------------ > > >>> Andy Blunden > > >>> http://home.mira.net/~andy > > >>> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective- > decision-making > > >>> > > >>> On 7/01/2017 11:42 PM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > > >>> > > >>>> Let me try to illustrate. > > >>>> > > >>>> Reading as mediated action: The cultural-historical > > >>>> context of reading mediates how one?s attention and > > >>>> response are channeled in socially constructed ways. So, > > >>>> in one setting, say at home or reading in the company of > > >>>> friends, a novel might bring a reader to tears, or invite > > >>>> readers to share personal stories that parallel those of > > >>>> the plot lines, or laugh out loud. But another setting, a > > >>>> formal school or university class, would have historical > > >>>> values and practices that mute emotional and personal > > >>>> responses, and promote a more sober, analytic way of > > >>>> reading and talking that fits with specific historical > > >>>> critical conventions and genres, and discourages others. > > >>>> > > >>>> Reading as mediating action: The act of reading can be > > >>>> transformational. In reading about an talking about a > > >>>> character?s actions, a reader might reconsider a value > > >>>> system, become more sympathetic to real people who > > >>>> resemble oppressed characters, etc. In other words, > > >>>> reading a text may serve a mediational process in which > > >>>> textual ideas and exemplars enable a reader to think > > >>>> differently. > > >>>> > > >>>> *From:*Andy Blunden [mailto:ablunden@mira.net] > > >>>> *Sent:* Saturday, January 7, 2017 6:28 AM > > >>>> *To:* Peter Smagorinsky ; eXtended Mind, > > >>>> Culture, Activity > > >>>> *Subject:* Re: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > >>>> > > >>>> Can you explain in a paragraph or two,. Peter, rather than > > >>>> asking us all to read 10,000 words to extract an answer? > > >>>> > > >>>> Andy > > >>>> > > >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ > > >>>> > > >>>> Andy Blunden > > >>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy > > >>>> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective- > decision-making > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> On 7/01/2017 11:23 PM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>> Andy and others, I tried to work out the mediated/mediating > > >>>> question > > >>>> > > >>> in the area of reading....see if this helps. > > >>> > > >>>> Smagorinsky, P., & O'Donnell-Allen, C. (1998). Reading as > > mediated > > >>>> > > >>> and mediating action: Composing meaning for literature through > > multimedia > > >>> interpretive texts. Reading Research Quarterly, 33, 198-226. > Available > > >>> athttp://www.petersmagorinsky.net/About/PDF/RRQ/RRQ1998.pdf > > >>> > > >>>> -----Original Message----- > > >>>> > > >>>> From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >>>> [mailto: > > xmca-l-bounces@ > > >>>> > > >>> mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden > > >>> > > >>>> Sent: Friday, January 6, 2017 7:12 PM > > >>>> > > >>>> To:xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >>>> > > >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > >>>> > > >>>> I have never understood this supposed distinction, Alfredo, > > between > > >>>> > > >>> "mediated activity" and "mediating activity" given that all activity > is > > >>> mediated and all activity mediates. > > >>> > > >>>> Also, could you spell out what you mean by the "tension" > > >>>> > > >>>> between perezhivanie as meaning and perezhivanie as struggle. > > >>>> > > >>>> Andy > > >>>> > > >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ > > >>>> > > >>>> Andy Blunden > > >>>> > > >>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy > > >>>> > > >>>> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective- > > >>>> > > >>> decision-making > > >>> > > >>>> On 5/01/2017 6:26 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>> Thanks Marc for your careful response. > > >>>> > > >>>> I am familiar to Vygotsky's notion of cultural mediation > and > > I > > >>>> > > >>> am aware and acknowledge that it was elaborated as a means to > overcome > > >>> dualism, and that it is not analog to a computational approach. > > >>> > > >>>> When I brought the computing analogy, I did so with regard > > not > > >>>> > > >>> to the concept of cultural mediation in general, but to the way it > can > > be > > >>> (and is) deployed analytically. I react to what it seems to me a > > >>> dichotomy > > >>> between a "meaning" as something that is static (thereby a form of > > >>> "representation" or reflection of the relation with the environment > > >>> instead > > >>> of?refraction)?? and the experiencing-as-struggling, which is > > described > > >>> as?transformation or change. If so, mediation here would seem to be > > part > > >>> of > > >>> a methodological device that first dissects "a type of meaning" from > "a > > >>> type of activity" (or a given state from the process that changes > that > > >>> state), and then unites it by adding the term "mediation." And this > may > > >>> be > > >>> my misreading, but in that (mis)reading (which perhaps is mostly due > to > > >>> the > > >>> fact that in your empirical illustration only the initial and end > > >>> product, > > >>> i.e., perezhivanie, are described, but not the > > experiencing-as-struggle, > > >>> that is, the moving between the two), mediation here seems to do as > > >>> analytical concept precisely what you were afraid our monism was > doing: > > >>> explaining nothing. Only the end products but not the process of > > >>> producing > > >>> perezhivanie are revealed. This may be problematic if one attends to > > what > > >>> Veresov argues in the paper I shared yesterday, where he defends the > > >>> notion > > >>> of mediation but also specifies that Vygotsky speaks of *mediating > > >>> activity* (as opposed to *mediated* activity). That is, not mediation > > by > > >>> signs as products, but mediating activity as the activity of > producing > > >>> signs (which again is an activity of producing social relations, > > perhaps > > >>> what you refer as "holistic meanings"?). What do you think? > > >>> > > >>>> I did not think you were trying to deny the influence of > > >>>> > > >>> Spinoza, and I do not think we ever said that Perezhivanie was > > primarily > > >>> a > > >>> move from Cartesian Dualism to Monism, as you suggest in your post. I > > >>> copy > > >>> and paste from my prior post: "The fact is that Vygotsky was > building > > a > > >>> theory on the unity of the affect and the intellect that was to be > > >>> grounded > > >>> on Spinoza, and what we try to do is to explore how perezhivanie, as > a > > >>> concept being developed during the same period (but not finalised or > > >>> totally settled!), could be seen from the perspective of the > Spinozist > > >>> Vygotsky." > > >>> > > >>>> I totally believe that bringing the distinction between > > >>>> > > >>> perezhivanie as meaning, and perezhivanie as struggle, is totally > > >>> relevant, > > >>> and Beth Ferholt's vignettes of Where the Wild Things Are do indeed > > >>> illustrate this. We really need to address this tension, which as > > Beth's > > >>> examples and as our own everyday experience shows, is a tension that > > >>> matters not just to books and to theories but to living persons > > >>> (children, > > >>> teachers), a tension that moreover is present and mentioned in all > the > > >>> articles of the symposium. The papers offer different proposals, and > I > > >>> think is so great we have the chance to discuss them! I too, as you, > am > > >>> very interesting in hearing others about the questions you had > > concerning > > >>> sense and meaning. > > >>> > > >>>> Alfredo > > >>>> > > >>>> From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> on behalf of > Marc > > >>>> > > >>> Clar? > > >>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> Sent: 04 January 2017 22:31 > > >>>> > > >>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > >>>> > > >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > >>>> > > >>>> Thank you very much, Alfredo, for sharing this excellent > > paper > > >>>> by > > >>>> > > >>>> Veresov, and thanks also for your responses, which really > > >>>> helped > > >>>> > > >>> me to > > >>> > > >>>> better understand your points. My main doubt about your > > >>>> proposal > > >>>> > > >>>> was/is caused by the statement that the idea of cultural > > >>>> > > >>>> mediation/mediator implies a cartesian dualism. This shocks > > me > > >>>> > > >>>> because, to me, the idea of cultural mediation is > absolutely > > >>>> > > >>> crucial > > >>> > > >>>> (in fact, the keystone) for the construction of a monist > (and > > >>>> > > >>>> scientific) psychology that does not forget mind ?that is, > a > > >>>> > > >>> cultural > > >>> > > >>>> psychology. From your response, however, I realized that we > > may > > >>>> > > >>> be > > >>> > > >>>> approaching the idea of mediation in different ways. I talk > > of > > >>>> > > >>>> mediation and mediators in a quite restricted way. The > > starting > > >>>> > > >>> point > > >>> > > >>>> of my understanding of mediation is a dialectical > > relationship > > >>>> > > >>>> (organic, transactional) between the subject and the world > > >>>> > > >>> (Vygotsky departs from the scheme stimulus-response, from > reflexology). > > >>> > > >>>> This relationship, that Vygotsky calls primitive > > psychological > > >>>> > > >>>> functions, would be basically biological. However, in human > > >>>> > > >>> beings > > >>> > > >>>> this relationship is mediated by cultural means: signs and > > >>>> > > >>> tools; or > > >>> > > >>>> primary, secondary and terciary artifacts. These cultural > > means > > >>>> > > >>>> reorganize the primitive functions (dialectic S-O > > >>>> relationship), > > >>>> > > >>> which > > >>> > > >>>> become then higher psychological functions (S-M-O) (see for > > >>>> > > >>> example, > > >>> > > >>>> The problem of the cultural development of the child, in > The > > >>>> > > >>> Vygotsky > > >>> > > >>>> Reader). Now, the subject, the cultural mediators, and the > > >>>> > > >>> object form > > >>> > > >>>> an inseparable dialectical unit, so that the subject acts > on > > >>>> > > >>>> (transforms) the object through the prism of the cultural > > >>>> > > >>> mediators, > > >>> > > >>>> the object acts on (transforms) the subject also through > the > > >>>> > > >>> prism of > > >>> > > >>>> the cultural mediators, and the cultural means are > themselves > > >>>> > > >>> also > > >>> > > >>>> transformed as a consequence of their mediation in this > > >>>> > > >>> continuous > > >>> > > >>>> dynamic dialectical tension. Here, for me, it is important > > the > > >>>> > > >>> idea > > >>> > > >>>> that the cultural means are as material (if we assume a > > >>>> > > >>> materialist > > >>> > > >>>> monism) as all the rest of the world; in fact, are parts of > > the > > >>>> > > >>>> material world which become signs or tools (and can be > > >>>> therefore > > >>>> > > >>>> socially distributed). This permits the introduction of the > > >>>> > > >>> scientific > > >>> > > >>>> study of mind-consciousness (as mediating systems of > signs), > > >>>> > > >>> because > > >>> > > >>>> mind is not anymore something immaterial and unobservable, > > but > > >>>> > > >>> it is > > >>> > > >>>> as material and observable as the rest of the natural > world. > > It > > >>>> > > >>> is > > >>> > > >>>> from this view that, for me, the idea of cultural mediation > > is > > >>>> > > >>> the > > >>> > > >>>> keystone of a monist psychology that includes mind. Thus, > > when > > >>>> I > > >>>> > > >>> speak > > >>> > > >>>> of mediators, I refer to the cultural means which mediate > in > > >>>> the > > >>>> > > >>> S-O > > >>> > > >>>> dialectics; I am especially interested in signs/secondary > > >>>> > > >>> artifacts. > > >>> > > >>>> Here, it is perhaps necessary to insist that when I talk of > > >>>> > > >>> studying > > >>> > > >>>> mediators (and their semantic structure), this doesn't mean > > >>>> that > > >>>> > > >>> they > > >>> > > >>>> are taken out from the activity (the flux of live) in which > > >>>> they > > >>>> > > >>>> mediate (since out of activity they are not signs anymore); > > >>>> > > >>> here, I > > >>> > > >>>> think Vygotsky tries again to overcome another old > dichotomy, > > >>>> the > > >>>> > > >>>> functionalism-structuralism one. I hope that all this makes > > >>>> also > > >>>> > > >>> clear the difference between this view and that of computational > > >>> psychologies (which in general are profoundly and explicitly dualist > > and > > >>> not dialectic). > > >>> > > >>>> Back to perezhivanie, I'm not obviously trying to deny the > > >>>> > > >>> influence > > >>> > > >>>> of Spinoza on Vygotsky's thinking (this is explicit in > > >>>> Vygotsky's > > >>>> > > >>>> writings, especially in ?The teaching about emotions?, in > the > > >>>> > > >>> Vol.6 of > > >>> > > >>>> the Collected Works). But I have doubts that Vygotsky's > > >>>> > > >>> introduction > > >>> > > >>>> of the concept of perezhivanie is to be regarded primarily > > as a > > >>>> > > >>>> movement towards monism (from a previous cartesian > dualism), > > >>>> and > > >>>> > > >>> that > > >>> > > >>>> this movement questions the concept of cultural mediation. > > >>>> > > >>> Instead, > > >>> > > >>>> and I think that this is in line with some of Gonz?lez-Rey > > >>>> > > >>>> observations in his paper, my impression is that the > > >>>> > > >>> introduction of > > >>> > > >>>> the concept of perezhivanie responds more to a movement (a > > >>>> > > >>> further > > >>> > > >>>> step) towards holism (something that, in my understanding, > > can > > >>>> > > >>> also be > > >>> > > >>>> found in Spinoza). Thus, I think that the word meaning is > > still > > >>>> > > >>> the > > >>> > > >>>> unit of analysis in the last Vygotsky -and therefore, the > > idea > > >>>> of > > >>>> > > >>>> cultural mediation is still crucial (in fact, in The > problem > > of > > >>>> > > >>> the > > >>> > > >>>> environment, he connects the concept of perezhivanie, which > > has > > >>>> > > >>> just > > >>> > > >>>> introduced, to the development of word meaning [p.345-346, > > also > > >>>> > > >>> cited > > >>> > > >>>> in my paper]). However, in my view, in the last Vygotsky > the > > >>>> > > >>> focus is > > >>> > > >>>> not anymore primarily on the word-meaning as formed for > > things > > >>>> > > >>> (or > > >>> > > >>>> collections of things, as in the ontogenetic research with > > >>>> > > >>> Sakharov), but the focus is now in the formation of meaning for > > holistic > > >>> situations. > > >>> > > >>>> Best regards, > > >>>> > > >>>> Marc. > > >>>> > > >>>> 2017-01-03 19:16 GMT+01:00 Alfredo Jornet Gil< > > >>>> > > >>> a.j.gil@iped.uio.no> : > > >>> > > >>>> Hi Marc, all, > > >>>> > > >>>> thanks for joining and for your interesting work, > which I > > >>>> > > >>> follow > > >>> > > >>>> since I became aware of it. I appreciate the way in > your > > >>>> > > >>> paper you > > >>> > > >>>> show careful and honest attention to the texts of the > > >>>> authors > > >>>> > > >>>> involved, but perhaps most of all I appreciate that the > > >>>> > > >>> paper makes > > >>> > > >>>> the transformational dimension related to struggle and > > >>>> change > > >>>> > > >>>> salient, a dimension all papers deemed central to > > >>>> > > >>> perezhivanie. And I > > >>> > > >>>> have learned more about Vasilyuk by reading your paper. > > But > > >>>> > > >>> I also > > >>> > > >>>> see that we have approached the question of > perezhivanie > > >>>> > > >>> differently > > >>> > > >>>> and I think that addressing the questions that you > raise > > >>>> > > >>> concerning > > >>> > > >>>> our article may be a good way to both respond and > discuss > > >>>> > > >>> your paper. > > >>> > > >>>> I am aware that our use of the term monism may be > > >>>> > > >>> problematic to > > >>> > > >>>> some, and N. Veresov, who has recently written about > this > > >>>> > > >>> (see > > >>> > > >>>> attached article), warns against the dangers of simply > > >>>> > > >>> moving from > > >>> > > >>>> dualism into an undifferentiating monism that > relativizes > > >>>> > > >>> everything, > > >>> > > >>>> making development un-studiable. This seems to be the > way > > >>>> in > > >>>> > > >>> which > > >>> > > >>>> you have understood our argument, and of course this is > > not > > >>>> > > >>> what we are or want to be doing. > > >>> > > >>>> Probably many will think that *dialectical materialism* > > >>>> > > >>> rather than > > >>> > > >>>> monism is the proper term, and I could agree with them; > > we > > >>>> > > >>> do in fact > > >>> > > >>>> use dialectical materialism there and elsewhere. Yet, > we > > >>>> > > >>> wanted to > > >>> > > >>>> emphasise the Spinozist influence (an influence that > also > > >>>> > > >>> runs > > >>> > > >>>> through Marx) and so we found it appropriate to use the > > >>>> term > > >>>> > > >>> monism, > > >>> > > >>>> a term that Vygotsky uses before arguing that Spinoza > > >>>> > > >>> "develops an essentially materialistic view" > > >>> > > >>>> (Collected Works, Vol. 6, p. 124). For us, the aim is > > >>>> > > >>> working out > > >>> > > >>>> ways to empirically examine and formulate problems in > > ways > > >>>> > > >>> that do > > >>> > > >>>> not reify a mind-body dualism. > > >>>> > > >>>> Although overcoming dualism is foundational to the CHAT > > >>>> > > >>> paradigm, I > > >>> > > >>>> would however not say that Vygotsky did get to solve > all > > of > > >>>> > > >>> the > > >>> > > >>>> problems that Cartesian dualism had created for > > psychology, > > >>>> > > >>> even > > >>> > > >>>> though he recognised those problems brilliantly as > early > > as > > >>>> > > >>> in the > > >>> > > >>>> "Crisis". It should suffice to cite Vygotsky's own > > remarks, > > >>>> > > >>> which we quote in the paper (and which A.N. > > >>> > > >>>> Leont'ev mentions in the introduction to the collected > > >>>> > > >>> works), where > > >>> > > >>>> Vygotsky explicitly critiques some of his own prior > ideas > > >>>> > > >>> for failing > > >>> > > >>>> to overcome dualism. We agree with those who, like F. > G. > > >>>> > > >>> Rey, see > > >>> > > >>>> Vygotsky's project as a developing rather than as a > > >>>> > > >>> finalised one. > > >>> > > >>>> The fact is that Vygotsky was building a theory on the > > >>>> unity > > >>>> > > >>> of the > > >>> > > >>>> affect and the intellect that was to be grounded on > > >>>> Spinoza, > > >>>> > > >>> and what > > >>> > > >>>> we try to do is to explore how perezhivanie, as a > concept > > >>>> > > >>> being > > >>> > > >>>> developed during the same period (but not finalised or > > >>>> > > >>> totally > > >>> > > >>>> settled!), could be seen from the perspective of the > > >>>> > > >>> Spinozist Vygotsky. > > >>> > > >>>> As you note, in our article we argue that, if one takes > > the > > >>>> > > >>> Spinozist > > >>> > > >>>> one-substance approach, classical concepts used in > > >>>> > > >>> non-classical > > >>> > > >>>> psychology, at least in the way they are commonly used > in > > >>>> > > >>> the current > > >>> > > >>>> literature, should be revised. One such concept is > > >>>> > > >>> mediation. And I > > >>> > > >>>> personally do not have much of a problem when mediation > > is > > >>>> > > >>> used to > > >>> > > >>>> denote the fundamental fact that every thing exists > > always > > >>>> > > >>> through > > >>> > > >>>> *another*, never in and of itself. But I do think that > it > > >>>> is > > >>>> > > >>>> problematic to identify MEDIATORS, such as "a meaning", > > as > > >>>> a > > >>>> > > >>> means to > > >>> > > >>>> account for or explain developmental processes and > > learning > > >>>> > > >>> events, > > >>> > > >>>> precisely because it is there, at least in my view, > that > > >>>> > > >>> dualism creeps in. > > >>> > > >>>> For example, I find it paradoxical that you are > concerned > > >>>> > > >>> that our > > >>> > > >>>> monist approach risks turning perezhivanie into a > useless > > >>>> > > >>> category > > >>> > > >>>> because it may be used to explain everything and > nothing, > > >>>> > > >>> and yet you > > >>> > > >>>> do not seem to have a problem using the term mediation > to > > >>>> > > >>> account for > > >>> > > >>>> the transformation of perezhivanie without clearly > > >>>> > > >>> elaborating on how > > >>> > > >>>> mediation does change anything or what it looks like > as a > > >>>> > > >>> real > > >>> > > >>>> process. How is it different saying that a perezhivanie > > >>>> > > >>> mediates the > > >>> > > >>>> experiencing-as-struggle from simply saying that it > > >>>> > > >>> "affects" or > > >>> > > >>>> "determines" it? Indeed, if perezhivanie mediates > > >>>> > > >>>> experiencing-as-struggle, does not > > >>>> experiencing-as-struglgle > > >>>> > > >>> too > > >>> > > >>>> mediate perezhivanie? And do not both may be said to > > >>>> mediate > > >>>> > > >>> development, or development mediate them? Is not this explaining > > >>> everything > > >>> and nothing? > > >>> > > >>>> I do believe you can argue that there is a difference > > >>>> between > > >>>> > > >>>> mediation and classical psychology's cause-effect > > >>>> relations, > > >>>> > > >>> but to > > >>> > > >>>> show this you need to dig into the dialectical > > >>>> underpinnings > > >>>> > > >>> of the > > >>> > > >>>> theory. In your paper, you offer a nice analysis of a > > >>>> lovely > > >>>> > > >>> case of > > >>> > > >>>> a teacher who, in dealing with a challenge with one of > > her > > >>>> > > >>> students, > > >>> > > >>>> changes her perezhivanie. I think you can rightly argue > > >>>> that > > >>>> > > >>> there is > > >>> > > >>>> a semiotic transformation, and I fully support your > > >>>> > > >>> statement that by > > >>> > > >>>> studying discourse we can empirically approach > questions > > of > > >>>> > > >>>> psychological development. The contradictions you show > as > > >>>> > > >>> being > > >>> > > >>>> involved and resolved resonate really well with what I > > >>>> > > >>> experience as > > >>> > > >>>> a parent or as a teacher in the classroom. Yet, without > > >>>> > > >>> unpacking > > >>> > > >>>> what this "mediation" taking place between one > > perezhivanie > > >>>> > > >>> and the > > >>> > > >>>> next one means as a concrete and real, the same > analysis > > >>>> > > >>> could be done taking an information processing approach: > > >>> > > >>>> there is an situation that is processed (represented?) > in > > >>>> > > >>> one way, > > >>> > > >>>> which then leads to a (cognitive) dissonance, and then > > >>>> there > > >>>> > > >>> is a > > >>> > > >>>> cognitive resolution by means of which the situation is > > >>>> > > >>> presented > > >>> > > >>>> differently in consciousness (indeed, when seen in this > > >>>> way, > > >>>> > > >>> the term > > >>> > > >>>> perezhivanie and the term "representation" become > almost > > >>>> > > >>>> indistinguishable). How is mediation, as an analytical > > >>>> > > >>> concept, > > >>> > > >>>> helping here? And most importantly to the question of > > >>>> > > >>> perezhivanie, > > >>> > > >>>> how is this analysis going to show the internal > > connection > > >>>> > > >>> between > > >>> > > >>>> intellect and affect that Vygotsky formulates as > > >>>> > > >>> constitutive of the notion of perezhivanie? > > >>> > > >>>> I believe that the key lies in understanding what > > Vygotsky > > >>>> > > >>> means when > > >>> > > >>>> he says that perezhivanie is a unit of analysis. I will > > not > > >>>> > > >>> repeat > > >>> > > >>>> here what already is written in at least a couple of > the > > >>>> > > >>> articles in > > >>> > > >>>> the special issue (Blunden, ours), that is the > difference > > >>>> > > >>> between > > >>> > > >>>> analysis by elements and unit analysis (Vygotsky > 1987). A > > >>>> > > >>> unit > > >>> > > >>>> analysis approach is consistent with Spinoza, for whom > > >>>> > > >>> cause-effect > > >>> > > >>>> explanations were not adequate, requiring instead an > > >>>> > > >>> understanding of > > >>> > > >>>> self-development, perezhivanie as a kernel cell for the > > >>>> > > >>> development > > >>> > > >>>> of personality. And I think you may be after this in > your > > >>>> > > >>> article in > > >>> > > >>>> suggesting a form of continuous movement from > > perezhivanie > > >>>> to > > >>>> > > >>>> experiencing-as-struggle. But perhaps the major > > difficulty > > >>>> I > > >>>> > > >>> find is that, in positing Vygotsky's perezhivanie as "a type of > > meaning" > > >>> > > >>>> and Vasilyuk's perezhivanie (or > experiencing-as-struggle) > > >>>> as > > >>>> > > >>> a "type > > >>> > > >>>> of activity," it is difficult not to see here a > division > > >>>> > > >>> between > > >>> > > >>>> product and process, a division that then is > analytically > > >>>> > > >>> bridged by > > >>> > > >>>> the addition of a third term, mediation, that should > > bring > > >>>> > > >>> back the > > >>> > > >>>> real movement between the product and the process. > > >>>> > > >>>> A different approach involves considering the concrete > > >>>> > > >>> extension of > > >>> > > >>>> actual living and lived social relations, and look at > > them > > >>>> as > > >>>> > > >>>> generative phenomena. What is there in the encounter > > >>>> between > > >>>> > > >>> Carla > > >>> > > >>>> and the child that leads to change? For it is not > inside > > >>>> the > > >>>> > > >>> mind, > > >>> > > >>>> but in real life, in consciousness as the real relation > > >>>> > > >>> between people, that Carla is changed. > > >>> > > >>>> How is the semantic structure that you nicely present > and > > >>>> > > >>> attribute > > >>> > > >>>> to Carla a product of the social relation between her > and > > >>>> > > >>> the child? > > >>> > > >>>> I think that to rightfully situate perezhivanie as a > > >>>> concept > > >>>> > > >>> in a > > >>> > > >>>> Vygotskian framework, we ought to address its relation > to > > >>>> > > >>> the genetic > > >>> > > >>>> law of development. > > >>>> > > >>>> There is much more to disentangle, but this is long > > enough. > > >>>> > > >>> I hope I > > >>> > > >>>> have succeeded in making clear these ideas. Thanks so > > much > > >>>> > > >>> for > > >>> > > >>>> engaging in the discussion! > > >>>> > > >>>> Alfredo > > >>>> > > >>>> ________________________________________ > > >>>> > > >>>> From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> on behalf of > > >>>> Marc > > >>>> > > >>> Clar? > > >>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> Sent: 02 January 2017 22:14 > > >>>> > > >>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > >>>> > > >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > >>>> > > >>>> Hi, all, and thank you so much, Alfredo, for your kind > > >>>> > > >>> invitation to > > >>> > > >>>> participate in this discussion. My paper in the MCA > > special > > >>>> > > >>> issue > > >>> > > >>>> focuses on a distinction between a type of activity, > > which > > >>>> I > > >>>> > > >>> argue > > >>> > > >>>> that is what Vasilyuk called *perezhivanie* > > (experiencing) > > >>>> > > >>> and a type > > >>> > > >>>> of semiotic mediator, which I argue that is what > > Vygotsky, > > >>>> > > >>> in The > > >>> > > >>>> Problem of the Environment, called *perezhivanie.* I > > argue, > > >>>> > > >>> following > > >>> > > >>>> Vasilyuk, that in experiencing activities (Vasilyuk's > > >>>> > > >>> perezhivanie), > > >>> > > >>>> this type of mediator is profoundly transformed ? in > > fact, > > >>>> > > >>> that > > >>> > > >>>> experiencing activities consist of the semiotic > > >>>> > > >>> transformation of this type of mediator. > > >>> > > >>>> As Veresov and Fleer argue in their commentary, > > >>>> perezhivanie > > >>>> > > >>> (as a > > >>> > > >>>> type of > > >>>> > > >>>> mediator) is for me a psychological phenomenon, one > which > > >>>> is > > >>>> > > >>> of > > >>> > > >>>> course conceptualized from a specific theoretical > > >>>> framework. > > >>>> > > >>> But the > > >>> > > >>>> phenomenon is also visible from other theoretical > > >>>> frameworks > > >>>> > > >>> as well, > > >>> > > >>>> as I mention in the paper. This phenomenon is my main > > >>>> > > >>> interest, and > > >>> > > >>>> it is from this interest that I arrived at the concept > of > > >>>> > > >>> perezhivanie (not the other way around). > > >>> > > >>>> Now, the phenomenon is that at least emotion, > reasoning, > > >>>> and > > >>>> > > >>> volition > > >>> > > >>>> (formation of conscious purposes) seem to be decisively > > >>>> > > >>> mediated by > > >>> > > >>>> holistic situational meaning. My current research > concern > > >>>> is > > >>>> > > >>> trying > > >>> > > >>>> to find ways to study and understand how this mediation > > >>>> > > >>> occurs and > > >>> > > >>>> how these semiotic mediators are transformed and > > >>>> > > >>> distributed. From > > >>> > > >>>> this view, I think that experiencing activities > > (Vasilyuk's > > >>>> > > >>>> perezhivanie) may provide a good terrain to study these > > >>>> > > >>> issues > > >>> > > >>>> (especially regarding the mediation of emotion), as I > > tried > > >>>> > > >>> to exemplify in the paper. > > >>> > > >>>> Studying semiotic mediation, however, is of course not > > >>>> easy. > > >>>> > > >>>> Following Vygotsky, I assume that extended discourse is > > the > > >>>> > > >>>> manifestation of thinking within certain psychological > > >>>> > > >>> conditions > > >>> > > >>>> (Vygotsky's Thinking and Speech, chapter 7), and I also > > >>>> > > >>> assume the > > >>> > > >>>> Vygotsky's law of the unity of the structure and > function > > >>>> of > > >>>> > > >>> thinking > > >>> > > >>>> (Vygotsky's Thinking and Speech, chapter 6). From these > > two > > >>>> > > >>>> assumptions, I propose that meaning (and its functions > in > > >>>> > > >>> human > > >>> > > >>>> activity) can be scientifically studied by structurally > > >>>> > > >>> analyzing the > > >>> > > >>>> narratives generated by subjects, considering that the > > >>>> > > >>> discourse > > >>> > > >>>> produced in the narrative is the point of departure of > > this > > >>>> > > >>> study, > > >>> > > >>>> but that considerable analytical work must be done to > > move > > >>>> > > >>> from this > > >>> > > >>>> discourse to the full characterization of meaning. It > is > > in > > >>>> > > >>> that > > >>> > > >>>> point where I find useful the work developed by > Greimas, > > >>>> the > > >>>> > > >>> usefulness of which I only suggest in the paper. > > >>> > > >>>> >From this background, I found many interesting ideas > and > > >>>> > > >>> questions > > >>> > > >>>> in the > > >>>> > > >>>> other papers of the special issue. In this first post I > > >>>> will > > >>>> > > >>> propose > > >>> > > >>>> two of them for possible discussion. The first one was > > >>>> > > >>> raised by > > >>> > > >>>> Gonz?lez-Rey, when he introduces, in connection with > > >>>> > > >>> perezhivanie, > > >>> > > >>>> the concepts of personality, and especially, of sense. > > So, > > >>>> > > >>> which is > > >>> > > >>>> the conceptual (and-or > > >>>> > > >>>> phenomenal) relation between perezhivanie and sense? > > >>>> > > >>> Gonz?lez-Rey > > >>> > > >>>> suggests that both concepts are somewhat similar (and > > >>>> > > >>> overcome by the > > >>> > > >>>> concept of ?subjective sense?); my opinion, partly > > >>>> expressed > > >>>> > > >>> in my > > >>> > > >>>> commentary, is that perezhivanie is a type of meaning, > > >>>> which > > >>>> > > >>> includes > > >>> > > >>>> different levels of depth, and that sense corresponds > to > > >>>> the > > >>>> > > >>> deepest > > >>> > > >>>> level of meaning (which can be characterized as a > system > > of > > >>>> > > >>> semic > > >>> > > >>>> oppositions). Therefore, sense wouldn't be in > opposition > > to > > >>>> > > >>> meaning > > >>> > > >>>> (as ?a microcosm of human consciousness?, as Kozulin > > >>>> > > >>> remembers in his > > >>> > > >>>> commentary), although it would be in opposition to > > >>>> > > >>> manifested meaning (the surface level of meaning). > > >>> > > >>>> The second issue was raised by Roth and Jornet, and I > > think > > >>>> > > >>> it goes > > >>> > > >>>> beyond the issue of perezhivanie itself. If I > understand > > >>>> > > >>> them well, > > >>> > > >>>> they argue that Vygotsky's core proposal of cultural > > >>>> > > >>> mediation is > > >>> > > >>>> influenced by the Cartesian dualism (mind-matter), and > > >>>> that a > > >>>> > > >>>> promising approach to Cultural Psychology would be a > > >>>> > > >>> Spinozist > > >>> > > >>>> monism. I am actually very interested on the issue of > > which > > >>>> > > >>>> epistemological position can best substantiate the > > >>>> > > >>> construction of a > > >>> > > >>>> cultural psychology, and that's why I feel inclined to > > take > > >>>> > > >>> the > > >>> > > >>>> opportunity to ask for your opinions about that. About > > the > > >>>> > > >>> proposal > > >>> > > >>>> of Roth and Jornet, I have some doubts. First, I don't > > see > > >>>> > > >>> why > > >>> > > >>>> Vygotsky's proposals can be seen as dualist (in the > > >>>> > > >>> Cartesian sense) > > >>> > > >>>> -I suspect that it is because of the analytical > > >>>> > > >>> distinctions?. > > >>> > > >>>> Anyway, in my understanding, Vygotsky explicitly > assumes > > a > > >>>> > > >>>> materialist monism (for example in The Crisis), and in > > fact > > >>>> > > >>> he constructs his proposal on mediation upon reflexology, which also > > >>> explicitly assumed a materialist monism (e.g. > > >>> > > >>>> Sechenov). Would a Spinozist monism be a better point > of > > >>>> > > >>> departure? I > > >>> > > >>>> don't know, in my understanding it is a more idealist > > >>>> > > >>> monism, and I > > >>> > > >>>> don't clearly see what could be gained. In my opinion, > a > > >>>> > > >>> scientific > > >>> > > >>>> psychology which includes the study of mind is only > > >>>> possible > > >>>> > > >>> if any > > >>> > > >>>> type of monism is assumed. However, in my view, for a > > >>>> > > >>> scientific > > >>> > > >>>> psychology, the ontological nature of the world is > > perhaps > > >>>> > > >>> less > > >>> > > >>>> important (it is an issue for metaphysics?), and I am > > >>>> > > >>> inclined to assume a neutral monism (e.g. Russell). > > >>> > > >>>> So from this view, a materialist monism and a Spinozist > > >>>> > > >>> monism > > >>> > > >>>> wouldn't be so different, so from both views it could > be > > >>>> > > >>> assumed that > > >>> > > >>>> all is of the same nature and all is similarly knowable > > >>>> > > >>> (including > > >>> > > >>>> mind) [which is the ontological nature of the world and > > to > > >>>> > > >>> what > > >>> > > >>>> degree it is knowable are issues that can be left to > > >>>> > > >>> philosophy]. > > >>> > > >>>> However, in my opinion, this does not mean that, while > > >>>> > > >>> assuming a > > >>> > > >>>> monism, analytical distinctions cannot be done when > > >>>> studying > > >>>> > > >>> the > > >>> > > >>>> world. In that sense, I had the impression that Roth > and > > >>>> > > >>> Jornet > > >>> > > >>>> tended to dilute analytical distinctions in the name of > > >>>> > > >>> monism; I > > >>> > > >>>> repeat that I don't know if I understood them well, but > > if > > >>>> > > >>> this was > > >>> > > >>>> the case, in my opinion, analysis would be impossible > > >>>> within > > >>>> > > >>> the new > > >>> > > >>>> psychology suggested by Roth and Jornet, and, regarding > > >>>> > > >>> perezhivanie, > > >>> > > >>>> there would be the danger, noted by Vygotsky in The > > Crisis > > >>>> > > >>> and > > >>> > > >>>> cautioned by Kozulin in his commentary, that by meaning > > >>>> > > >>> everything, perezhivanie ends by meaning nothing. > > >>> > > >>>> Best regards and happy new year, > > >>>> > > >>>> Marc. > > >>>> > > >>>> 2017-01-02 9:12 GMT+01:00 Alfredo Jornet Gil< > > >>>> > > >>> a.j.gil@iped.uio.no> : > > >>> > > >>>> Dear all, > > >>>> > > >>>> I would like to join David, Luisa, Ana, Henry and > the > > >>>> > > >>> others to wish > > >>> > > >>>> you all a Happy New Year! May it be full of joy, > > peace, > > >>>> > > >>> and opportunity. > > >>> > > >>>> I also would like to begin the year announcing our > > >>>> first > > >>>> > > >>> ?MCA > > >>> > > >>>> article discussion, ?although in fact corresponds > to > > >>>> the > > >>>> > > >>> last issue > > >>> > > >>>> of the year > > >>>> > > >>>> we > > >>>> > > >>>> just passed, Issue 4 on Perezhivanie. This is a > very > > >>>> > > >>> special > > >>> > > >>>> *special* issue, not only because its topic has > > raised > > >>>> > > >>> lots of > > >>> > > >>>> interest lately in > > >>>> > > >>>> the > > >>>> > > >>>> CHAT community but also because, greatly > coordinated > > by > > >>>> > > >>> Andy Blunden > > >>> > > >>>> and the rest of the editorial team, the issue takes > > the > > >>>> > > >>> form of a > > >>> > > >>>> symposium where authors get the chance to present > and > > >>>> > > >>> respond to > > >>> > > >>>> each others' ideas on the subject. In my view, this > > >>>> > > >>> allows having a > > >>> > > >>>> rich and > > >>>> > > >>>> multidimensional > > >>>> > > >>>> approach to a subject as important as perezhivanie. > > >>>> > > >>>> Following with the dialogical spirit in which the > > >>>> > > >>> special issue was > > >>> > > >>>> assembled, we will focus on one lead article, but > > >>>> hoping > > >>>> > > >>> to also > > >>> > > >>>> engage ideas and insights present in or relevant to > > >>>> other > > >>>> > > >>>> contributions in the issue. ?Marc Clar?'s "Vygotsky > > and > > >>>> > > >>> Vasilyuk on > > >>> > > >>>> Perezhivanie: Two Notions and One Word" will be our > > >>>> > > >>> focus. The > > >>> > > >>>> article very nicely engages the lead work of > > Vygotsky, > > >>>> > > >>> but also the > > >>> > > >>>> less known ??(?in educational literature) but > totally > > >>>> > > >>> relevant works > > >>> > > >>>> of psychologist ?F. Vasilyuk and semiotician > > >>>> > > >>>> A. > > >>>> > > >>>> J. Greimas, mobilising a number of key concepts > > >>>> > > >>> including those of > > >>> > > >>>> semiotic > > >>>> > > >>>> mediation and transformation. > > >>>> > > >>>> ?In addition to Marc, who will soon join us, I have > > >>>> > > >>> encouraged some > > >>> > > >>>> of > > >>>> > > >>>> the > > >>>> > > >>>> other authors in the special issue to also join as > > >>>> > > >>> "relevant > > >>> > > >>>> others," if time and circumstances allow them. > Let's > > >>>> > > >>> hope that this > > >>> > > >>>> will help keeping the symposium spirit up. > > >>>> > > >>>> Marc's article is attached to this e-mail and will > be > > >>>> > > >>> made open > > >>> > > >>>> access at the T&F pages as soon as people is back > > from > > >>>> > > >>> the holidays. > > >>> > > >>>> The T&F link > > >>>> > > >>>> is > > >>>> > > >>>> this: > > >>>> > > >>>> http://www.tandfonline.com/ > doi/full/10.1080/10749039 > > . > > >>>> > > >>> 2016.1186194 > > >>> > > >>>> The link to the MCA Forum pages, where we announce > > our > > >>>> > > >>> discussions > > >>> > > >>>> and other xmca things, is here: > > >>>> http://lchc.ucsd.edu/MCA/ > > >>>> > > >>>> I wish us all a very productive and interesting > > >>>> > > >>> discussion. > > >>> > > >>>> Alfredo > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>> > > >> > > > > > > From dkellogg60@gmail.com Tue Jan 10 19:50:08 2017 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2017 14:50:08 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! In-Reply-To: References: <1483344752182.40904@iped.uio.no> <1483467423798.57819@iped.uio.no> <1483601196884.31418@iped.uio.no> <5df5e870-3ef8-70d6-0c17-f8647ba17e62@mira.net> <587124d9.d957620a.4a5a8.bd56@mx.google.com> <1483820996800.91513@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: Vygotsky's got a terrific metaphor for how "perezhivanie" is internalized: it is like internalizing the rules of the game of chess. The child who doesn't know how to play chess simply plays WITH the pieces instead of playing them. She or he might try to create a piece-board structure by putting black pieces on black squares and white pieces on white squares, but the structure is a visual one and not a semiotic one; it's about color and not about meaning. The child who DOES know how to play chess plays the pieces instead of playing with them. She or he too creates "structures" but this time they are semiotic ones: a black knight in a completely different column and a completely different row, can capture a white pawn. The board is the same and so are the kids; the children may have very similar biological and very similar cultural endowments, but they do not have the same semiotic context at all. Hence different perezhivanie and different personalities. David Kellogg Macquarie University On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 11:54 AM, Andy Blunden wrote: > How to understand the personality? ... i.e., the *development* of the > personality? > > The subject's inheritance, and The subject's experiences (/perezhivaniya/) > > ... just think of how you'd go about writing a good biography or > Bildungsroman. > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Andy Blunden > http://home.mira.net/~andy > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > On 11/01/2017 10:24 AM, David Kellogg wrote: > >> Andy: >> >> A good paradox! Word meaning is a unit, but the spoken word itself is >> just an element--a thing. We can see that this is, on the face of it, >> impossible: within a single holistic analysis, an element can be a part of >> a unit, but a unit can never be a part of an element. So what you are >> referring to when you say that the word is a thing is the "sonic" or >> "phasal" quality of the word: its "acoustic" properties, its "phonetics". >> >> But not its phonology. The word that Vygotsky uses for "phoneme" refers >> to the 1929 work of the Prague Circle, originally the Moscow Circle. He is >> a LITTLE coy about this, because the founders, Jakobson and Trubetskoy, >> were not very popular with the authorities and Vygotsky already had plenty >> of heterodox acquaintances to worry about. Nevertheless, whenever Vygotsky >> says "phoneme", we know he really means what Jakobson and Trubetskoy called >> "morphophonemes". We know this because the examples he actually >> gives--Russian case endings--are morpho-phonemes and not simply phonemes: >> so for example in English the sound /s/ is a simple phoneme when I say the >> word "self" but if I say "Andy's" the sound /s/ is a morpho-phoneme: a >> difference in sounding that makes a difference in meaning. The system (that >> is, the paradigmatic menu) of these differences in soundings are what the >> Moscow and Prague Circles called "phonology" (as OPPOSED to phonetics), and >> this is the kind of "phoneme" that Vygotsky is really talking about. >> >> Still, you can see that it is not what he is talking about when he says >> word meaning, because these units are still nowhere near big enough to >> describe the kinds of changes which must occur when verbal thinking >> develops. I feel the same way about a lot of the examples offered of >> "perezhivanie", including Marc's. If MacDuff's grief or Carla's epiphany >> about the misbehavior of her kids being due to "outside influences" really >> is the unit of personality and experience that Vygotsky wants us to use >> when we analyse the ontogenesis of personality, then it is no more >> appropriate than using the morpho-phoneme to analyse the whole of verbal >> thinking. Just as evolution (of species) requires very different units from >> history (of classes), development, whether we are talking about verbal >> thinking or the personality as a whole, is going to require very different >> units from learning, whether we are talking about MacDuff or Carla. The >> units must be able to develop; that is, the relationship of the elements >> within them must be susceptible to many changes over time. >> >> Let me give three examples of how this happens in different >> "perezhivanie". They are not mine; they are Vygotsky's, and they are all >> from the Pedological Lectures. >> >> First, the Crisis at One. Neither the biological nor the social endowment >> of the child greatly changes in the acquisition of speech; nevertheless, >> the relationship between the personality and the environment, of which both >> personality moments and environmental ones are constituent elements, is >> entirely transformed. Here we are not talking about phonemes, or even >> morpho-phonemes: we are talking about "wordings"--whole utterances. In >> Melbourne I presented some data that demonstrated this beautifully--a >> child's first word is actually an attempt to imitate a whole conversation. >> >> Second, the Crisis at Three. Vygotsky spends a lot of time discussing the >> "Seven Stars"--the symptoms of the "Terrible Twos" and "Threenagehood" >> noted by harried parents everywhere. But by the end of his analysis it's >> clear that what really happens is a new relationship between wish and will: >> in extreme cases, the child actually wishes for one thing (e.g. compromise) >> and wills the opposite (the everlasting "No!"). Again, neither the >> personality moments as such nor the environmental ones change, but there is >> a separation and a sorting which allows the subordination of wish to will >> that we see in play. This isn't the kind of "aha" moment that Marc is >> offering us at all: Vygotsky actually calls it the "antipode" of future >> will, because instead of enabling will it actually paralyzes it. But it is >> indubitably a key moment in the development of the relation of personality >> to environmental moments that we see in "perizhivanie". >> >> Thirdly, the Crisis at Seven. I think Gonzalez Rey makes a total hash of >> this, and I get very cross when I read his article. It is not true that the >> essence of perizhivanie remained a mystery to Vygotsky simply because he no >> longer subscribes to "the aesthetic reaction" and "catharsis" and other >> notions that he toyed with in Psych of Art (he's no longer doing >> experiments on changes in breathing rate when people read the works of >> Bunin either!). It might be true that he never offered a system of facts >> and methodological procedures for perezivanie, but that was only because >> one already existed, for example in the work of Wallon and Stern and >> others. It is demonstrably not true that when Vygotsky says that the speech >> environment of those around him does not change when the child learns to >> talk at one, he is not "profoundly contradictory with the concept of >> sense": when you read the quotation in context, it is very clear that what >> he is referring to are the kinds of absolute indicators used by Zalkind: >> how often the parents read the newspapers, the dialect they speak, and >> their educational background. These do not change, and if the child wants >> to make sense, these are the factors the child will have to relate to. >> >> Vygotsky gives the example of a child who is severely retarded. The child >> wants to play with other children and is rejected. The child walks down the >> street and the other children follow, laughing. The child is shrieked at, >> insulted, but as soon as the humiliation stops, the child is perfectly >> happy with himself. Vygotsky points out that the child is not able to >> "co-generalize" the "perizhivanie" of the humiliations: each is unpleasant, >> but they are entirely separate and cannot be connected with any internal >> sense of inferiority. A normal child, however, is able to "internalize" >> these humiliations and consequently develops a sense of inferiority. We can >> see that what has happened is the insertion of what Vygotsky calls an >> "intellectual" moment: an inner layer, which is what distinguishes later >> Chaplin movies from earlier ones (again, Vygotsky's example, not mine!) and >> what brings about the "loss of directness and naivete" that we see in >> pre-schoolers. >> >> I think that the reason people find "perizhivanie" so hard to work with >> is the same reason that they find "word meaning" hard to work with: it >> develops. The feeling of drinking milk as the infant drinks it is >> perizhivanie, and the thought of being humiliated when you are mulling it >> over and contemplating revenge is also perizhivanie, and only a profound >> analysis which includes ontogenetic development and not just learning will >> show the inner link between them. It's for that reason that I think that >> "activity" is not a useful unit of analysis and I am much more inclined to >> use your word "project", so long as it can include what Vygotsky calls >> "inner activeness". >> >> Vygotsky says: >> >> >> ????? ? ?????????, ?????????? ? ?. ?., ? ???? ???? ? ?????????? >> ???????????, ??? ?????????? ???????????? ??????????????? ????????? >> ??????????????? ?? ??????? ? ??????? ?????????????. ??? ??? ????? ????? >> ?????????? ?????????? ? ???????? ???????? ??????????? ? ???, ???, ? ?? >> ????? ??? ? ?????????? ???????? ??? ?????????? ???????????? ???????????? >> ???????????????? ????? ? ?????????, ??????? ???????????, ? ???????? >> ???????? ?? ????? ???????????? ?????????????? ???????????, ???????????? >> ??????????? ?????????? ?????????? ?? ????????? ? ??????? ????????????. ??? >> ??? ???????, ??????? ????? ??????????, ? ?? ????? ????? ?? ?????? ??? ????? >> ???-??????, ???, ? ???????? ????????? ?????????????? ??????? ? ?????????? >> ????????????. >> >> When I think, remember, etc. I am dealing withinner activeness; this >> psychological process of inner activity is not directly linked to any >> external activity. The new form of inner activeness in the School Age >> consists of this: that while during the preschool years these inner >> activities demonstrated an immediate link with action, with external >> activeness, in the school years we have a relative autonomy which emerges, >> inner activeness which is relatively independent of external activities. >> Here is already a child who can think, at the same time when he is doing or >> seeing something, one in whom has emerged a differentiation of inner and >> outer activities. >> >> David Kellogg >> Macquarie University >> >> >> >> On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 10:07 AM, Andy Blunden > ablunden@mira.net>> wrote: >> >> David: "Are words really units?" >> >> Well, firstly, "units" is a *relative* term. That is, >> the question is: are words units of something, some >> complex process subject to analysis. And which? >> >> Secondly, according to Vygotsky, "no." The concept >> Vygotsky proposes as a unit is "word meaning" which he >> says is a unity of sound and meaning. The sound is an >> artefact, which, detached from its meaningful >> utterance in a transactional context is just a thing, >> viz., a word. Whereas "word meaning" is an >> arrtefact-mediated action, a unit of human social >> activity. >> >> It is true that words can be countable or mass >> according to context, but I wasn't talking about words >> was I? I was talking about word meaning. >> >> Andy >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------ >> Andy Blunden >> http://home.mira.net/~andy >> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making >> > decision-making> >> >> On 8/01/2017 7:59 AM, David Kellogg wrote: >> >> Are words really units? When we look at their >> ideational meaning (that is, >> their logical and experiential content--their >> capacity for representing and >> linking together human experiences) they seem to >> fall into two very >> different categories: lexical words like >> "perezhivanie" or "sense" or >> "personality" of "individual" and grammatical >> words like "of", or "might", >> or "is". The lexical words seem to behave like >> units--they are bounded, >> discrete, and, as Andy would say, "countable" (the >> problem is that almost >> all nouns are both countable and uncountable >> depending on the context you >> put them in, so this distinction is really not as >> essential as Andy seems >> to assume). But the more grammatical words seem to >> be elements of some >> larger unit, which we can call wording. >> >> Veresov and Fleer come up against this problem >> with "edintsvo" and >> "edintsa". Of course, as they say, the two words >> are distinct. But this >> doesn't necessarily mean that the former always >> corresponds to "unity" in >> English and the latter is always "unit". If you >> look at the paragraph they >> translate on 330, you can see that Vygotsky starts >> with an idea that is >> quite "synoptic" and is well expressed by "unit". >> But in the last sentence >> there is a sense that "perezhivanie" is a >> meta-stable unit--one that >> remains self-similar only through a process of >> thorough change, like a >> bicycle whose every part is replaced--and in >> English is it is better to >> express this idea with "unity". The problem is >> that the differences between >> "edintsvo" and "edintsva" in Russian is a matter >> of gender (I think) and >> not simply abstractness, and as a result the >> English version, which cannot >> use the resource of gender,has to rely on >> abstractness, so the words >> "unity" and "unit" are somewhat more distinct and >> less linked than >> "edintsvo" and "edintsva". >> >> There are other problems that are similar. When >> Gonzalez Rey uses the word >> "final moment" to refer to the final period of >> Vygotsky's thinking, he >> leaves the anglophone reader the impression that >> he is referring to >> Vygotsky's deathbed thoughts. On the other hand, >> when Veresov and Fleer use >> "factor" to translate the same Russian word that >> Gonzalez Rey is using, >> they are giving us something more quantitative >> than Vygotsky intended, and >> their translation of "dalee nerazloshim'im >> chastyami etava edinstva" >> into "vital and further indivisible part of the >> whole" is quite opaque in >> English (notice that here Veresov and Fleer use >> "whole" to translate >> "edinstva" rather than "unit"!) At some point you >> have to accept that you >> can change Russian words into English words as if >> you were exchanging >> rubles for dollars, but you still won't be able to >> buy a samovar at Walmart. >> >> David Kellogg >> Macquarie University >> >> >> >> On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 5:21 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >> > >> wrote: >> >> Larry, all, >> >> our arguments in the 2014 address a science >> education literature in which >> the constructivist perspective is the leading >> perspective; We note that the >> assertion that people learn from experience is >> everywhere taken for granted >> but nowhere accounted for. We resort to >> pragmatist and phenomenological >> literature along with Vygotsky's insights to >> point out the need to account >> for learning as something that cannot be the >> result of an individual's >> construction; in experience there is always >> something in excess of what you >> intended, and this is a basic feature of >> doing, of performing. I take that >> to be your "trans" in the trans/zhivanie word, >> Larry, which already is >> denoted in the word PERezhivanie. >> >> But I do not wish to move our discussion too >> far away from Marc's paper >> and the Perezhivanie special issue. We also >> risk disengaging many that have >> not have the privilege we've had to have the >> time to read so many articles >> in just few days into the new year. I think we >> are a point in the >> discussion where a pretty clear point of >> agreement/disagreement, and >> therefore of possibility for growth, has been >> reached with regard to the >> view of perezhivanie as "an experience" and as >> the "working over it". I >> think that to allow as many as possible to >> follow, and hopefully also >> engage, I think it will be helpful to bring >> the diverse perspectives and >> theoretical accounts to matter in accounting >> for some actual material. And >> there are a number of cases described in the >> articles, including Marc's >> case of a teacher, as well as everyday facts, >> such as those brought by >> Beth, and in Beth's article... >> >> I take the task for myself too, but Saturday >> morning need to attend to >> other things! >> A >> >> >> >> ________________________________________ >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> >> > > >> on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com >> >> > > >> Sent: 07 January 2017 18:26 >> To: Andy Blunden; Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended >> Mind, Culture, Activity; >> Larry Purss >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and >> Perezhivanie! >> >> Andy, Peter, i hope the intention to move >> beyond politeness to struggle >> with this topic materializes. >> In this vein i want to introduce exploration >> of the ?excess? of actual >> over intended meaning as he sketched his >> introduction to ?experience?. >> >> Citing Dewey, Alfredo says that this excess of >> actual learning over >> intended learning INCLUDES what Dewey refers >> to as ?attitudes? and these >> ?attitudes? are FUNDAMENTALLY what count in >> the future. >> Alfredo and Roth then add this summary >> statement : >> >> There is therefore, a need to theorize >> experience in terms that do not >> assume control and rationality as the sine qua >> non of learning. It also >> implies a need to develop analytical accounts >> that retain the ?uncertainty? >> that is an ?integral part? of human experience. >> >> Where are Alfredo and Roth leading us with >> this sketch of experience? To >> highlight ?attitudes? that occur in the excess >> of actual over intended >> learning? The word ?attitudes? generates >> images of (atmosphere) and (moods) >> that ?flow? like cascading waterfalls that can >> be imaged as (force) or as >> (receptive). Attitudes that flow to places >> where they are received within a >> certain attitude of care and concern. Not as >> forceful an image as moving >> only with control and rationality. Describing >> ?weaker? thought that >> remains uncertain but that also opens us to >> the other?s peril and plight. >> Possibly a post-analytic motion that exceeds >> the intended by living-through >> the actual that develops ?attitudes? that are >> fundamentally what count for >> the future. >> >> >> Sent from my Windows 10 phone >> >> From: Andy Blunden >> Sent: January 7, 2017 5:00 AM >> To: Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, >> Activity >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and >> Perezhivanie! >> >> OK Peter, what you say is all very true I am >> sure, but it >> entails conflating activity and action (as >> mass nouns) and >> context and mediation, and makes the required >> distinction >> much like one could find multiple meanings for >> the word >> "and" by listing the different phrases and >> clauses which can >> be linked by "and." >> >> Andy >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------ >> Andy Blunden >> http://home.mira.net/~andy >> >> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decisi >> on-making >> > decision-making> >> >> On 7/01/2017 11:42 PM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: >> >> Let me try to illustrate. >> >> Reading as mediated action: The >> cultural-historical >> context of reading mediates how one?s >> attention and >> response are channeled in socially >> constructed ways. So, >> in one setting, say at home or reading in >> the company of >> friends, a novel might bring a reader to >> tears, or invite >> readers to share personal stories that >> parallel those of >> the plot lines, or laugh out loud. But >> another setting, a >> formal school or university class, would >> have historical >> values and practices that mute emotional >> and personal >> responses, and promote a more sober, >> analytic way of >> reading and talking that fits with >> specific historical >> critical conventions and genres, and >> discourages others. >> >> Reading as mediating action: The act of >> reading can be >> transformational. In reading about an >> talking about a >> character?s actions, a reader might >> reconsider a value >> system, become more sympathetic to real >> people who >> resemble oppressed characters, etc. In >> other words, >> reading a text may serve a mediational >> process in which >> textual ideas and exemplars enable a >> reader to think >> differently. >> >> *From:*Andy Blunden >> [mailto:ablunden@mira.net >> ] >> *Sent:* Saturday, January 7, 2017 6:28 AM >> *To:* Peter Smagorinsky > >; eXtended Mind, >> Culture, Activity > > >> *Subject:* Re: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year >> and Perezhivanie! >> >> Can you explain in a paragraph or two,. >> Peter, rather than >> asking us all to read 10,000 words to >> extract an answer? >> >> Andy >> >> ------------------------------ >> ------------------------------ >> >> Andy Blunden >> http://home.mira.net/~andy >> >> >> http://www.brill.com/products/ >> book/origins-collective-decision-making >> > decision-making> >> >> >> On 7/01/2017 11:23 PM, Peter Smagorinsky >> wrote: >> >> Andy and others, I tried to work out >> the mediated/mediating question >> >> in the area of reading....see if this helps. >> >> Smagorinsky, P., & O'Donnell-Allen, >> C. (1998). Reading as mediated >> >> and mediating action: Composing meaning for >> literature through multimedia >> interpretive texts. Reading Research >> Quarterly, 33, 198-226. Available >> athttp://www.petersmagorinsky.net/About/PDF/RRQ/RRQ1998.pdf >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >> From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> >> > .ucsd.edu >> > >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ >> >> >> mailman.ucsd.edu ] On >> Behalf Of Andy Blunden >> >> Sent: Friday, January 6, 2017 7:12 PM >> >> To:xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu >> >> > > >> >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year >> and Perezhivanie! >> >> I have never understood this supposed >> distinction, Alfredo, between >> >> "mediated activity" and "mediating activity" >> given that all activity is >> mediated and all activity mediates. >> >> Also, could you spell out what you >> mean by the "tension" >> >> between perezhivanie as meaning and >> perezhivanie as struggle. >> >> Andy >> >> ------------------------------ >> ------------------------------ >> >> Andy Blunden >> >> http://home.mira.net/~andy >> >> >> >> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective- >> >> >> decision-making >> >> On 5/01/2017 6:26 PM, Alfredo Jornet >> Gil wrote: >> >> Thanks Marc for your careful >> response. >> >> I am familiar to Vygotsky's >> notion of cultural mediation and I >> >> am aware and acknowledge that it was >> elaborated as a means to overcome >> dualism, and that it is not analog to a >> computational approach. >> >> When I brought the computing >> analogy, I did so with regard not >> >> to the concept of cultural mediation in >> general, but to the way it can be >> (and is) deployed analytically. I react to >> what it seems to me a dichotomy >> between a "meaning" as something that is >> static (thereby a form of >> "representation" or reflection of the relation >> with the environment instead >> of?refraction)?? and the >> experiencing-as-struggling, which is described >> as?transformation or change. If so, mediation >> here would seem to be part of >> a methodological device that first dissects "a >> type of meaning" from "a >> type of activity" (or a given state from the >> process that changes that >> state), and then unites it by adding the term >> "mediation." And this may be >> my misreading, but in that (mis)reading (which >> perhaps is mostly due to the >> fact that in your empirical illustration only >> the initial and end product, >> i.e., perezhivanie, are described, but not the >> experiencing-as-struggle, >> that is, the moving between the two), >> mediation here seems to do as >> analytical concept precisely what you were >> afraid our monism was doing: >> explaining nothing. Only the end products but >> not the process of producing >> perezhivanie are revealed. This may be >> problematic if one attends to what >> Veresov argues in the paper I shared >> yesterday, where he defends the notion >> of mediation but also specifies that Vygotsky >> speaks of *mediating >> activity* (as opposed to *mediated* activity). >> That is, not mediation by >> signs as products, but mediating activity as >> the activity of producing >> signs (which again is an activity of producing >> social relations, perhaps >> what you refer as "holistic meanings"?). What >> do you think? >> >> I did not think you were trying >> to deny the influence of >> >> Spinoza, and I do not think we ever said that >> Perezhivanie was primarily a >> move from Cartesian Dualism to Monism, as you >> suggest in your post. I copy >> and paste from my prior post: "The fact is >> that Vygotsky was building a >> theory on the unity of the affect and the >> intellect that was to be grounded >> on Spinoza, and what we try to do is to >> explore how perezhivanie, as a >> concept being developed during the same period >> (but not finalised or >> totally settled!), could be seen from the >> perspective of the Spinozist >> Vygotsky." >> >> I totally believe that bringing >> the distinction between >> >> perezhivanie as meaning, and perezhivanie as >> struggle, is totally relevant, >> and Beth Ferholt's vignettes of Where the Wild >> Things Are do indeed >> illustrate this. We really need to address >> this tension, which as Beth's >> examples and as our own everyday experience >> shows, is a tension that >> matters not just to books and to theories but >> to living persons (children, >> teachers), a tension that moreover is present >> and mentioned in all the >> articles of the symposium. The papers offer >> different proposals, and I >> think is so great we have the chance to >> discuss them! I too, as you, am >> very interesting in hearing others about the >> questions you had concerning >> sense and meaning. >> >> Alfredo >> >> From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> >> > .ucsd.edu >> > >> >> > > >> > .ucsd.edu >> > >> on behalf of Marc >> >> Clar? >> >> > > >> > > >> >> Sent: 04 January 2017 22:31 >> >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New >> Year and Perezhivanie! >> >> Thank you very much, Alfredo, for >> sharing this excellent paper by >> >> Veresov, and thanks also for your >> responses, which really helped >> >> me to >> >> better understand your points. My >> main doubt about your proposal >> >> was/is caused by the statement >> that the idea of cultural >> >> mediation/mediator implies a >> cartesian dualism. This shocks me >> >> because, to me, the idea of >> cultural mediation is absolutely >> >> crucial >> >> (in fact, the keystone) for the >> construction of a monist (and >> >> scientific) psychology that does >> not forget mind ?that is, a >> >> cultural >> >> psychology. From your response, >> however, I realized that we may >> >> be >> >> approaching the idea of mediation >> in different ways. I talk of >> >> mediation and mediators in a >> quite restricted way. The starting >> >> point >> >> of my understanding of mediation >> is a dialectical relationship >> >> (organic, transactional) between >> the subject and the world >> >> (Vygotsky departs from the scheme >> stimulus-response, from reflexology). >> >> This relationship, that Vygotsky >> calls primitive psychological >> >> functions, would be basically >> biological. However, in human >> >> beings >> >> this relationship is mediated by >> cultural means: signs and >> >> tools; or >> >> primary, secondary and terciary >> artifacts. These cultural means >> >> reorganize the primitive >> functions (dialectic S-O relationship), >> >> which >> >> become then higher psychological >> functions (S-M-O) (see for >> >> example, >> >> The problem of the cultural >> development of the child, in The >> >> Vygotsky >> >> Reader). Now, the subject, the >> cultural mediators, and the >> >> object form >> >> an inseparable dialectical unit, >> so that the subject acts on >> >> (transforms) the object through >> the prism of the cultural >> >> mediators, >> >> the object acts on (transforms) >> the subject also through the >> >> prism of >> >> the cultural mediators, and the >> cultural means are themselves >> >> also >> >> transformed as a consequence of >> their mediation in this >> >> continuous >> >> dynamic dialectical tension. >> Here, for me, it is important the >> >> idea >> >> that the cultural means are as >> material (if we assume a >> >> materialist >> >> monism) as all the rest of the >> world; in fact, are parts of the >> >> material world which become signs >> or tools (and can be therefore >> >> socially distributed). This >> permits the introduction of the >> >> scientific >> >> study of mind-consciousness (as >> mediating systems of signs), >> >> because >> >> mind is not anymore something >> immaterial and unobservable, but >> >> it is >> >> as material and observable as the >> rest of the natural world. It >> >> is >> >> from this view that, for me, the >> idea of cultural mediation is >> >> the >> >> keystone of a monist psychology >> that includes mind. Thus, when I >> >> speak >> >> of mediators, I refer to the >> cultural means which mediate in the >> >> S-O >> >> dialectics; I am especially >> interested in signs/secondary >> >> artifacts. >> >> Here, it is perhaps necessary to >> insist that when I talk of >> >> studying >> >> mediators (and their semantic >> structure), this doesn't mean that >> >> they >> >> are taken out from the activity >> (the flux of live) in which they >> >> mediate (since out of activity >> they are not signs anymore); >> >> here, I >> >> think Vygotsky tries again to >> overcome another old dichotomy, the >> >> functionalism-structuralism one. >> I hope that all this makes also >> >> clear the difference between this view and >> that of computational >> psychologies (which in general are profoundly >> and explicitly dualist and >> not dialectic). >> >> Back to perezhivanie, I'm not >> obviously trying to deny the >> >> influence >> >> of Spinoza on Vygotsky's thinking >> (this is explicit in Vygotsky's >> >> writings, especially in ?The >> teaching about emotions?, in the >> >> Vol.6 of >> >> the Collected Works). But I have >> doubts that Vygotsky's >> >> introduction >> >> of the concept of perezhivanie is >> to be regarded primarily as a >> >> movement towards monism (from a >> previous cartesian dualism), and >> >> that >> >> this movement questions the >> concept of cultural mediation. >> >> Instead, >> >> and I think that this is in line >> with some of Gonz?lez-Rey >> >> observations in his paper, my >> impression is that the >> >> introduction of >> >> the concept of perezhivanie >> responds more to a movement (a >> >> further >> >> step) towards holism (something >> that, in my understanding, can >> >> also be >> >> found in Spinoza). Thus, I think >> that the word meaning is still >> >> the >> >> unit of analysis in the last >> Vygotsky -and therefore, the idea of >> >> cultural mediation is still >> crucial (in fact, in The problem of >> >> the >> >> environment, he connects the >> concept of perezhivanie, which has >> >> just >> >> introduced, to the development of >> word meaning [p.345-346, also >> >> cited >> >> in my paper]). However, in my >> view, in the last Vygotsky the >> >> focus is >> >> not anymore primarily on the >> word-meaning as formed for things >> >> (or >> >> collections of things, as in the >> ontogenetic research with >> >> Sakharov), but the focus is now in the >> formation of meaning for holistic >> situations. >> >> Best regards, >> >> Marc. >> >> 2017-01-03 19:16 GMT+01:00 >> Alfredo Jornet Gil< >> >> a.j.gil@iped.uio.no >> > >> > >: >> >> Hi Marc, all, >> >> thanks for joining and for >> your interesting work, which I >> >> follow >> >> since I became aware of it. I >> appreciate the way in your >> >> paper you >> >> show careful and honest >> attention to the texts of the authors >> >> involved, but perhaps most of >> all I appreciate that the >> >> paper makes >> >> the transformational >> dimension related to struggle and change >> >> salient, a dimension all >> papers deemed central to >> >> perezhivanie. And I >> >> have learned more about >> Vasilyuk by reading your paper. But >> >> I also >> >> see that we have approached >> the question of perezhivanie >> >> differently >> >> and I think that addressing >> the questions that you raise >> >> concerning >> >> our article may be a good way >> to both respond and discuss >> >> your paper. >> >> I am aware that our use of >> the term monism may be >> >> problematic to >> >> some, and N. Veresov, who has >> recently written about this >> >> (see >> >> attached article), warns >> against the dangers of simply >> >> moving from >> >> dualism into an >> undifferentiating monism that relativizes >> >> everything, >> >> making development >> un-studiable. This seems to be the way in >> >> which >> >> you have understood our >> argument, and of course this is not >> >> what we are or want to be doing. >> >> Probably many will think that >> *dialectical materialism* >> >> rather than >> >> monism is the proper term, >> and I could agree with them; we >> >> do in fact >> >> use dialectical materialism >> there and elsewhere. Yet, we >> >> wanted to >> >> emphasise the Spinozist >> influence (an influence that also >> >> runs >> >> through Marx) and so we found >> it appropriate to use the term >> >> monism, >> >> a term that Vygotsky uses >> before arguing that Spinoza >> >> "develops an essentially materialistic view" >> >> (Collected Works, Vol. 6, p. >> 124). For us, the aim is >> >> working out >> >> ways to empirically examine >> and formulate problems in ways >> >> that do >> >> not reify a mind-body dualism. >> >> Although overcoming dualism >> is foundational to the CHAT >> >> paradigm, I >> >> would however not say that >> Vygotsky did get to solve all of >> >> the >> >> problems that Cartesian >> dualism had created for psychology, >> >> even >> >> though he recognised those >> problems brilliantly as early as >> >> in the >> >> "Crisis". It should suffice >> to cite Vygotsky's own remarks, >> >> which we quote in the paper (and which A.N. >> >> Leont'ev mentions in the >> introduction to the collected >> >> works), where >> >> Vygotsky explicitly critiques >> some of his own prior ideas >> >> for failing >> >> to overcome dualism. We agree >> with those who, like F. G. >> >> Rey, see >> >> Vygotsky's project as a >> developing rather than as a >> >> finalised one. >> >> The fact is that Vygotsky was >> building a theory on the unity >> >> of the >> >> affect and the intellect that >> was to be grounded on Spinoza, >> >> and what >> >> we try to do is to explore >> how perezhivanie, as a concept >> >> being >> >> developed during the same >> period (but not finalised or >> >> totally >> >> settled!), could be seen from >> the perspective of the >> >> Spinozist Vygotsky. >> >> As you note, in our article >> we argue that, if one takes the >> >> Spinozist >> >> one-substance approach, >> classical concepts used in >> >> non-classical >> >> psychology, at least in the >> way they are commonly used in >> >> the current >> >> literature, should be >> revised. One such concept is >> >> mediation. And I >> >> personally do not have much >> of a problem when mediation is >> >> used to >> >> denote the fundamental fact >> that every thing exists always >> >> through >> >> *another*, never in and of >> itself. But I do think that it is >> >> problematic to identify >> MEDIATORS, such as "a meaning", as a >> >> means to >> >> account for or explain >> developmental processes and learning >> >> events, >> >> precisely because it is >> there, at least in my view, that >> >> dualism creeps in. >> >> For example, I find it >> paradoxical that you are concerned >> >> that our >> >> monist approach risks turning >> perezhivanie into a useless >> >> category >> >> because it may be used to >> explain everything and nothing, >> >> and yet you >> >> do not seem to have a problem >> using the term mediation to >> >> account for >> >> the transformation of >> perezhivanie without clearly >> >> elaborating on how >> >> mediation does change >> anything or what it looks like as a >> >> real >> >> process. How is it different >> saying that a perezhivanie >> >> mediates the >> >> experiencing-as-struggle from >> simply saying that it >> >> "affects" or >> >> "determines" it? Indeed, if >> perezhivanie mediates >> >> experiencing-as-struggle, >> does not experiencing-as-struglgle >> >> too >> >> mediate perezhivanie? And do >> not both may be said to mediate >> >> development, or development mediate them? Is >> not this explaining everything >> and nothing? >> >> I do believe you can argue >> that there is a difference between >> >> mediation and classical >> psychology's cause-effect relations, >> >> but to >> >> show this you need to dig >> into the dialectical underpinnings >> >> of the >> >> theory. In your paper, you >> offer a nice analysis of a lovely >> >> case of >> >> a teacher who, in dealing >> with a challenge with one of her >> >> students, >> >> changes her perezhivanie. I >> think you can rightly argue that >> >> there is >> >> a semiotic transformation, >> and I fully support your >> >> statement that by >> >> studying discourse we can >> empirically approach questions of >> >> psychological development. >> The contradictions you show as >> >> being >> >> involved and resolved >> resonate really well with what I >> >> experience as >> >> a parent or as a teacher in >> the classroom. Yet, without >> >> unpacking >> >> what this "mediation" taking >> place between one perezhivanie >> >> and the >> >> next one means as a concrete >> and real, the same analysis >> >> could be done taking an information processing >> approach: >> >> there is an situation that is >> processed (represented?) in >> >> one way, >> >> which then leads to a >> (cognitive) dissonance, and then there >> >> is a >> >> cognitive resolution by means >> of which the situation is >> >> presented >> >> differently in consciousness >> (indeed, when seen in this way, >> >> the term >> >> perezhivanie and the term >> "representation" become almost >> >> indistinguishable). How is >> mediation, as an analytical >> >> concept, >> >> helping here? And most >> importantly to the question of >> >> perezhivanie, >> >> how is this analysis going to >> show the internal connection >> >> between >> >> intellect and affect that >> Vygotsky formulates as >> >> constitutive of the notion of perezhivanie? >> >> I believe that the key lies >> in understanding what Vygotsky >> >> means when >> >> he says that perezhivanie is >> a unit of analysis. I will not >> >> repeat >> >> here what already is written >> in at least a couple of the >> >> articles in >> >> the special issue (Blunden, >> ours), that is the difference >> >> between >> >> analysis by elements and unit >> analysis (Vygotsky 1987). A >> >> unit >> >> analysis approach is >> consistent with Spinoza, for whom >> >> cause-effect >> >> explanations were not >> adequate, requiring instead an >> >> understanding of >> >> self-development, >> perezhivanie as a kernel cell for the >> >> development >> >> of personality. And I think >> you may be after this in your >> >> article in > > From mcole@ucsd.edu Tue Jan 10 20:19:03 2017 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2017 20:19:03 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! In-Reply-To: References: <1483344752182.40904@iped.uio.no> <1483467423798.57819@iped.uio.no> <1483601196884.31418@iped.uio.no> <5df5e870-3ef8-70d6-0c17-f8647ba17e62@mira.net> <587124d9.d957620a.4a5a8.bd56@mx.google.com> <1483820996800.91513@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: ?David -- I am finding it very difficult to distinguish what Vygotsky wrote what you are saying that Vygotsky is saying, and what you are saying. I read the phrase I quoted as coming from LSV not DK. And I went looking for the Russian passage in your email to see if I interpreted the notion of endowment the way Vygotsky did, only to find out it was you writing!! Getting slow in my old age for sure. mike ? On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 7:29 PM, David Kellogg wrote: > Tenaciously, Mike. The word "endowment" is a metaphor for something given, > like the endowment of a university, or the patrimony of an investment fund. > The child's biological endowment is given to the child by heredity and > speech doesn't change that endowment. The most important part of > the child's social endowment is, as Bronfenbrenner points out, largely > unseen by the child: it's what Mommy and Daddy do for a living. That is not > changed by the child's learning speech either. > > Vygotsky's a semiotician: not an environmentalist and he's also not a > constructivist. The semiotic truth isn't in the middle; it's simultaneously > beyond both extremes. It's beyond environmentalism because what the child > obtains from the social and cultural environment is a semiotic and not > simply an interpersonal one; it's the context of culture and the resources > of the language system and not simply the immediate text and the immediate > situation. It's beyond constructivism, because what the child construes in > building up a grammar is not simply the meanings but the meaning > potentials; not just seen paths for the taking but also the unseen ones not > taken. > > That's why even the most social-behavioristic psychologists can > underestimate the influence of the environment and even the most "childist" > constructivists can understate the creativity involved; why people like > Chomsky end up invoking biology and conversely people like Skinner end up > invoking culture and environment to make up the deficit. Both assume that > language has to be literally "acquired" or "built up" and cannot see a way > to do this with finite materials. But the resources are not material at > all; they are semiotic, and "construction", like "endowment," is simply a > metaphor we use to lend the weightlessness of word meaning a little mass. > > David Kellogg > Macquarie University > > On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 1:01 PM, mike cole wrote: > > > You believe the following, David? > > > > Neither the biological nor the social endowment > > of the child greatly changes in the acquisition of speech; > > nevertheless,..... > > > > mike > > > > On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 3:24 PM, David Kellogg > > wrote: > > > > > Andy: > > > > > > A good paradox! Word meaning is a unit, but the spoken word itself is > > just > > > an element--a thing. We can see that this is, on the face of it, > > > impossible: within a single holistic analysis, an element can be a part > > of > > > a unit, but a unit can never be a part of an element. So what you are > > > referring to when you say that the word is a thing is the "sonic" or > > > "phasal" quality of the word: its "acoustic" properties, its > "phonetics". > > > > > > But not its phonology. The word that Vygotsky uses for "phoneme" refers > > to > > > the 1929 work of the Prague Circle, originally the Moscow Circle. He > is a > > > LITTLE coy about this, because the founders, Jakobson and Trubetskoy, > > were > > > not very popular with the authorities and Vygotsky already had plenty > of > > > heterodox acquaintances to worry about. Nevertheless, whenever Vygotsky > > > says "phoneme", we know he really means what Jakobson and Trubetskoy > > called > > > "morphophonemes". We know this because the examples he actually > > > gives--Russian case endings--are morpho-phonemes and not simply > phonemes: > > > so for example in English the sound /s/ is a simple phoneme when I say > > the > > > word "self" but if I say "Andy's" the sound /s/ is a morpho-phoneme: a > > > difference in sounding that makes a difference in meaning. The system > > (that > > > is, the paradigmatic menu) of these differences in soundings are what > the > > > Moscow and Prague Circles called "phonology" (as OPPOSED to phonetics), > > and > > > this is the kind of "phoneme" that Vygotsky is really talking about. > > > > > > Still, you can see that it is not what he is talking about when he says > > > word meaning, because these units are still nowhere near big enough to > > > describe the kinds of changes which must occur when verbal thinking > > > develops. I feel the same way about a lot of the examples offered of > > > "perezhivanie", including Marc's. If MacDuff's grief or Carla's > epiphany > > > about the misbehavior of her kids being due to "outside influences" > > really > > > is the unit of personality and experience that Vygotsky wants us to use > > > when we analyse the ontogenesis of personality, then it is no more > > > appropriate than using the morpho-phoneme to analyse the whole of > verbal > > > thinking. Just as evolution (of species) requires very different units > > from > > > history (of classes), development, whether we are talking about verbal > > > thinking or the personality as a whole, is going to require very > > different > > > units from learning, whether we are talking about MacDuff or Carla. The > > > units must be able to develop; that is, the relationship of the > elements > > > within them must be susceptible to many changes over time. > > > > > > Let me give three examples of how this happens in different > > "perezhivanie". > > > They are not mine; they are Vygotsky's, and they are all from the > > > Pedological Lectures. > > > > > > First, the Crisis at One. Neither the biological nor the social > endowment > > > of the child greatly changes in the acquisition of speech; > nevertheless, > > > the relationship between the personality and the environment, of which > > > both personality moments and environmental ones are constituent > elements, > > > is entirely transformed. Here we are not talking about phonemes, or > even > > > morpho-phonemes: we are talking about "wordings"--whole utterances. In > > > Melbourne I presented some data that demonstrated this beautifully--a > > > child's first word is actually an attempt to imitate a whole > > conversation. > > > > > > Second, the Crisis at Three. Vygotsky spends a lot of time discussing > the > > > "Seven Stars"--the symptoms of the "Terrible Twos" and "Threenagehood" > > > noted by harried parents everywhere. But by the end of his analysis > it's > > > clear that what really happens is a new relationship between wish and > > > will: in extreme cases, the child actually wishes for one thing (e.g. > > > compromise) and wills the opposite (the everlasting "No!"). Again, > > neither > > > the personality moments as such nor the environmental ones change, but > > > there is a separation and a sorting which allows the subordination of > > wish > > > to will that we see in play. This isn't the kind of "aha" moment that > > Marc > > > is offering us at all: Vygotsky actually calls it the "antipode" of > > future > > > will, because instead of enabling will it actually paralyzes it. But it > > is > > > indubitably a key moment in the development of the relation of > > personality > > > to environmental moments that we see in "perizhivanie". > > > > > > Thirdly, the Crisis at Seven. I think Gonzalez Rey makes a total hash > of > > > this, and I get very cross when I read his article. It is not true that > > the > > > essence of perizhivanie remained a mystery to Vygotsky simply because > he > > no > > > longer subscribes to "the aesthetic reaction" and "catharsis" and other > > > notions that he toyed with in Psych of Art (he's no longer doing > > > experiments on changes in breathing rate when people read the works of > > > Bunin either!). It might be true that he never offered a system of > facts > > > and methodological procedures for perezivanie, but that was only > because > > > one already existed, for example in the work of Wallon and Stern > > > and others. It is demonstrably not true that when Vygotsky says that > the > > > speech environment of those around him does not change when the child > > > learns to talk at one, he is not "profoundly contradictory with the > > concept > > > of sense": when you read the quotation in context, it is very clear > that > > > what he is referring to are the kinds of absolute indicators used by > > > Zalkind: how often the parents read the newspapers, the dialect they > > speak, > > > and their educational background. These do not change, and if the child > > > wants to make sense, these are the factors the child will have to > relate > > > to. > > > > > > Vygotsky gives the example of a child who is severely retarded. The > child > > > wants to play with other children and is rejected. The child walks down > > the > > > street and the other children follow, laughing. The child is shrieked > at, > > > insulted, but as soon as the humiliation stops, the child is perfectly > > > happy with himself. Vygotsky points out that the child is not able > > > to "co-generalize" the "perizhivanie" of the humiliations: each is > > > unpleasant, but they are entirely separate and cannot be connected with > > any > > > internal sense of inferiority. A normal child, however, is able to > > > "internalize" these humiliations and consequently develops a sense of > > > inferiority. We can see that what has happened is the insertion of what > > > Vygotsky calls an "intellectual" moment: an inner layer, which is what > > > distinguishes later Chaplin movies from earlier ones (again, Vygotsky's > > > example, not mine!) and what brings about the "loss of directness and > > > naivete" that we see in pre-schoolers. > > > > > > I think that the reason people find "perizhivanie" so hard to work with > > is > > > the same reason that they find "word meaning" hard to work with: it > > > develops. The feeling of drinking milk as the infant drinks it is > > > perizhivanie, and the thought of being humiliated when you are mulling > it > > > over and contemplating revenge is also perizhivanie, and only a > profound > > > analysis which includes ontogenetic development and not just learning > > will > > > show the inner link between them. It's for that reason that I think > that > > > "activity" is not a useful unit of analysis and I am much more inclined > > to > > > use your word "project", so long as it can include what Vygotsky calls > > > "inner activeness". > > > > > > Vygotsky says: > > > > > > > > > ????? ? ?????????, ?????????? ? ?. ?., ? ???? ???? ? ?????????? > > > ???????????, ??? ?????????? ???????????? ??????????????? ????????? > > > ??????????????? ?? ??????? ? ??????? ?????????????. ??? ??? ????? ????? > > > ?????????? ?????????? ? ???????? ???????? ??????????? ? ???, ???, ? ?? > > > ????? ??? ? ?????????? ???????? ??? ?????????? ???????????? > ???????????? > > > ???????????????? ????? ? ?????????, ??????? ???????????, ? ???????? > > > ???????? ?? ????? ???????????? ?????????????? ???????????, ???????????? > > > ??????????? ?????????? ?????????? ?? ????????? ? ??????? ????????????. > > ??? > > > ??? ???????, ??????? ????? ??????????, ? ?? ????? ????? ?? ?????? ??? > > ????? > > > ???-??????, ???, ? ???????? ????????? ?????????????? ??????? ? > ?????????? > > > ????????????. > > > > > > When I think, remember, etc. I am dealing with inner activeness; this > > > psychological process of inner activity is not directly linked to any > > > external activity. The new form of inner activeness in the School Age > > > consists of this: that while during the preschool years these inner > > > activities demonstrated an immediate link with action, with external > > > activeness, in the school years we have a relative autonomy which > > emerges, > > > inner activeness which is relatively independent of external > activities. > > > Here is already a child who can think, at the same time when he is > doing > > or > > > seeing something, one in whom has emerged a differentiation of inner > and > > > outer activities. > > > David Kellogg > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 10:07 AM, Andy Blunden > wrote: > > > > > > > David: "Are words really units?" > > > > > > > > Well, firstly, "units" is a *relative* term. That is, the question > is: > > > are > > > > words units of something, some complex process subject to analysis. > And > > > > which? > > > > > > > > Secondly, according to Vygotsky, "no." The concept Vygotsky proposes > > as a > > > > unit is "word meaning" which he says is a unity of sound and meaning. > > The > > > > sound is an artefact, which, detached from its meaningful utterance > in > > a > > > > transactional context is just a thing, viz., a word. Whereas "word > > > meaning" > > > > is an arrtefact-mediated action, a unit of human social activity. > > > > > > > > It is true that words can be countable or mass according to context, > > but > > > I > > > > wasn't talking about words was I? I was talking about word meaning. > > > > > > > > Andy > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > Andy Blunden > > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective- > decision-making > > > > On 8/01/2017 7:59 AM, David Kellogg wrote: > > > > > > > >> Are words really units? When we look at their ideational meaning > (that > > > is, > > > >> their logical and experiential content--their capacity for > > representing > > > >> and > > > >> linking together human experiences) they seem to fall into two very > > > >> different categories: lexical words like "perezhivanie" or "sense" > or > > > >> "personality" of "individual" and grammatical words like "of", or > > > "might", > > > >> or "is". The lexical words seem to behave like units--they are > > bounded, > > > >> discrete, and, as Andy would say, "countable" (the problem is that > > > almost > > > >> all nouns are both countable and uncountable depending on the > context > > > you > > > >> put them in, so this distinction is really not as essential as Andy > > > seems > > > >> to assume). But the more grammatical words seem to be elements of > some > > > >> larger unit, which we can call wording. > > > >> > > > >> Veresov and Fleer come up against this problem with "edintsvo" and > > > >> "edintsa". Of course, as they say, the two words are distinct. But > > this > > > >> doesn't necessarily mean that the former always corresponds to > "unity" > > > in > > > >> English and the latter is always "unit". If you look at the > paragraph > > > they > > > >> translate on 330, you can see that Vygotsky starts with an idea that > > is > > > >> quite "synoptic" and is well expressed by "unit". But in the last > > > sentence > > > >> there is a sense that "perezhivanie" is a meta-stable unit--one that > > > >> remains self-similar only through a process of thorough change, > like a > > > >> bicycle whose every part is replaced--and in English is it is better > > to > > > >> express this idea with "unity". The problem is that the differences > > > >> between > > > >> "edintsvo" and "edintsva" in Russian is a matter of gender (I think) > > and > > > >> not simply abstractness, and as a result the English version, which > > > cannot > > > >> use the resource of gender,has to rely on abstractness, so the words > > > >> "unity" and "unit" are somewhat more distinct and less linked than > > > >> "edintsvo" and "edintsva". > > > >> > > > >> There are other problems that are similar. When Gonzalez Rey uses > the > > > word > > > >> "final moment" to refer to the final period of Vygotsky's thinking, > he > > > >> leaves the anglophone reader the impression that he is referring to > > > >> Vygotsky's deathbed thoughts. On the other hand, when Veresov and > > Fleer > > > >> use > > > >> "factor" to translate the same Russian word that Gonzalez Rey is > > using, > > > >> they are giving us something more quantitative than Vygotsky > intended, > > > and > > > >> their translation of "dalee nerazloshim'im chastyami etava edinstva" > > > >> into "vital and further indivisible part of the whole" is quite > > opaque > > > in > > > >> English (notice that here Veresov and Fleer use "whole" to translate > > > >> "edinstva" rather than "unit"!) At some point you have to accept > that > > > you > > > >> can change Russian words into English words as if you were > exchanging > > > >> rubles for dollars, but you still won't be able to buy a samovar at > > > >> Walmart. > > > >> > > > >> David Kellogg > > > >> Macquarie University > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 5:21 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil < > > a.j.gil@iped.uio.no > > > > > > > >> wrote: > > > >> > > > >> Larry, all, > > > >>> > > > >>> our arguments in the 2014 address a science education literature in > > > which > > > >>> the constructivist perspective is the leading perspective; We note > > that > > > >>> the > > > >>> assertion that people learn from experience is everywhere taken for > > > >>> granted > > > >>> but nowhere accounted for. We resort to pragmatist and > > phenomenological > > > >>> literature along with Vygotsky's insights to point out the need to > > > >>> account > > > >>> for learning as something that cannot be the result of an > > individual's > > > >>> construction; in experience there is always something in excess of > > what > > > >>> you > > > >>> intended, and this is a basic feature of doing, of performing. I > take > > > >>> that > > > >>> to be your "trans" in the trans/zhivanie word, Larry, which already > > is > > > >>> denoted in the word PERezhivanie. > > > >>> > > > >>> But I do not wish to move our discussion too far away from Marc's > > paper > > > >>> and the Perezhivanie special issue. We also risk disengaging many > > that > > > >>> have > > > >>> not have the privilege we've had to have the time to read so many > > > >>> articles > > > >>> in just few days into the new year. I think we are a point in the > > > >>> discussion where a pretty clear point of agreement/disagreement, > and > > > >>> therefore of possibility for growth, has been reached with regard > to > > > the > > > >>> view of perezhivanie as "an experience" and as the "working over > > it". I > > > >>> think that to allow as many as possible to follow, and hopefully > also > > > >>> engage, I think it will be helpful to bring the diverse > perspectives > > > and > > > >>> theoretical accounts to matter in accounting for some actual > > material. > > > >>> And > > > >>> there are a number of cases described in the articles, including > > Marc's > > > >>> case of a teacher, as well as everyday facts, such as those brought > > by > > > >>> Beth, and in Beth's article... > > > >>> > > > >>> I take the task for myself too, but Saturday morning need to attend > > to > > > >>> other things! > > > >>> A > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> ________________________________________ > > > >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > edu > > > > > > > >>> on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com > > > >>> Sent: 07 January 2017 18:26 > > > >>> To: Andy Blunden; Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, > > Activity; > > > >>> Larry Purss > > > >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > > >>> > > > >>> Andy, Peter, i hope the intention to move beyond politeness to > > struggle > > > >>> with this topic materializes. > > > >>> In this vein i want to introduce exploration of the ?excess? of > > actual > > > >>> over intended meaning as he sketched his introduction to > > ?experience?. > > > >>> > > > >>> Citing Dewey, Alfredo says that this excess of actual learning over > > > >>> intended learning INCLUDES what Dewey refers to as ?attitudes? and > > > these > > > >>> ?attitudes? are FUNDAMENTALLY what count in the future. > > > >>> Alfredo and Roth then add this summary statement : > > > >>> > > > >>> There is therefore, a need to theorize experience in terms that do > > not > > > >>> assume control and rationality as the sine qua non of learning. It > > also > > > >>> implies a need to develop analytical accounts that retain the > > > >>> ?uncertainty? > > > >>> that is an ?integral part? of human experience. > > > >>> > > > >>> Where are Alfredo and Roth leading us with this sketch of > experience? > > > To > > > >>> highlight ?attitudes? that occur in the excess of actual over > > intended > > > >>> learning? The word ?attitudes? generates images of (atmosphere) and > > > >>> (moods) > > > >>> that ?flow? like cascading waterfalls that can be imaged as (force) > > or > > > as > > > >>> (receptive). Attitudes that flow to places where they are received > > > >>> within a > > > >>> certain attitude of care and concern. Not as forceful an image as > > > moving > > > >>> only with control and rationality. Describing ?weaker? thought > that > > > >>> remains uncertain but that also opens us to the other?s peril and > > > plight. > > > >>> Possibly a post-analytic motion that exceeds the intended by > > > >>> living-through > > > >>> the actual that develops ?attitudes? that are fundamentally what > > count > > > >>> for > > > >>> the future. > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > >>> > > > >>> From: Andy Blunden > > > >>> Sent: January 7, 2017 5:00 AM > > > >>> To: Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > > >>> > > > >>> OK Peter, what you say is all very true I am sure, but it > > > >>> entails conflating activity and action (as mass nouns) and > > > >>> context and mediation, and makes the required distinction > > > >>> much like one could find multiple meanings for the word > > > >>> "and" by listing the different phrases and clauses which can > > > >>> be linked by "and." > > > >>> > > > >>> Andy > > > >>> > > > >>> ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > >>> Andy Blunden > > > >>> http://home.mira.net/~andy > > > >>> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective- > > decision-making > > > >>> > > > >>> On 7/01/2017 11:42 PM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > > > >>> > > > >>>> Let me try to illustrate. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> Reading as mediated action: The cultural-historical > > > >>>> context of reading mediates how one?s attention and > > > >>>> response are channeled in socially constructed ways. So, > > > >>>> in one setting, say at home or reading in the company of > > > >>>> friends, a novel might bring a reader to tears, or invite > > > >>>> readers to share personal stories that parallel those of > > > >>>> the plot lines, or laugh out loud. But another setting, a > > > >>>> formal school or university class, would have historical > > > >>>> values and practices that mute emotional and personal > > > >>>> responses, and promote a more sober, analytic way of > > > >>>> reading and talking that fits with specific historical > > > >>>> critical conventions and genres, and discourages others. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> Reading as mediating action: The act of reading can be > > > >>>> transformational. In reading about an talking about a > > > >>>> character?s actions, a reader might reconsider a value > > > >>>> system, become more sympathetic to real people who > > > >>>> resemble oppressed characters, etc. In other words, > > > >>>> reading a text may serve a mediational process in which > > > >>>> textual ideas and exemplars enable a reader to think > > > >>>> differently. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> *From:*Andy Blunden [mailto:ablunden@mira.net] > > > >>>> *Sent:* Saturday, January 7, 2017 6:28 AM > > > >>>> *To:* Peter Smagorinsky ; eXtended Mind, > > > >>>> Culture, Activity > > > >>>> *Subject:* Re: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > > >>>> > > > >>>> Can you explain in a paragraph or two,. Peter, rather than > > > >>>> asking us all to read 10,000 words to extract an answer? > > > >>>> > > > >>>> Andy > > > >>>> > > > >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > >>>> > > > >>>> Andy Blunden > > > >>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy > > > >>>> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective- > > decision-making > > > >>>> > > > >>>> > > > >>>> On 7/01/2017 11:23 PM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > > > >>>> > > > >>>> Andy and others, I tried to work out the mediated/mediating > > > >>>> question > > > >>>> > > > >>> in the area of reading....see if this helps. > > > >>> > > > >>>> Smagorinsky, P., & O'Donnell-Allen, C. (1998). Reading as > > > mediated > > > >>>> > > > >>> and mediating action: Composing meaning for literature through > > > multimedia > > > >>> interpretive texts. Reading Research Quarterly, 33, 198-226. > > Available > > > >>> athttp://www.petersmagorinsky.net/About/PDF/RRQ/RRQ1998.pdf > > > >>> > > > >>>> -----Original Message----- > > > >>>> > > > >>>> From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > >>>> [mailto: > > > xmca-l-bounces@ > > > >>>> > > > >>> mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden > > > >>> > > > >>>> Sent: Friday, January 6, 2017 7:12 PM > > > >>>> > > > >>>> To:xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > >>>> > > > >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > > >>>> > > > >>>> I have never understood this supposed distinction, Alfredo, > > > between > > > >>>> > > > >>> "mediated activity" and "mediating activity" given that all > activity > > is > > > >>> mediated and all activity mediates. > > > >>> > > > >>>> Also, could you spell out what you mean by the "tension" > > > >>>> > > > >>>> between perezhivanie as meaning and perezhivanie as struggle. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> Andy > > > >>>> > > > >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > >>>> > > > >>>> Andy Blunden > > > >>>> > > > >>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy > > > >>>> > > > >>>> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective- > > > >>>> > > > >>> decision-making > > > >>> > > > >>>> On 5/01/2017 6:26 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > > > >>>> > > > >>>> Thanks Marc for your careful response. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> I am familiar to Vygotsky's notion of cultural mediation > > and > > > I > > > >>>> > > > >>> am aware and acknowledge that it was elaborated as a means to > > overcome > > > >>> dualism, and that it is not analog to a computational approach. > > > >>> > > > >>>> When I brought the computing analogy, I did so with > regard > > > not > > > >>>> > > > >>> to the concept of cultural mediation in general, but to the way it > > can > > > be > > > >>> (and is) deployed analytically. I react to what it seems to me a > > > >>> dichotomy > > > >>> between a "meaning" as something that is static (thereby a form of > > > >>> "representation" or reflection of the relation with the environment > > > >>> instead > > > >>> of?refraction)?? and the experiencing-as-struggling, which is > > > described > > > >>> as?transformation or change. If so, mediation here would seem to be > > > part > > > >>> of > > > >>> a methodological device that first dissects "a type of meaning" > from > > "a > > > >>> type of activity" (or a given state from the process that changes > > that > > > >>> state), and then unites it by adding the term "mediation." And this > > may > > > >>> be > > > >>> my misreading, but in that (mis)reading (which perhaps is mostly > due > > to > > > >>> the > > > >>> fact that in your empirical illustration only the initial and end > > > >>> product, > > > >>> i.e., perezhivanie, are described, but not the > > > experiencing-as-struggle, > > > >>> that is, the moving between the two), mediation here seems to do as > > > >>> analytical concept precisely what you were afraid our monism was > > doing: > > > >>> explaining nothing. Only the end products but not the process of > > > >>> producing > > > >>> perezhivanie are revealed. This may be problematic if one attends > to > > > what > > > >>> Veresov argues in the paper I shared yesterday, where he defends > the > > > >>> notion > > > >>> of mediation but also specifies that Vygotsky speaks of *mediating > > > >>> activity* (as opposed to *mediated* activity). That is, not > mediation > > > by > > > >>> signs as products, but mediating activity as the activity of > > producing > > > >>> signs (which again is an activity of producing social relations, > > > perhaps > > > >>> what you refer as "holistic meanings"?). What do you think? > > > >>> > > > >>>> I did not think you were trying to deny the influence of > > > >>>> > > > >>> Spinoza, and I do not think we ever said that Perezhivanie was > > > primarily > > > >>> a > > > >>> move from Cartesian Dualism to Monism, as you suggest in your > post. I > > > >>> copy > > > >>> and paste from my prior post: "The fact is that Vygotsky was > > building > > > a > > > >>> theory on the unity of the affect and the intellect that was to be > > > >>> grounded > > > >>> on Spinoza, and what we try to do is to explore how perezhivanie, > as > > a > > > >>> concept being developed during the same period (but not finalised > or > > > >>> totally settled!), could be seen from the perspective of the > > Spinozist > > > >>> Vygotsky." > > > >>> > > > >>>> I totally believe that bringing the distinction between > > > >>>> > > > >>> perezhivanie as meaning, and perezhivanie as struggle, is totally > > > >>> relevant, > > > >>> and Beth Ferholt's vignettes of Where the Wild Things Are do indeed > > > >>> illustrate this. We really need to address this tension, which as > > > Beth's > > > >>> examples and as our own everyday experience shows, is a tension > that > > > >>> matters not just to books and to theories but to living persons > > > >>> (children, > > > >>> teachers), a tension that moreover is present and mentioned in all > > the > > > >>> articles of the symposium. The papers offer different proposals, > and > > I > > > >>> think is so great we have the chance to discuss them! I too, as > you, > > am > > > >>> very interesting in hearing others about the questions you had > > > concerning > > > >>> sense and meaning. > > > >>> > > > >>>> Alfredo > > > >>>> > > > >>>> From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > >>>> > > > >>>> > > > >>>> > > > >>>> on behalf of > > Marc > > > >>>> > > > >>> Clar? > > > >>> > > > >>>> > > > >>>> > > > >>>> Sent: 04 January 2017 22:31 > > > >>>> > > > >>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > >>>> > > > >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > > >>>> > > > >>>> Thank you very much, Alfredo, for sharing this excellent > > > paper > > > >>>> by > > > >>>> > > > >>>> Veresov, and thanks also for your responses, which really > > > >>>> helped > > > >>>> > > > >>> me to > > > >>> > > > >>>> better understand your points. My main doubt about your > > > >>>> proposal > > > >>>> > > > >>>> was/is caused by the statement that the idea of cultural > > > >>>> > > > >>>> mediation/mediator implies a cartesian dualism. This > shocks > > > me > > > >>>> > > > >>>> because, to me, the idea of cultural mediation is > > absolutely > > > >>>> > > > >>> crucial > > > >>> > > > >>>> (in fact, the keystone) for the construction of a monist > > (and > > > >>>> > > > >>>> scientific) psychology that does not forget mind ?that > is, > > a > > > >>>> > > > >>> cultural > > > >>> > > > >>>> psychology. From your response, however, I realized that > we > > > may > > > >>>> > > > >>> be > > > >>> > > > >>>> approaching the idea of mediation in different ways. I > talk > > > of > > > >>>> > > > >>>> mediation and mediators in a quite restricted way. The > > > starting > > > >>>> > > > >>> point > > > >>> > > > >>>> of my understanding of mediation is a dialectical > > > relationship > > > >>>> > > > >>>> (organic, transactional) between the subject and the > world > > > >>>> > > > >>> (Vygotsky departs from the scheme stimulus-response, from > > reflexology). > > > >>> > > > >>>> This relationship, that Vygotsky calls primitive > > > psychological > > > >>>> > > > >>>> functions, would be basically biological. However, in > human > > > >>>> > > > >>> beings > > > >>> > > > >>>> this relationship is mediated by cultural means: signs > and > > > >>>> > > > >>> tools; or > > > >>> > > > >>>> primary, secondary and terciary artifacts. These cultural > > > means > > > >>>> > > > >>>> reorganize the primitive functions (dialectic S-O > > > >>>> relationship), > > > >>>> > > > >>> which > > > >>> > > > >>>> become then higher psychological functions (S-M-O) (see > for > > > >>>> > > > >>> example, > > > >>> > > > >>>> The problem of the cultural development of the child, in > > The > > > >>>> > > > >>> Vygotsky > > > >>> > > > >>>> Reader). Now, the subject, the cultural mediators, and > the > > > >>>> > > > >>> object form > > > >>> > > > >>>> an inseparable dialectical unit, so that the subject acts > > on > > > >>>> > > > >>>> (transforms) the object through the prism of the cultural > > > >>>> > > > >>> mediators, > > > >>> > > > >>>> the object acts on (transforms) the subject also through > > the > > > >>>> > > > >>> prism of > > > >>> > > > >>>> the cultural mediators, and the cultural means are > > themselves > > > >>>> > > > >>> also > > > >>> > > > >>>> transformed as a consequence of their mediation in this > > > >>>> > > > >>> continuous > > > >>> > > > >>>> dynamic dialectical tension. Here, for me, it is > important > > > the > > > >>>> > > > >>> idea > > > >>> > > > >>>> that the cultural means are as material (if we assume a > > > >>>> > > > >>> materialist > > > >>> > > > >>>> monism) as all the rest of the world; in fact, are parts > of > > > the > > > >>>> > > > >>>> material world which become signs or tools (and can be > > > >>>> therefore > > > >>>> > > > >>>> socially distributed). This permits the introduction of > the > > > >>>> > > > >>> scientific > > > >>> > > > >>>> study of mind-consciousness (as mediating systems of > > signs), > > > >>>> > > > >>> because > > > >>> > > > >>>> mind is not anymore something immaterial and > unobservable, > > > but > > > >>>> > > > >>> it is > > > >>> > > > >>>> as material and observable as the rest of the natural > > world. > > > It > > > >>>> > > > >>> is > > > >>> > > > >>>> from this view that, for me, the idea of cultural > mediation > > > is > > > >>>> > > > >>> the > > > >>> > > > >>>> keystone of a monist psychology that includes mind. Thus, > > > when > > > >>>> I > > > >>>> > > > >>> speak > > > >>> > > > >>>> of mediators, I refer to the cultural means which mediate > > in > > > >>>> the > > > >>>> > > > >>> S-O > > > >>> > > > >>>> dialectics; I am especially interested in signs/secondary > > > >>>> > > > >>> artifacts. > > > >>> > > > >>>> Here, it is perhaps necessary to insist that when I talk > of > > > >>>> > > > >>> studying > > > >>> > > > >>>> mediators (and their semantic structure), this doesn't > mean > > > >>>> that > > > >>>> > > > >>> they > > > >>> > > > >>>> are taken out from the activity (the flux of live) in > which > > > >>>> they > > > >>>> > > > >>>> mediate (since out of activity they are not signs > anymore); > > > >>>> > > > >>> here, I > > > >>> > > > >>>> think Vygotsky tries again to overcome another old > > dichotomy, > > > >>>> the > > > >>>> > > > >>>> functionalism-structuralism one. I hope that all this > makes > > > >>>> also > > > >>>> > > > >>> clear the difference between this view and that of computational > > > >>> psychologies (which in general are profoundly and explicitly > dualist > > > and > > > >>> not dialectic). > > > >>> > > > >>>> Back to perezhivanie, I'm not obviously trying to deny > the > > > >>>> > > > >>> influence > > > >>> > > > >>>> of Spinoza on Vygotsky's thinking (this is explicit in > > > >>>> Vygotsky's > > > >>>> > > > >>>> writings, especially in ?The teaching about emotions?, in > > the > > > >>>> > > > >>> Vol.6 of > > > >>> > > > >>>> the Collected Works). But I have doubts that Vygotsky's > > > >>>> > > > >>> introduction > > > >>> > > > >>>> of the concept of perezhivanie is to be regarded > primarily > > > as a > > > >>>> > > > >>>> movement towards monism (from a previous cartesian > > dualism), > > > >>>> and > > > >>>> > > > >>> that > > > >>> > > > >>>> this movement questions the concept of cultural > mediation. > > > >>>> > > > >>> Instead, > > > >>> > > > >>>> and I think that this is in line with some of > Gonz?lez-Rey > > > >>>> > > > >>>> observations in his paper, my impression is that the > > > >>>> > > > >>> introduction of > > > >>> > > > >>>> the concept of perezhivanie responds more to a movement > (a > > > >>>> > > > >>> further > > > >>> > > > >>>> step) towards holism (something that, in my > understanding, > > > can > > > >>>> > > > >>> also be > > > >>> > > > >>>> found in Spinoza). Thus, I think that the word meaning is > > > still > > > >>>> > > > >>> the > > > >>> > > > >>>> unit of analysis in the last Vygotsky -and therefore, the > > > idea > > > >>>> of > > > >>>> > > > >>>> cultural mediation is still crucial (in fact, in The > > problem > > > of > > > >>>> > > > >>> the > > > >>> > > > >>>> environment, he connects the concept of perezhivanie, > which > > > has > > > >>>> > > > >>> just > > > >>> > > > >>>> introduced, to the development of word meaning > [p.345-346, > > > also > > > >>>> > > > >>> cited > > > >>> > > > >>>> in my paper]). However, in my view, in the last Vygotsky > > the > > > >>>> > > > >>> focus is > > > >>> > > > >>>> not anymore primarily on the word-meaning as formed for > > > things > > > >>>> > > > >>> (or > > > >>> > > > >>>> collections of things, as in the ontogenetic research > with > > > >>>> > > > >>> Sakharov), but the focus is now in the formation of meaning for > > > holistic > > > >>> situations. > > > >>> > > > >>>> Best regards, > > > >>>> > > > >>>> Marc. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> 2017-01-03 19:16 GMT+01:00 Alfredo Jornet Gil< > > > >>>> > > > >>> a.j.gil@iped.uio.no> : > > > >>> > > > >>>> Hi Marc, all, > > > >>>> > > > >>>> thanks for joining and for your interesting work, > > which I > > > >>>> > > > >>> follow > > > >>> > > > >>>> since I became aware of it. I appreciate the way in > > your > > > >>>> > > > >>> paper you > > > >>> > > > >>>> show careful and honest attention to the texts of the > > > >>>> authors > > > >>>> > > > >>>> involved, but perhaps most of all I appreciate that > the > > > >>>> > > > >>> paper makes > > > >>> > > > >>>> the transformational dimension related to struggle > and > > > >>>> change > > > >>>> > > > >>>> salient, a dimension all papers deemed central to > > > >>>> > > > >>> perezhivanie. And I > > > >>> > > > >>>> have learned more about Vasilyuk by reading your > paper. > > > But > > > >>>> > > > >>> I also > > > >>> > > > >>>> see that we have approached the question of > > perezhivanie > > > >>>> > > > >>> differently > > > >>> > > > >>>> and I think that addressing the questions that you > > raise > > > >>>> > > > >>> concerning > > > >>> > > > >>>> our article may be a good way to both respond and > > discuss > > > >>>> > > > >>> your paper. > > > >>> > > > >>>> I am aware that our use of the term monism may be > > > >>>> > > > >>> problematic to > > > >>> > > > >>>> some, and N. Veresov, who has recently written about > > this > > > >>>> > > > >>> (see > > > >>> > > > >>>> attached article), warns against the dangers of > simply > > > >>>> > > > >>> moving from > > > >>> > > > >>>> dualism into an undifferentiating monism that > > relativizes > > > >>>> > > > >>> everything, > > > >>> > > > >>>> making development un-studiable. This seems to be the > > way > > > >>>> in > > > >>>> > > > >>> which > > > >>> > > > >>>> you have understood our argument, and of course this > is > > > not > > > >>>> > > > >>> what we are or want to be doing. > > > >>> > > > >>>> Probably many will think that *dialectical > materialism* > > > >>>> > > > >>> rather than > > > >>> > > > >>>> monism is the proper term, and I could agree with > them; > > > we > > > >>>> > > > >>> do in fact > > > >>> > > > >>>> use dialectical materialism there and elsewhere. Yet, > > we > > > >>>> > > > >>> wanted to > > > >>> > > > >>>> emphasise the Spinozist influence (an influence that > > also > > > >>>> > > > >>> runs > > > >>> > > > >>>> through Marx) and so we found it appropriate to use > the > > > >>>> term > > > >>>> > > > >>> monism, > > > >>> > > > >>>> a term that Vygotsky uses before arguing that Spinoza > > > >>>> > > > >>> "develops an essentially materialistic view" > > > >>> > > > >>>> (Collected Works, Vol. 6, p. 124). For us, the aim is > > > >>>> > > > >>> working out > > > >>> > > > >>>> ways to empirically examine and formulate problems in > > > ways > > > >>>> > > > >>> that do > > > >>> > > > >>>> not reify a mind-body dualism. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> Although overcoming dualism is foundational to the > CHAT > > > >>>> > > > >>> paradigm, I > > > >>> > > > >>>> would however not say that Vygotsky did get to solve > > all > > > of > > > >>>> > > > >>> the > > > >>> > > > >>>> problems that Cartesian dualism had created for > > > psychology, > > > >>>> > > > >>> even > > > >>> > > > >>>> though he recognised those problems brilliantly as > > early > > > as > > > >>>> > > > >>> in the > > > >>> > > > >>>> "Crisis". It should suffice to cite Vygotsky's own > > > remarks, > > > >>>> > > > >>> which we quote in the paper (and which A.N. > > > >>> > > > >>>> Leont'ev mentions in the introduction to the > collected > > > >>>> > > > >>> works), where > > > >>> > > > >>>> Vygotsky explicitly critiques some of his own prior > > ideas > > > >>>> > > > >>> for failing > > > >>> > > > >>>> to overcome dualism. We agree with those who, like F. > > G. > > > >>>> > > > >>> Rey, see > > > >>> > > > >>>> Vygotsky's project as a developing rather than as a > > > >>>> > > > >>> finalised one. > > > >>> > > > >>>> The fact is that Vygotsky was building a theory on > the > > > >>>> unity > > > >>>> > > > >>> of the > > > >>> > > > >>>> affect and the intellect that was to be grounded on > > > >>>> Spinoza, > > > >>>> > > > >>> and what > > > >>> > > > >>>> we try to do is to explore how perezhivanie, as a > > concept > > > >>>> > > > >>> being > > > >>> > > > >>>> developed during the same period (but not finalised > or > > > >>>> > > > >>> totally > > > >>> > > > >>>> settled!), could be seen from the perspective of the > > > >>>> > > > >>> Spinozist Vygotsky. > > > >>> > > > >>>> As you note, in our article we argue that, if one > takes > > > the > > > >>>> > > > >>> Spinozist > > > >>> > > > >>>> one-substance approach, classical concepts used in > > > >>>> > > > >>> non-classical > > > >>> > > > >>>> psychology, at least in the way they are commonly > used > > in > > > >>>> > > > >>> the current > > > >>> > > > >>>> literature, should be revised. One such concept is > > > >>>> > > > >>> mediation. And I > > > >>> > > > >>>> personally do not have much of a problem when > mediation > > > is > > > >>>> > > > >>> used to > > > >>> > > > >>>> denote the fundamental fact that every thing exists > > > always > > > >>>> > > > >>> through > > > >>> > > > >>>> *another*, never in and of itself. But I do think > that > > it > > > >>>> is > > > >>>> > > > >>>> problematic to identify MEDIATORS, such as "a > meaning", > > > as > > > >>>> a > > > >>>> > > > >>> means to > > > >>> > > > >>>> account for or explain developmental processes and > > > learning > > > >>>> > > > >>> events, > > > >>> > > > >>>> precisely because it is there, at least in my view, > > that > > > >>>> > > > >>> dualism creeps in. > > > >>> > > > >>>> For example, I find it paradoxical that you are > > concerned > > > >>>> > > > >>> that our > > > >>> > > > >>>> monist approach risks turning perezhivanie into a > > useless > > > >>>> > > > >>> category > > > >>> > > > >>>> because it may be used to explain everything and > > nothing, > > > >>>> > > > >>> and yet you > > > >>> > > > >>>> do not seem to have a problem using the term > mediation > > to > > > >>>> > > > >>> account for > > > >>> > > > >>>> the transformation of perezhivanie without clearly > > > >>>> > > > >>> elaborating on how > > > >>> > > > >>>> mediation does change anything or what it looks like > > as a > > > >>>> > > > >>> real > > > >>> > > > >>>> process. How is it different saying that a > perezhivanie > > > >>>> > > > >>> mediates the > > > >>> > > > >>>> experiencing-as-struggle from simply saying that it > > > >>>> > > > >>> "affects" or > > > >>> > > > >>>> "determines" it? Indeed, if perezhivanie mediates > > > >>>> > > > >>>> experiencing-as-struggle, does not > > > >>>> experiencing-as-struglgle > > > >>>> > > > >>> too > > > >>> > > > >>>> mediate perezhivanie? And do not both may be said to > > > >>>> mediate > > > >>>> > > > >>> development, or development mediate them? Is not this explaining > > > >>> everything > > > >>> and nothing? > > > >>> > > > >>>> I do believe you can argue that there is a difference > > > >>>> between > > > >>>> > > > >>>> mediation and classical psychology's cause-effect > > > >>>> relations, > > > >>>> > > > >>> but to > > > >>> > > > >>>> show this you need to dig into the dialectical > > > >>>> underpinnings > > > >>>> > > > >>> of the > > > >>> > > > >>>> theory. In your paper, you offer a nice analysis of a > > > >>>> lovely > > > >>>> > > > >>> case of > > > >>> > > > >>>> a teacher who, in dealing with a challenge with one > of > > > her > > > >>>> > > > >>> students, > > > >>> > > > >>>> changes her perezhivanie. I think you can rightly > argue > > > >>>> that > > > >>>> > > > >>> there is > > > >>> > > > >>>> a semiotic transformation, and I fully support your > > > >>>> > > > >>> statement that by > > > >>> > > > >>>> studying discourse we can empirically approach > > questions > > > of > > > >>>> > > > >>>> psychological development. The contradictions you > show > > as > > > >>>> > > > >>> being > > > >>> > > > >>>> involved and resolved resonate really well with what > I > > > >>>> > > > >>> experience as > > > >>> > > > >>>> a parent or as a teacher in the classroom. Yet, > without > > > >>>> > > > >>> unpacking > > > >>> > > > >>>> what this "mediation" taking place between one > > > perezhivanie > > > >>>> > > > >>> and the > > > >>> > > > >>>> next one means as a concrete and real, the same > > analysis > > > >>>> > > > >>> could be done taking an information processing approach: > > > >>> > > > >>>> there is an situation that is processed > (represented?) > > in > > > >>>> > > > >>> one way, > > > >>> > > > >>>> which then leads to a (cognitive) dissonance, and > then > > > >>>> there > > > >>>> > > > >>> is a > > > >>> > > > >>>> cognitive resolution by means of which the situation > is > > > >>>> > > > >>> presented > > > >>> > > > >>>> differently in consciousness (indeed, when seen in > this > > > >>>> way, > > > >>>> > > > >>> the term > > > >>> > > > >>>> perezhivanie and the term "representation" become > > almost > > > >>>> > > > >>>> indistinguishable). How is mediation, as an > analytical > > > >>>> > > > >>> concept, > > > >>> > > > >>>> helping here? And most importantly to the question of > > > >>>> > > > >>> perezhivanie, > > > >>> > > > >>>> how is this analysis going to show the internal > > > connection > > > >>>> > > > >>> between > > > >>> > > > >>>> intellect and affect that Vygotsky formulates as > > > >>>> > > > >>> constitutive of the notion of perezhivanie? > > > >>> > > > >>>> I believe that the key lies in understanding what > > > Vygotsky > > > >>>> > > > >>> means when > > > >>> > > > >>>> he says that perezhivanie is a unit of analysis. I > will > > > not > > > >>>> > > > >>> repeat > > > >>> > > > >>>> here what already is written in at least a couple of > > the > > > >>>> > > > >>> articles in > > > >>> > > > >>>> the special issue (Blunden, ours), that is the > > difference > > > >>>> > > > >>> between > > > >>> > > > >>>> analysis by elements and unit analysis (Vygotsky > > 1987). A > > > >>>> > > > >>> unit > > > >>> > > > >>>> analysis approach is consistent with Spinoza, for > whom > > > >>>> > > > >>> cause-effect > > > >>> > > > >>>> explanations were not adequate, requiring instead an > > > >>>> > > > >>> understanding of > > > >>> > > > >>>> self-development, perezhivanie as a kernel cell for > the > > > >>>> > > > >>> development > > > >>> > > > >>>> of personality. And I think you may be after this in > > your > > > >>>> > > > >>> article in > > > >>> > > > >>>> suggesting a form of continuous movement from > > > perezhivanie > > > >>>> to > > > >>>> > > > >>>> experiencing-as-struggle. But perhaps the major > > > difficulty > > > >>>> I > > > >>>> > > > >>> find is that, in positing Vygotsky's perezhivanie as "a type of > > > meaning" > > > >>> > > > >>>> and Vasilyuk's perezhivanie (or > > experiencing-as-struggle) > > > >>>> as > > > >>>> > > > >>> a "type > > > >>> > > > >>>> of activity," it is difficult not to see here a > > division > > > >>>> > > > >>> between > > > >>> > > > >>>> product and process, a division that then is > > analytically > > > >>>> > > > >>> bridged by > > > >>> > > > >>>> the addition of a third term, mediation, that should > > > bring > > > >>>> > > > >>> back the > > > >>> > > > >>>> real movement between the product and the process. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> A different approach involves considering the > concrete > > > >>>> > > > >>> extension of > > > >>> > > > >>>> actual living and lived social relations, and look at > > > them > > > >>>> as > > > >>>> > > > >>>> generative phenomena. What is there in the encounter > > > >>>> between > > > >>>> > > > >>> Carla > > > >>> > > > >>>> and the child that leads to change? For it is not > > inside > > > >>>> the > > > >>>> > > > >>> mind, > > > >>> > > > >>>> but in real life, in consciousness as the real > relation > > > >>>> > > > >>> between people, that Carla is changed. > > > >>> > > > >>>> How is the semantic structure that you nicely present > > and > > > >>>> > > > >>> attribute > > > >>> > > > >>>> to Carla a product of the social relation between her > > and > > > >>>> > > > >>> the child? > > > >>> > > > >>>> I think that to rightfully situate perezhivanie as a > > > >>>> concept > > > >>>> > > > >>> in a > > > >>> > > > >>>> Vygotskian framework, we ought to address its > relation > > to > > > >>>> > > > >>> the genetic > > > >>> > > > >>>> law of development. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> There is much more to disentangle, but this is long > > > enough. > > > >>>> > > > >>> I hope I > > > >>> > > > >>>> have succeeded in making clear these ideas. Thanks so > > > much > > > >>>> > > > >>> for > > > >>> > > > >>>> engaging in the discussion! > > > >>>> > > > >>>> Alfredo > > > >>>> > > > >>>> ________________________________________ > > > >>>> > > > >>>> From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > >>>> > > > >>>> > > > >>>> > > > >>>> on behalf > of > > > >>>> Marc > > > >>>> > > > >>> Clar? > > > >>> > > > >>>> > > > >>>> > > > >>>> > > > >>>> Sent: 02 January 2017 22:14 > > > >>>> > > > >>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > >>>> > > > >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and > Perezhivanie! > > > >>>> > > > >>>> Hi, all, and thank you so much, Alfredo, for your > kind > > > >>>> > > > >>> invitation to > > > >>> > > > >>>> participate in this discussion. My paper in the MCA > > > special > > > >>>> > > > >>> issue > > > >>> > > > >>>> focuses on a distinction between a type of activity, > > > which > > > >>>> I > > > >>>> > > > >>> argue > > > >>> > > > >>>> that is what Vasilyuk called *perezhivanie* > > > (experiencing) > > > >>>> > > > >>> and a type > > > >>> > > > >>>> of semiotic mediator, which I argue that is what > > > Vygotsky, > > > >>>> > > > >>> in The > > > >>> > > > >>>> Problem of the Environment, called *perezhivanie.* I > > > argue, > > > >>>> > > > >>> following > > > >>> > > > >>>> Vasilyuk, that in experiencing activities (Vasilyuk's > > > >>>> > > > >>> perezhivanie), > > > >>> > > > >>>> this type of mediator is profoundly transformed ? in > > > fact, > > > >>>> > > > >>> that > > > >>> > > > >>>> experiencing activities consist of the semiotic > > > >>>> > > > >>> transformation of this type of mediator. > > > >>> > > > >>>> As Veresov and Fleer argue in their commentary, > > > >>>> perezhivanie > > > >>>> > > > >>> (as a > > > >>> > > > >>>> type of > > > >>>> > > > >>>> mediator) is for me a psychological phenomenon, one > > which > > > >>>> is > > > >>>> > > > >>> of > > > >>> > > > >>>> course conceptualized from a specific theoretical > > > >>>> framework. > > > >>>> > > > >>> But the > > > >>> > > > >>>> phenomenon is also visible from other theoretical > > > >>>> frameworks > > > >>>> > > > >>> as well, > > > >>> > > > >>>> as I mention in the paper. This phenomenon is my main > > > >>>> > > > >>> interest, and > > > >>> > > > >>>> it is from this interest that I arrived at the > concept > > of > > > >>>> > > > >>> perezhivanie (not the other way around). > > > >>> > > > >>>> Now, the phenomenon is that at least emotion, > > reasoning, > > > >>>> and > > > >>>> > > > >>> volition > > > >>> > > > >>>> (formation of conscious purposes) seem to be > decisively > > > >>>> > > > >>> mediated by > > > >>> > > > >>>> holistic situational meaning. My current research > > concern > > > >>>> is > > > >>>> > > > >>> trying > > > >>> > > > >>>> to find ways to study and understand how this > mediation > > > >>>> > > > >>> occurs and > > > >>> > > > >>>> how these semiotic mediators are transformed and > > > >>>> > > > >>> distributed. From > > > >>> > > > >>>> this view, I think that experiencing activities > > > (Vasilyuk's > > > >>>> > > > >>>> perezhivanie) may provide a good terrain to study > these > > > >>>> > > > >>> issues > > > >>> > > > >>>> (especially regarding the mediation of emotion), as I > > > tried > > > >>>> > > > >>> to exemplify in the paper. > > > >>> > > > >>>> Studying semiotic mediation, however, is of course > not > > > >>>> easy. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> Following Vygotsky, I assume that extended discourse > is > > > the > > > >>>> > > > >>>> manifestation of thinking within certain > psychological > > > >>>> > > > >>> conditions > > > >>> > > > >>>> (Vygotsky's Thinking and Speech, chapter 7), and I > also > > > >>>> > > > >>> assume the > > > >>> > > > >>>> Vygotsky's law of the unity of the structure and > > function > > > >>>> of > > > >>>> > > > >>> thinking > > > >>> > > > >>>> (Vygotsky's Thinking and Speech, chapter 6). From > these > > > two > > > >>>> > > > >>>> assumptions, I propose that meaning (and its > functions > > in > > > >>>> > > > >>> human > > > >>> > > > >>>> activity) can be scientifically studied by > structurally > > > >>>> > > > >>> analyzing the > > > >>> > > > >>>> narratives generated by subjects, considering that > the > > > >>>> > > > >>> discourse > > > >>> > > > >>>> produced in the narrative is the point of departure > of > > > this > > > >>>> > > > >>> study, > > > >>> > > > >>>> but that considerable analytical work must be done to > > > move > > > >>>> > > > >>> from this > > > >>> > > > >>>> discourse to the full characterization of meaning. It > > is > > > in > > > >>>> > > > >>> that > > > >>> > > > >>>> point where I find useful the work developed by > > Greimas, > > > >>>> the > > > >>>> > > > >>> usefulness of which I only suggest in the paper. > > > >>> > > > >>>> >From this background, I found many interesting ideas > > and > > > >>>> > > > >>> questions > > > >>> > > > >>>> in the > > > >>>> > > > >>>> other papers of the special issue. In this first > post I > > > >>>> will > > > >>>> > > > >>> propose > > > >>> > > > >>>> two of them for possible discussion. The first one > was > > > >>>> > > > >>> raised by > > > >>> > > > >>>> Gonz?lez-Rey, when he introduces, in connection with > > > >>>> > > > >>> perezhivanie, > > > >>> > > > >>>> the concepts of personality, and especially, of > sense. > > > So, > > > >>>> > > > >>> which is > > > >>> > > > >>>> the conceptual (and-or > > > >>>> > > > >>>> phenomenal) relation between perezhivanie and sense? > > > >>>> > > > >>> Gonz?lez-Rey > > > >>> > > > >>>> suggests that both concepts are somewhat similar (and > > > >>>> > > > >>> overcome by the > > > >>> > > > >>>> concept of ?subjective sense?); my opinion, partly > > > >>>> expressed > > > >>>> > > > >>> in my > > > >>> > > > >>>> commentary, is that perezhivanie is a type of > meaning, > > > >>>> which > > > >>>> > > > >>> includes > > > >>> > > > >>>> different levels of depth, and that sense corresponds > > to > > > >>>> the > > > >>>> > > > >>> deepest > > > >>> > > > >>>> level of meaning (which can be characterized as a > > system > > > of > > > >>>> > > > >>> semic > > > >>> > > > >>>> oppositions). Therefore, sense wouldn't be in > > opposition > > > to > > > >>>> > > > >>> meaning > > > >>> > > > >>>> (as ?a microcosm of human consciousness?, as Kozulin > > > >>>> > > > >>> remembers in his > > > >>> > > > >>>> commentary), although it would be in opposition to > > > >>>> > > > >>> manifested meaning (the surface level of meaning). > > > >>> > > > >>>> The second issue was raised by Roth and Jornet, and I > > > think > > > >>>> > > > >>> it goes > > > >>> > > > >>>> beyond the issue of perezhivanie itself. If I > > understand > > > >>>> > > > >>> them well, > > > >>> > > > >>>> they argue that Vygotsky's core proposal of cultural > > > >>>> > > > >>> mediation is > > > >>> > > > >>>> influenced by the Cartesian dualism (mind-matter), > and > > > >>>> that a > > > >>>> > > > >>>> promising approach to Cultural Psychology would be a > > > >>>> > > > >>> Spinozist > > > >>> > > > >>>> monism. I am actually very interested on the issue of > > > which > > > >>>> > > > >>>> epistemological position can best substantiate the > > > >>>> > > > >>> construction of a > > > >>> > > > >>>> cultural psychology, and that's why I feel inclined > to > > > take > > > >>>> > > > >>> the > > > >>> > > > >>>> opportunity to ask for your opinions about that. > About > > > the > > > >>>> > > > >>> proposal > > > >>> > > > >>>> of Roth and Jornet, I have some doubts. First, I > don't > > > see > > > >>>> > > > >>> why > > > >>> > > > >>>> Vygotsky's proposals can be seen as dualist (in the > > > >>>> > > > >>> Cartesian sense) > > > >>> > > > >>>> -I suspect that it is because of the analytical > > > >>>> > > > >>> distinctions?. > > > >>> > > > >>>> Anyway, in my understanding, Vygotsky explicitly > > assumes > > > a > > > >>>> > > > >>>> materialist monism (for example in The Crisis), and > in > > > fact > > > >>>> > > > >>> he constructs his proposal on mediation upon reflexology, which > also > > > >>> explicitly assumed a materialist monism (e.g. > > > >>> > > > >>>> Sechenov). Would a Spinozist monism be a better point > > of > > > >>>> > > > >>> departure? I > > > >>> > > > >>>> don't know, in my understanding it is a more idealist > > > >>>> > > > >>> monism, and I > > > >>> > > > >>>> don't clearly see what could be gained. In my > opinion, > > a > > > >>>> > > > >>> scientific > > > >>> > > > >>>> psychology which includes the study of mind is only > > > >>>> possible > > > >>>> > > > >>> if any > > > >>> > > > >>>> type of monism is assumed. However, in my view, for a > > > >>>> > > > >>> scientific > > > >>> > > > >>>> psychology, the ontological nature of the world is > > > perhaps > > > >>>> > > > >>> less > > > >>> > > > >>>> important (it is an issue for metaphysics?), and I am > > > >>>> > > > >>> inclined to assume a neutral monism (e.g. Russell). > > > >>> > > > >>>> So from this view, a materialist monism and a > Spinozist > > > >>>> > > > >>> monism > > > >>> > > > >>>> wouldn't be so different, so from both views it could > > be > > > >>>> > > > >>> assumed that > > > >>> > > > >>>> all is of the same nature and all is similarly > knowable > > > >>>> > > > >>> (including > > > >>> > > > >>>> mind) [which is the ontological nature of the world > and > > > to > > > >>>> > > > >>> what > > > >>> > > > >>>> degree it is knowable are issues that can be left to > > > >>>> > > > >>> philosophy]. > > > >>> > > > >>>> However, in my opinion, this does not mean that, > while > > > >>>> > > > >>> assuming a > > > >>> > > > >>>> monism, analytical distinctions cannot be done when > > > >>>> studying > > > >>>> > > > >>> the > > > >>> > > > >>>> world. In that sense, I had the impression that Roth > > and > > > >>>> > > > >>> Jornet > > > >>> > > > >>>> tended to dilute analytical distinctions in the name > of > > > >>>> > > > >>> monism; I > > > >>> > > > >>>> repeat that I don't know if I understood them well, > but > > > if > > > >>>> > > > >>> this was > > > >>> > > > >>>> the case, in my opinion, analysis would be impossible > > > >>>> within > > > >>>> > > > >>> the new > > > >>> > > > >>>> psychology suggested by Roth and Jornet, and, > regarding > > > >>>> > > > >>> perezhivanie, > > > >>> > > > >>>> there would be the danger, noted by Vygotsky in The > > > Crisis > > > >>>> > > > >>> and > > > >>> > > > >>>> cautioned by Kozulin in his commentary, that by > meaning > > > >>>> > > > >>> everything, perezhivanie ends by meaning nothing. > > > >>> > > > >>>> Best regards and happy new year, > > > >>>> > > > >>>> Marc. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> 2017-01-02 9:12 GMT+01:00 Alfredo Jornet Gil< > > > >>>> > > > >>> a.j.gil@iped.uio.no> : > > > >>> > > > >>>> Dear all, > > > >>>> > > > >>>> I would like to join David, Luisa, Ana, Henry and > > the > > > >>>> > > > >>> others to wish > > > >>> > > > >>>> you all a Happy New Year! May it be full of joy, > > > peace, > > > >>>> > > > >>> and opportunity. > > > >>> > > > >>>> I also would like to begin the year announcing > our > > > >>>> first > > > >>>> > > > >>> ?MCA > > > >>> > > > >>>> article discussion, ?although in fact corresponds > > to > > > >>>> the > > > >>>> > > > >>> last issue > > > >>> > > > >>>> of the year > > > >>>> > > > >>>> we > > > >>>> > > > >>>> just passed, Issue 4 on Perezhivanie. This is a > > very > > > >>>> > > > >>> special > > > >>> > > > >>>> *special* issue, not only because its topic has > > > raised > > > >>>> > > > >>> lots of > > > >>> > > > >>>> interest lately in > > > >>>> > > > >>>> the > > > >>>> > > > >>>> CHAT community but also because, greatly > > coordinated > > > by > > > >>>> > > > >>> Andy Blunden > > > >>> > > > >>>> and the rest of the editorial team, the issue > takes > > > the > > > >>>> > > > >>> form of a > > > >>> > > > >>>> symposium where authors get the chance to present > > and > > > >>>> > > > >>> respond to > > > >>> > > > >>>> each others' ideas on the subject. In my view, > this > > > >>>> > > > >>> allows having a > > > >>> > > > >>>> rich and > > > >>>> > > > >>>> multidimensional > > > >>>> > > > >>>> approach to a subject as important as > perezhivanie. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> Following with the dialogical spirit in which the > > > >>>> > > > >>> special issue was > > > >>> > > > >>>> assembled, we will focus on one lead article, but > > > >>>> hoping > > > >>>> > > > >>> to also > > > >>> > > > >>>> engage ideas and insights present in or relevant > to > > > >>>> other > > > >>>> > > > >>>> contributions in the issue. ?Marc Clar?'s > "Vygotsky > > > and > > > >>>> > > > >>> Vasilyuk on > > > >>> > > > >>>> Perezhivanie: Two Notions and One Word" will be > our > > > >>>> > > > >>> focus. The > > > >>> > > > >>>> article very nicely engages the lead work of > > > Vygotsky, > > > >>>> > > > >>> but also the > > > >>> > > > >>>> less known ??(?in educational literature) but > > totally > > > >>>> > > > >>> relevant works > > > >>> > > > >>>> of psychologist ?F. Vasilyuk and semiotician > > > >>>> > > > >>>> A. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> J. Greimas, mobilising a number of key concepts > > > >>>> > > > >>> including those of > > > >>> > > > >>>> semiotic > > > >>>> > > > >>>> mediation and transformation. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> ?In addition to Marc, who will soon join us, I > have > > > >>>> > > > >>> encouraged some > > > >>> > > > >>>> of > > > >>>> > > > >>>> the > > > >>>> > > > >>>> other authors in the special issue to also join > as > > > >>>> > > > >>> "relevant > > > >>> > > > >>>> others," if time and circumstances allow them. > > Let's > > > >>>> > > > >>> hope that this > > > >>> > > > >>>> will help keeping the symposium spirit up. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> Marc's article is attached to this e-mail and > will > > be > > > >>>> > > > >>> made open > > > >>> > > > >>>> access at the T&F pages as soon as people is back > > > from > > > >>>> > > > >>> the holidays. > > > >>> > > > >>>> The T&F link > > > >>>> > > > >>>> is > > > >>>> > > > >>>> this: > > > >>>> > > > >>>> http://www.tandfonline.com/ > > doi/full/10.1080/10749039 > > > . > > > >>>> > > > >>> 2016.1186194 > > > >>> > > > >>>> The link to the MCA Forum pages, where we > announce > > > our > > > >>>> > > > >>> discussions > > > >>> > > > >>>> and other xmca things, is here: > > > >>>> http://lchc.ucsd.edu/MCA/ > > > >>>> > > > >>>> I wish us all a very productive and interesting > > > >>>> > > > >>> discussion. > > > >>> > > > >>>> Alfredo > > > >>>> > > > >>>> > > > >>> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > From dkellogg60@gmail.com Tue Jan 10 21:22:35 2017 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2017 16:22:35 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! In-Reply-To: References: <1483344752182.40904@iped.uio.no> <1483467423798.57819@iped.uio.no> <1483601196884.31418@iped.uio.no> <5df5e870-3ef8-70d6-0c17-f8647ba17e62@mira.net> <587124d9.d957620a.4a5a8.bd56@mx.google.com> <1483820996800.91513@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: You flatter me, Mike. Here's what Vygotsky did say: ?????????????, ????? ???????????? ???????, ??????? ?????? ???? ?????? ??? ???????? ?????,? ??? ??????? ?? ?? ?????????? ??????????? ? ????????????? ? ??????? ???? ????? ???????: ?????? ????? ???? ???????, ??? ??? ???????? ??? ???????, ?????? ????????? ??????? ? ????????? ???????? ???? ?????. ??????, ??????? ?? ???? ?? ???????. ????? ???? ??? ?? ?????????, ??????? ????? ??? ??????? ???????? ??????????. ? ?? ???? ? ????? ???? ? ?????????? ??????????? ??????? ???????? ?????????? ????????? ?? ??????????. ??, ? ?????, ?????? ??????????: ? ??? ??????, ????? ??????? ????? ???????? ?????? ?????, ????? ?? ????? ??????????? ?????? ??????????? ?????, ??? ????????? ? ??????? ???????? ? ?????, ???? ???? ? ????????? ? ??????? ????? ??????????. "Consequently, the most substantial shift, which must be carried out in the study of the environment?a transition from absolute indicators to relative ones?it is necessary to study the environment for the child: first of all it is necessary to study what it signifies to the child, what the relationship of the child is to the different aspects of this environment. For example, the child of less than one does not speak. Once he speaks, the speech environment of those in the immediate environment remains unchanged. And the year before and the year after the absolute indicators of the culture of speech surrounding him is practically unchanged. But, I think, everyone will agree that from the minute when the child begins to understand the first words, when he begins to utter his first sensible words, his relationship to the moments of speech in the environment and the role of speech in relationship to the child are very much changed." I thought "absolute indicators" was not a term that would mean a lot to most people on this list--you really have to read it in relation to "relative indicators" and Vygotsky's critique of the textbook that his students are reading (by Aron Zalkind). Vygotsky uses "perezhivanie" as an example of a relational indicator. But Zalkind's SES, the number of times a child visits the bathhouse each week, the cubic metres in a family apartment, the newspapers that the family subscribes to, the dialect a family speaks--these are all examples of the former. I just thought that "endowment" would be a little more meaningful to others; even when you change rubles to dollars, you can't get a samovar at Costco. All indicators are relative indicators in that sense. David Kellogg Macquarie University On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 3:19 PM, mike cole wrote: > ?David -- I am finding it very difficult to distinguish what Vygotsky wrote > what you are saying that Vygotsky is saying, and what you are saying. > > I read the phrase I quoted as coming from LSV not DK. And I went looking > for the Russian passage in your email to see if I interpreted the notion of > endowment the way Vygotsky did, only to find out it was you writing!! > > Getting slow in my old age for sure. > > mike > > > > > > ? > > On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 7:29 PM, David Kellogg > wrote: > > > Tenaciously, Mike. The word "endowment" is a metaphor for something > given, > > like the endowment of a university, or the patrimony of an investment > fund. > > The child's biological endowment is given to the child by heredity and > > speech doesn't change that endowment. The most important part of > > the child's social endowment is, as Bronfenbrenner points out, largely > > unseen by the child: it's what Mommy and Daddy do for a living. That is > not > > changed by the child's learning speech either. > > > > Vygotsky's a semiotician: not an environmentalist and he's also not a > > constructivist. The semiotic truth isn't in the middle; it's > simultaneously > > beyond both extremes. It's beyond environmentalism because what the child > > obtains from the social and cultural environment is a semiotic and not > > simply an interpersonal one; it's the context of culture and the > resources > > of the language system and not simply the immediate text and the > immediate > > situation. It's beyond constructivism, because what the child construes > in > > building up a grammar is not simply the meanings but the meaning > > potentials; not just seen paths for the taking but also the unseen ones > not > > taken. > > > > That's why even the most social-behavioristic psychologists can > > underestimate the influence of the environment and even the most > "childist" > > constructivists can understate the creativity involved; why people like > > Chomsky end up invoking biology and conversely people like Skinner end up > > invoking culture and environment to make up the deficit. Both assume that > > language has to be literally "acquired" or "built up" and cannot see a > way > > to do this with finite materials. But the resources are not material at > > all; they are semiotic, and "construction", like "endowment," is simply > a > > metaphor we use to lend the weightlessness of word meaning a little mass. > > > > David Kellogg > > Macquarie University > > > > On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 1:01 PM, mike cole wrote: > > > > > You believe the following, David? > > > > > > Neither the biological nor the social endowment > > > of the child greatly changes in the acquisition of speech; > > > nevertheless,..... > > > > > > mike > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 3:24 PM, David Kellogg > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Andy: > > > > > > > > A good paradox! Word meaning is a unit, but the spoken word itself is > > > just > > > > an element--a thing. We can see that this is, on the face of it, > > > > impossible: within a single holistic analysis, an element can be a > part > > > of > > > > a unit, but a unit can never be a part of an element. So what you are > > > > referring to when you say that the word is a thing is the "sonic" or > > > > "phasal" quality of the word: its "acoustic" properties, its > > "phonetics". > > > > > > > > But not its phonology. The word that Vygotsky uses for "phoneme" > refers > > > to > > > > the 1929 work of the Prague Circle, originally the Moscow Circle. He > > is a > > > > LITTLE coy about this, because the founders, Jakobson and Trubetskoy, > > > were > > > > not very popular with the authorities and Vygotsky already had plenty > > of > > > > heterodox acquaintances to worry about. Nevertheless, whenever > Vygotsky > > > > says "phoneme", we know he really means what Jakobson and Trubetskoy > > > called > > > > "morphophonemes". We know this because the examples he actually > > > > gives--Russian case endings--are morpho-phonemes and not simply > > phonemes: > > > > so for example in English the sound /s/ is a simple phoneme when I > say > > > the > > > > word "self" but if I say "Andy's" the sound /s/ is a morpho-phoneme: > a > > > > difference in sounding that makes a difference in meaning. The system > > > (that > > > > is, the paradigmatic menu) of these differences in soundings are what > > the > > > > Moscow and Prague Circles called "phonology" (as OPPOSED to > phonetics), > > > and > > > > this is the kind of "phoneme" that Vygotsky is really talking about. > > > > > > > > Still, you can see that it is not what he is talking about when he > says > > > > word meaning, because these units are still nowhere near big enough > to > > > > describe the kinds of changes which must occur when verbal thinking > > > > develops. I feel the same way about a lot of the examples offered of > > > > "perezhivanie", including Marc's. If MacDuff's grief or Carla's > > epiphany > > > > about the misbehavior of her kids being due to "outside influences" > > > really > > > > is the unit of personality and experience that Vygotsky wants us to > use > > > > when we analyse the ontogenesis of personality, then it is no more > > > > appropriate than using the morpho-phoneme to analyse the whole of > > verbal > > > > thinking. Just as evolution (of species) requires very different > units > > > from > > > > history (of classes), development, whether we are talking about > verbal > > > > thinking or the personality as a whole, is going to require very > > > different > > > > units from learning, whether we are talking about MacDuff or Carla. > The > > > > units must be able to develop; that is, the relationship of the > > elements > > > > within them must be susceptible to many changes over time. > > > > > > > > Let me give three examples of how this happens in different > > > "perezhivanie". > > > > They are not mine; they are Vygotsky's, and they are all from the > > > > Pedological Lectures. > > > > > > > > First, the Crisis at One. Neither the biological nor the social > > endowment > > > > of the child greatly changes in the acquisition of speech; > > nevertheless, > > > > the relationship between the personality and the environment, of > which > > > > both personality moments and environmental ones are constituent > > elements, > > > > is entirely transformed. Here we are not talking about phonemes, or > > even > > > > morpho-phonemes: we are talking about "wordings"--whole utterances. > In > > > > Melbourne I presented some data that demonstrated this beautifully--a > > > > child's first word is actually an attempt to imitate a whole > > > conversation. > > > > > > > > Second, the Crisis at Three. Vygotsky spends a lot of time discussing > > the > > > > "Seven Stars"--the symptoms of the "Terrible Twos" and > "Threenagehood" > > > > noted by harried parents everywhere. But by the end of his analysis > > it's > > > > clear that what really happens is a new relationship between wish and > > > > will: in extreme cases, the child actually wishes for one thing (e.g. > > > > compromise) and wills the opposite (the everlasting "No!"). Again, > > > neither > > > > the personality moments as such nor the environmental ones change, > but > > > > there is a separation and a sorting which allows the subordination of > > > wish > > > > to will that we see in play. This isn't the kind of "aha" moment that > > > Marc > > > > is offering us at all: Vygotsky actually calls it the "antipode" of > > > future > > > > will, because instead of enabling will it actually paralyzes it. But > it > > > is > > > > indubitably a key moment in the development of the relation of > > > personality > > > > to environmental moments that we see in "perizhivanie". > > > > > > > > Thirdly, the Crisis at Seven. I think Gonzalez Rey makes a total hash > > of > > > > this, and I get very cross when I read his article. It is not true > that > > > the > > > > essence of perizhivanie remained a mystery to Vygotsky simply because > > he > > > no > > > > longer subscribes to "the aesthetic reaction" and "catharsis" and > other > > > > notions that he toyed with in Psych of Art (he's no longer doing > > > > experiments on changes in breathing rate when people read the works > of > > > > Bunin either!). It might be true that he never offered a system of > > facts > > > > and methodological procedures for perezivanie, but that was only > > because > > > > one already existed, for example in the work of Wallon and Stern > > > > and others. It is demonstrably not true that when Vygotsky says that > > the > > > > speech environment of those around him does not change when the child > > > > learns to talk at one, he is not "profoundly contradictory with the > > > concept > > > > of sense": when you read the quotation in context, it is very clear > > that > > > > what he is referring to are the kinds of absolute indicators used by > > > > Zalkind: how often the parents read the newspapers, the dialect they > > > speak, > > > > and their educational background. These do not change, and if the > child > > > > wants to make sense, these are the factors the child will have to > > relate > > > > to. > > > > > > > > Vygotsky gives the example of a child who is severely retarded. The > > child > > > > wants to play with other children and is rejected. The child walks > down > > > the > > > > street and the other children follow, laughing. The child is shrieked > > at, > > > > insulted, but as soon as the humiliation stops, the child is > perfectly > > > > happy with himself. Vygotsky points out that the child is not able > > > > to "co-generalize" the "perizhivanie" of the humiliations: each is > > > > unpleasant, but they are entirely separate and cannot be connected > with > > > any > > > > internal sense of inferiority. A normal child, however, is able to > > > > "internalize" these humiliations and consequently develops a sense of > > > > inferiority. We can see that what has happened is the insertion of > what > > > > Vygotsky calls an "intellectual" moment: an inner layer, which is > what > > > > distinguishes later Chaplin movies from earlier ones (again, > Vygotsky's > > > > example, not mine!) and what brings about the "loss of directness and > > > > naivete" that we see in pre-schoolers. > > > > > > > > I think that the reason people find "perizhivanie" so hard to work > with > > > is > > > > the same reason that they find "word meaning" hard to work with: it > > > > develops. The feeling of drinking milk as the infant drinks it is > > > > perizhivanie, and the thought of being humiliated when you are > mulling > > it > > > > over and contemplating revenge is also perizhivanie, and only a > > profound > > > > analysis which includes ontogenetic development and not just learning > > > will > > > > show the inner link between them. It's for that reason that I think > > that > > > > "activity" is not a useful unit of analysis and I am much more > inclined > > > to > > > > use your word "project", so long as it can include what Vygotsky > calls > > > > "inner activeness". > > > > > > > > Vygotsky says: > > > > > > > > > > > > ????? ? ?????????, ?????????? ? ?. ?., ? ???? ???? ? ?????????? > > > > ???????????, ??? ?????????? ???????????? ??????????????? ????????? > > > > ??????????????? ?? ??????? ? ??????? ?????????????. ??? ??? ????? > ????? > > > > ?????????? ?????????? ? ???????? ???????? ??????????? ? ???, ???, ? > ?? > > > > ????? ??? ? ?????????? ???????? ??? ?????????? ???????????? > > ???????????? > > > > ???????????????? ????? ? ?????????, ??????? ???????????, ? ???????? > > > > ???????? ?? ????? ???????????? ?????????????? ???????????, > ???????????? > > > > ??????????? ?????????? ?????????? ?? ????????? ? ??????? > ????????????. > > > ??? > > > > ??? ???????, ??????? ????? ??????????, ? ?? ????? ????? ?? ?????? ??? > > > ????? > > > > ???-??????, ???, ? ???????? ????????? ?????????????? ??????? ? > > ?????????? > > > > ????????????. > > > > > > > > When I think, remember, etc. I am dealing with inner activeness; this > > > > psychological process of inner activity is not directly linked to any > > > > external activity. The new form of inner activeness in the School Age > > > > consists of this: that while during the preschool years these inner > > > > activities demonstrated an immediate link with action, with external > > > > activeness, in the school years we have a relative autonomy which > > > emerges, > > > > inner activeness which is relatively independent of external > > activities. > > > > Here is already a child who can think, at the same time when he is > > doing > > > or > > > > seeing something, one in whom has emerged a differentiation of inner > > and > > > > outer activities. > > > > David Kellogg > > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 10:07 AM, Andy Blunden > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > David: "Are words really units?" > > > > > > > > > > Well, firstly, "units" is a *relative* term. That is, the question > > is: > > > > are > > > > > words units of something, some complex process subject to analysis. > > And > > > > > which? > > > > > > > > > > Secondly, according to Vygotsky, "no." The concept Vygotsky > proposes > > > as a > > > > > unit is "word meaning" which he says is a unity of sound and > meaning. > > > The > > > > > sound is an artefact, which, detached from its meaningful utterance > > in > > > a > > > > > transactional context is just a thing, viz., a word. Whereas "word > > > > meaning" > > > > > is an arrtefact-mediated action, a unit of human social activity. > > > > > > > > > > It is true that words can be countable or mass according to > context, > > > but > > > > I > > > > > wasn't talking about words was I? I was talking about word meaning. > > > > > > > > > > Andy > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > Andy Blunden > > > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > > > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective- > > decision-making > > > > > On 8/01/2017 7:59 AM, David Kellogg wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> Are words really units? When we look at their ideational meaning > > (that > > > > is, > > > > >> their logical and experiential content--their capacity for > > > representing > > > > >> and > > > > >> linking together human experiences) they seem to fall into two > very > > > > >> different categories: lexical words like "perezhivanie" or "sense" > > or > > > > >> "personality" of "individual" and grammatical words like "of", or > > > > "might", > > > > >> or "is". The lexical words seem to behave like units--they are > > > bounded, > > > > >> discrete, and, as Andy would say, "countable" (the problem is that > > > > almost > > > > >> all nouns are both countable and uncountable depending on the > > context > > > > you > > > > >> put them in, so this distinction is really not as essential as > Andy > > > > seems > > > > >> to assume). But the more grammatical words seem to be elements of > > some > > > > >> larger unit, which we can call wording. > > > > >> > > > > >> Veresov and Fleer come up against this problem with "edintsvo" and > > > > >> "edintsa". Of course, as they say, the two words are distinct. But > > > this > > > > >> doesn't necessarily mean that the former always corresponds to > > "unity" > > > > in > > > > >> English and the latter is always "unit". If you look at the > > paragraph > > > > they > > > > >> translate on 330, you can see that Vygotsky starts with an idea > that > > > is > > > > >> quite "synoptic" and is well expressed by "unit". But in the last > > > > sentence > > > > >> there is a sense that "perezhivanie" is a meta-stable unit--one > that > > > > >> remains self-similar only through a process of thorough change, > > like a > > > > >> bicycle whose every part is replaced--and in English is it is > better > > > to > > > > >> express this idea with "unity". The problem is that the > differences > > > > >> between > > > > >> "edintsvo" and "edintsva" in Russian is a matter of gender (I > think) > > > and > > > > >> not simply abstractness, and as a result the English version, > which > > > > cannot > > > > >> use the resource of gender,has to rely on abstractness, so the > words > > > > >> "unity" and "unit" are somewhat more distinct and less linked than > > > > >> "edintsvo" and "edintsva". > > > > >> > > > > >> There are other problems that are similar. When Gonzalez Rey uses > > the > > > > word > > > > >> "final moment" to refer to the final period of Vygotsky's > thinking, > > he > > > > >> leaves the anglophone reader the impression that he is referring > to > > > > >> Vygotsky's deathbed thoughts. On the other hand, when Veresov and > > > Fleer > > > > >> use > > > > >> "factor" to translate the same Russian word that Gonzalez Rey is > > > using, > > > > >> they are giving us something more quantitative than Vygotsky > > intended, > > > > and > > > > >> their translation of "dalee nerazloshim'im chastyami etava > edinstva" > > > > >> into "vital and further indivisible part of the whole" is quite > > > opaque > > > > in > > > > >> English (notice that here Veresov and Fleer use "whole" to > translate > > > > >> "edinstva" rather than "unit"!) At some point you have to accept > > that > > > > you > > > > >> can change Russian words into English words as if you were > > exchanging > > > > >> rubles for dollars, but you still won't be able to buy a samovar > at > > > > >> Walmart. > > > > >> > > > > >> David Kellogg > > > > >> Macquarie University > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 5:21 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil < > > > a.j.gil@iped.uio.no > > > > > > > > > >> wrote: > > > > >> > > > > >> Larry, all, > > > > >>> > > > > >>> our arguments in the 2014 address a science education literature > in > > > > which > > > > >>> the constructivist perspective is the leading perspective; We > note > > > that > > > > >>> the > > > > >>> assertion that people learn from experience is everywhere taken > for > > > > >>> granted > > > > >>> but nowhere accounted for. We resort to pragmatist and > > > phenomenological > > > > >>> literature along with Vygotsky's insights to point out the need > to > > > > >>> account > > > > >>> for learning as something that cannot be the result of an > > > individual's > > > > >>> construction; in experience there is always something in excess > of > > > what > > > > >>> you > > > > >>> intended, and this is a basic feature of doing, of performing. I > > take > > > > >>> that > > > > >>> to be your "trans" in the trans/zhivanie word, Larry, which > already > > > is > > > > >>> denoted in the word PERezhivanie. > > > > >>> > > > > >>> But I do not wish to move our discussion too far away from Marc's > > > paper > > > > >>> and the Perezhivanie special issue. We also risk disengaging many > > > that > > > > >>> have > > > > >>> not have the privilege we've had to have the time to read so many > > > > >>> articles > > > > >>> in just few days into the new year. I think we are a point in the > > > > >>> discussion where a pretty clear point of agreement/disagreement, > > and > > > > >>> therefore of possibility for growth, has been reached with regard > > to > > > > the > > > > >>> view of perezhivanie as "an experience" and as the "working over > > > it". I > > > > >>> think that to allow as many as possible to follow, and hopefully > > also > > > > >>> engage, I think it will be helpful to bring the diverse > > perspectives > > > > and > > > > >>> theoretical accounts to matter in accounting for some actual > > > material. > > > > >>> And > > > > >>> there are a number of cases described in the articles, including > > > Marc's > > > > >>> case of a teacher, as well as everyday facts, such as those > brought > > > by > > > > >>> Beth, and in Beth's article... > > > > >>> > > > > >>> I take the task for myself too, but Saturday morning need to > attend > > > to > > > > >>> other things! > > > > >>> A > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> ________________________________________ > > > > >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > edu > > > > > > > > > >>> on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com > > > > >>> Sent: 07 January 2017 18:26 > > > > >>> To: Andy Blunden; Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, > > > Activity; > > > > >>> Larry Purss > > > > >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > > > >>> > > > > >>> Andy, Peter, i hope the intention to move beyond politeness to > > > struggle > > > > >>> with this topic materializes. > > > > >>> In this vein i want to introduce exploration of the ?excess? of > > > actual > > > > >>> over intended meaning as he sketched his introduction to > > > ?experience?. > > > > >>> > > > > >>> Citing Dewey, Alfredo says that this excess of actual learning > over > > > > >>> intended learning INCLUDES what Dewey refers to as ?attitudes? > and > > > > these > > > > >>> ?attitudes? are FUNDAMENTALLY what count in the future. > > > > >>> Alfredo and Roth then add this summary statement : > > > > >>> > > > > >>> There is therefore, a need to theorize experience in terms that > do > > > not > > > > >>> assume control and rationality as the sine qua non of learning. > It > > > also > > > > >>> implies a need to develop analytical accounts that retain the > > > > >>> ?uncertainty? > > > > >>> that is an ?integral part? of human experience. > > > > >>> > > > > >>> Where are Alfredo and Roth leading us with this sketch of > > experience? > > > > To > > > > >>> highlight ?attitudes? that occur in the excess of actual over > > > intended > > > > >>> learning? The word ?attitudes? generates images of (atmosphere) > and > > > > >>> (moods) > > > > >>> that ?flow? like cascading waterfalls that can be imaged as > (force) > > > or > > > > as > > > > >>> (receptive). Attitudes that flow to places where they are > received > > > > >>> within a > > > > >>> certain attitude of care and concern. Not as forceful an image as > > > > moving > > > > >>> only with control and rationality. Describing ?weaker? thought > > that > > > > >>> remains uncertain but that also opens us to the other?s peril and > > > > plight. > > > > >>> Possibly a post-analytic motion that exceeds the intended by > > > > >>> living-through > > > > >>> the actual that develops ?attitudes? that are fundamentally what > > > count > > > > >>> for > > > > >>> the future. > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > >>> > > > > >>> From: Andy Blunden > > > > >>> Sent: January 7, 2017 5:00 AM > > > > >>> To: Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > > > >>> > > > > >>> OK Peter, what you say is all very true I am sure, but it > > > > >>> entails conflating activity and action (as mass nouns) and > > > > >>> context and mediation, and makes the required distinction > > > > >>> much like one could find multiple meanings for the word > > > > >>> "and" by listing the different phrases and clauses which can > > > > >>> be linked by "and." > > > > >>> > > > > >>> Andy > > > > >>> > > > > >>> ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > >>> Andy Blunden > > > > >>> http://home.mira.net/~andy > > > > >>> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective- > > > decision-making > > > > >>> > > > > >>> On 7/01/2017 11:42 PM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> Let me try to illustrate. > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> Reading as mediated action: The cultural-historical > > > > >>>> context of reading mediates how one?s attention and > > > > >>>> response are channeled in socially constructed ways. So, > > > > >>>> in one setting, say at home or reading in the company of > > > > >>>> friends, a novel might bring a reader to tears, or invite > > > > >>>> readers to share personal stories that parallel those of > > > > >>>> the plot lines, or laugh out loud. But another setting, a > > > > >>>> formal school or university class, would have historical > > > > >>>> values and practices that mute emotional and personal > > > > >>>> responses, and promote a more sober, analytic way of > > > > >>>> reading and talking that fits with specific historical > > > > >>>> critical conventions and genres, and discourages others. > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> Reading as mediating action: The act of reading can be > > > > >>>> transformational. In reading about an talking about a > > > > >>>> character?s actions, a reader might reconsider a value > > > > >>>> system, become more sympathetic to real people who > > > > >>>> resemble oppressed characters, etc. In other words, > > > > >>>> reading a text may serve a mediational process in which > > > > >>>> textual ideas and exemplars enable a reader to think > > > > >>>> differently. > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> *From:*Andy Blunden [mailto:ablunden@mira.net] > > > > >>>> *Sent:* Saturday, January 7, 2017 6:28 AM > > > > >>>> *To:* Peter Smagorinsky ; eXtended Mind, > > > > >>>> Culture, Activity > > > > >>>> *Subject:* Re: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> Can you explain in a paragraph or two,. Peter, rather than > > > > >>>> asking us all to read 10,000 words to extract an answer? > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> Andy > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> Andy Blunden > > > > >>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy > > > > >>>> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective- > > > decision-making > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> On 7/01/2017 11:23 PM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> Andy and others, I tried to work out the mediated/mediating > > > > >>>> question > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> in the area of reading....see if this helps. > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> Smagorinsky, P., & O'Donnell-Allen, C. (1998). Reading as > > > > mediated > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> and mediating action: Composing meaning for literature through > > > > multimedia > > > > >>> interpretive texts. Reading Research Quarterly, 33, 198-226. > > > Available > > > > >>> athttp://www.petersmagorinsky.net/About/PDF/RRQ/RRQ1998.pdf > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> -----Original Message----- > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > >>>> [mailto: > > > > xmca-l-bounces@ > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> Sent: Friday, January 6, 2017 7:12 PM > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> To:xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> I have never understood this supposed distinction, Alfredo, > > > > between > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> "mediated activity" and "mediating activity" given that all > > activity > > > is > > > > >>> mediated and all activity mediates. > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> Also, could you spell out what you mean by the "tension" > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> between perezhivanie as meaning and perezhivanie as > struggle. > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> Andy > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> ------------------------------ > ------------------------------ > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> Andy Blunden > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective- > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> decision-making > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> On 5/01/2017 6:26 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> Thanks Marc for your careful response. > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> I am familiar to Vygotsky's notion of cultural > mediation > > > and > > > > I > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> am aware and acknowledge that it was elaborated as a means to > > > overcome > > > > >>> dualism, and that it is not analog to a computational approach. > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> When I brought the computing analogy, I did so with > > regard > > > > not > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> to the concept of cultural mediation in general, but to the way > it > > > can > > > > be > > > > >>> (and is) deployed analytically. I react to what it seems to me a > > > > >>> dichotomy > > > > >>> between a "meaning" as something that is static (thereby a form > of > > > > >>> "representation" or reflection of the relation with the > environment > > > > >>> instead > > > > >>> of?refraction)?? and the experiencing-as-struggling, which is > > > > described > > > > >>> as?transformation or change. If so, mediation here would seem to > be > > > > part > > > > >>> of > > > > >>> a methodological device that first dissects "a type of meaning" > > from > > > "a > > > > >>> type of activity" (or a given state from the process that changes > > > that > > > > >>> state), and then unites it by adding the term "mediation." And > this > > > may > > > > >>> be > > > > >>> my misreading, but in that (mis)reading (which perhaps is mostly > > due > > > to > > > > >>> the > > > > >>> fact that in your empirical illustration only the initial and end > > > > >>> product, > > > > >>> i.e., perezhivanie, are described, but not the > > > > experiencing-as-struggle, > > > > >>> that is, the moving between the two), mediation here seems to do > as > > > > >>> analytical concept precisely what you were afraid our monism was > > > doing: > > > > >>> explaining nothing. Only the end products but not the process of > > > > >>> producing > > > > >>> perezhivanie are revealed. This may be problematic if one attends > > to > > > > what > > > > >>> Veresov argues in the paper I shared yesterday, where he defends > > the > > > > >>> notion > > > > >>> of mediation but also specifies that Vygotsky speaks of > *mediating > > > > >>> activity* (as opposed to *mediated* activity). That is, not > > mediation > > > > by > > > > >>> signs as products, but mediating activity as the activity of > > > producing > > > > >>> signs (which again is an activity of producing social relations, > > > > perhaps > > > > >>> what you refer as "holistic meanings"?). What do you think? > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> I did not think you were trying to deny the influence > of > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> Spinoza, and I do not think we ever said that Perezhivanie was > > > > primarily > > > > >>> a > > > > >>> move from Cartesian Dualism to Monism, as you suggest in your > > post. I > > > > >>> copy > > > > >>> and paste from my prior post: "The fact is that Vygotsky was > > > building > > > > a > > > > >>> theory on the unity of the affect and the intellect that was to > be > > > > >>> grounded > > > > >>> on Spinoza, and what we try to do is to explore how perezhivanie, > > as > > > a > > > > >>> concept being developed during the same period (but not finalised > > or > > > > >>> totally settled!), could be seen from the perspective of the > > > Spinozist > > > > >>> Vygotsky." > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> I totally believe that bringing the distinction between > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> perezhivanie as meaning, and perezhivanie as struggle, is totally > > > > >>> relevant, > > > > >>> and Beth Ferholt's vignettes of Where the Wild Things Are do > indeed > > > > >>> illustrate this. We really need to address this tension, which as > > > > Beth's > > > > >>> examples and as our own everyday experience shows, is a tension > > that > > > > >>> matters not just to books and to theories but to living persons > > > > >>> (children, > > > > >>> teachers), a tension that moreover is present and mentioned in > all > > > the > > > > >>> articles of the symposium. The papers offer different proposals, > > and > > > I > > > > >>> think is so great we have the chance to discuss them! I too, as > > you, > > > am > > > > >>> very interesting in hearing others about the questions you had > > > > concerning > > > > >>> sense and meaning. > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> Alfredo > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> on behalf of > > > Marc > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> Clar? > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> Sent: 04 January 2017 22:31 > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> Thank you very much, Alfredo, for sharing this > excellent > > > > paper > > > > >>>> by > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> Veresov, and thanks also for your responses, which > really > > > > >>>> helped > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> me to > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> better understand your points. My main doubt about your > > > > >>>> proposal > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> was/is caused by the statement that the idea of > cultural > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> mediation/mediator implies a cartesian dualism. This > > shocks > > > > me > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> because, to me, the idea of cultural mediation is > > > absolutely > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> crucial > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> (in fact, the keystone) for the construction of a > monist > > > (and > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> scientific) psychology that does not forget mind ?that > > is, > > > a > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> cultural > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> psychology. From your response, however, I realized > that > > we > > > > may > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> be > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> approaching the idea of mediation in different ways. I > > talk > > > > of > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> mediation and mediators in a quite restricted way. The > > > > starting > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> point > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> of my understanding of mediation is a dialectical > > > > relationship > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> (organic, transactional) between the subject and the > > world > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> (Vygotsky departs from the scheme stimulus-response, from > > > reflexology). > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> This relationship, that Vygotsky calls primitive > > > > psychological > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> functions, would be basically biological. However, in > > human > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> beings > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> this relationship is mediated by cultural means: signs > > and > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> tools; or > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> primary, secondary and terciary artifacts. These > cultural > > > > means > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> reorganize the primitive functions (dialectic S-O > > > > >>>> relationship), > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> which > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> become then higher psychological functions (S-M-O) (see > > for > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> example, > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> The problem of the cultural development of the child, > in > > > The > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> Vygotsky > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> Reader). Now, the subject, the cultural mediators, and > > the > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> object form > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> an inseparable dialectical unit, so that the subject > acts > > > on > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> (transforms) the object through the prism of the > cultural > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> mediators, > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> the object acts on (transforms) the subject also > through > > > the > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> prism of > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> the cultural mediators, and the cultural means are > > > themselves > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> also > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> transformed as a consequence of their mediation in this > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> continuous > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> dynamic dialectical tension. Here, for me, it is > > important > > > > the > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> idea > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> that the cultural means are as material (if we assume a > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> materialist > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> monism) as all the rest of the world; in fact, are > parts > > of > > > > the > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> material world which become signs or tools (and can be > > > > >>>> therefore > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> socially distributed). This permits the introduction of > > the > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> scientific > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> study of mind-consciousness (as mediating systems of > > > signs), > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> because > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> mind is not anymore something immaterial and > > unobservable, > > > > but > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> it is > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> as material and observable as the rest of the natural > > > world. > > > > It > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> is > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> from this view that, for me, the idea of cultural > > mediation > > > > is > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> the > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> keystone of a monist psychology that includes mind. > Thus, > > > > when > > > > >>>> I > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> speak > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> of mediators, I refer to the cultural means which > mediate > > > in > > > > >>>> the > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> S-O > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> dialectics; I am especially interested in > signs/secondary > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> artifacts. > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> Here, it is perhaps necessary to insist that when I > talk > > of > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> studying > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> mediators (and their semantic structure), this doesn't > > mean > > > > >>>> that > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> they > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> are taken out from the activity (the flux of live) in > > which > > > > >>>> they > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> mediate (since out of activity they are not signs > > anymore); > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> here, I > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> think Vygotsky tries again to overcome another old > > > dichotomy, > > > > >>>> the > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> functionalism-structuralism one. I hope that all this > > makes > > > > >>>> also > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> clear the difference between this view and that of computational > > > > >>> psychologies (which in general are profoundly and explicitly > > dualist > > > > and > > > > >>> not dialectic). > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> Back to perezhivanie, I'm not obviously trying to deny > > the > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> influence > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> of Spinoza on Vygotsky's thinking (this is explicit in > > > > >>>> Vygotsky's > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> writings, especially in ?The teaching about emotions?, > in > > > the > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> Vol.6 of > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> the Collected Works). But I have doubts that Vygotsky's > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> introduction > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> of the concept of perezhivanie is to be regarded > > primarily > > > > as a > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> movement towards monism (from a previous cartesian > > > dualism), > > > > >>>> and > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> that > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> this movement questions the concept of cultural > > mediation. > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> Instead, > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> and I think that this is in line with some of > > Gonz?lez-Rey > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> observations in his paper, my impression is that the > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> introduction of > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> the concept of perezhivanie responds more to a movement > > (a > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> further > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> step) towards holism (something that, in my > > understanding, > > > > can > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> also be > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> found in Spinoza). Thus, I think that the word meaning > is > > > > still > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> the > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> unit of analysis in the last Vygotsky -and therefore, > the > > > > idea > > > > >>>> of > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> cultural mediation is still crucial (in fact, in The > > > problem > > > > of > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> the > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> environment, he connects the concept of perezhivanie, > > which > > > > has > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> just > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> introduced, to the development of word meaning > > [p.345-346, > > > > also > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> cited > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> in my paper]). However, in my view, in the last > Vygotsky > > > the > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> focus is > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> not anymore primarily on the word-meaning as formed for > > > > things > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> (or > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> collections of things, as in the ontogenetic research > > with > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> Sakharov), but the focus is now in the formation of meaning for > > > > holistic > > > > >>> situations. > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> Best regards, > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> Marc. > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> 2017-01-03 19:16 GMT+01:00 Alfredo Jornet Gil< > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> a.j.gil@iped.uio.no> : > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> Hi Marc, all, > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> thanks for joining and for your interesting work, > > > which I > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> follow > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> since I became aware of it. I appreciate the way in > > > your > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> paper you > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> show careful and honest attention to the texts of > the > > > > >>>> authors > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> involved, but perhaps most of all I appreciate that > > the > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> paper makes > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> the transformational dimension related to struggle > > and > > > > >>>> change > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> salient, a dimension all papers deemed central to > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> perezhivanie. And I > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> have learned more about Vasilyuk by reading your > > paper. > > > > But > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> I also > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> see that we have approached the question of > > > perezhivanie > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> differently > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> and I think that addressing the questions that you > > > raise > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> concerning > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> our article may be a good way to both respond and > > > discuss > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> your paper. > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> I am aware that our use of the term monism may be > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> problematic to > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> some, and N. Veresov, who has recently written > about > > > this > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> (see > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> attached article), warns against the dangers of > > simply > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> moving from > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> dualism into an undifferentiating monism that > > > relativizes > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> everything, > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> making development un-studiable. This seems to be > the > > > way > > > > >>>> in > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> which > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> you have understood our argument, and of course > this > > is > > > > not > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> what we are or want to be doing. > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> Probably many will think that *dialectical > > materialism* > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> rather than > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> monism is the proper term, and I could agree with > > them; > > > > we > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> do in fact > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> use dialectical materialism there and elsewhere. > Yet, > > > we > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> wanted to > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> emphasise the Spinozist influence (an influence > that > > > also > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> runs > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> through Marx) and so we found it appropriate to use > > the > > > > >>>> term > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> monism, > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> a term that Vygotsky uses before arguing that > Spinoza > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> "develops an essentially materialistic view" > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> (Collected Works, Vol. 6, p. 124). For us, the aim > is > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> working out > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> ways to empirically examine and formulate problems > in > > > > ways > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> that do > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> not reify a mind-body dualism. > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> Although overcoming dualism is foundational to the > > CHAT > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> paradigm, I > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> would however not say that Vygotsky did get to > solve > > > all > > > > of > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> the > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> problems that Cartesian dualism had created for > > > > psychology, > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> even > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> though he recognised those problems brilliantly as > > > early > > > > as > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> in the > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> "Crisis". It should suffice to cite Vygotsky's own > > > > remarks, > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> which we quote in the paper (and which A.N. > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> Leont'ev mentions in the introduction to the > > collected > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> works), where > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> Vygotsky explicitly critiques some of his own prior > > > ideas > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> for failing > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> to overcome dualism. We agree with those who, like > F. > > > G. > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> Rey, see > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> Vygotsky's project as a developing rather than as a > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> finalised one. > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> The fact is that Vygotsky was building a theory on > > the > > > > >>>> unity > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> of the > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> affect and the intellect that was to be grounded on > > > > >>>> Spinoza, > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> and what > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> we try to do is to explore how perezhivanie, as a > > > concept > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> being > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> developed during the same period (but not finalised > > or > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> totally > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> settled!), could be seen from the perspective of > the > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> Spinozist Vygotsky. > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> As you note, in our article we argue that, if one > > takes > > > > the > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> Spinozist > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> one-substance approach, classical concepts used in > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> non-classical > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> psychology, at least in the way they are commonly > > used > > > in > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> the current > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> literature, should be revised. One such concept is > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> mediation. And I > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> personally do not have much of a problem when > > mediation > > > > is > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> used to > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> denote the fundamental fact that every thing exists > > > > always > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> through > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> *another*, never in and of itself. But I do think > > that > > > it > > > > >>>> is > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> problematic to identify MEDIATORS, such as "a > > meaning", > > > > as > > > > >>>> a > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> means to > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> account for or explain developmental processes and > > > > learning > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> events, > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> precisely because it is there, at least in my view, > > > that > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> dualism creeps in. > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> For example, I find it paradoxical that you are > > > concerned > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> that our > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> monist approach risks turning perezhivanie into a > > > useless > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> category > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> because it may be used to explain everything and > > > nothing, > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> and yet you > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> do not seem to have a problem using the term > > mediation > > > to > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> account for > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> the transformation of perezhivanie without clearly > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> elaborating on how > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> mediation does change anything or what it looks > like > > > as a > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> real > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> process. How is it different saying that a > > perezhivanie > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> mediates the > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> experiencing-as-struggle from simply saying that it > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> "affects" or > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> "determines" it? Indeed, if perezhivanie mediates > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> experiencing-as-struggle, does not > > > > >>>> experiencing-as-struglgle > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> too > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> mediate perezhivanie? And do not both may be said > to > > > > >>>> mediate > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> development, or development mediate them? Is not this explaining > > > > >>> everything > > > > >>> and nothing? > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> I do believe you can argue that there is a > difference > > > > >>>> between > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> mediation and classical psychology's cause-effect > > > > >>>> relations, > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> but to > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> show this you need to dig into the dialectical > > > > >>>> underpinnings > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> of the > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> theory. In your paper, you offer a nice analysis > of a > > > > >>>> lovely > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> case of > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> a teacher who, in dealing with a challenge with one > > of > > > > her > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> students, > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> changes her perezhivanie. I think you can rightly > > argue > > > > >>>> that > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> there is > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> a semiotic transformation, and I fully support your > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> statement that by > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> studying discourse we can empirically approach > > > questions > > > > of > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> psychological development. The contradictions you > > show > > > as > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> being > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> involved and resolved resonate really well with > what > > I > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> experience as > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> a parent or as a teacher in the classroom. Yet, > > without > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> unpacking > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> what this "mediation" taking place between one > > > > perezhivanie > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> and the > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> next one means as a concrete and real, the same > > > analysis > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> could be done taking an information processing approach: > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> there is an situation that is processed > > (represented?) > > > in > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> one way, > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> which then leads to a (cognitive) dissonance, and > > then > > > > >>>> there > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> is a > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> cognitive resolution by means of which the > situation > > is > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> presented > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> differently in consciousness (indeed, when seen in > > this > > > > >>>> way, > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> the term > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> perezhivanie and the term "representation" become > > > almost > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> indistinguishable). How is mediation, as an > > analytical > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> concept, > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> helping here? And most importantly to the question > of > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> perezhivanie, > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> how is this analysis going to show the internal > > > > connection > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> between > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> intellect and affect that Vygotsky formulates as > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> constitutive of the notion of perezhivanie? > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> I believe that the key lies in understanding what > > > > Vygotsky > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> means when > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> he says that perezhivanie is a unit of analysis. I > > will > > > > not > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> repeat > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> here what already is written in at least a couple > of > > > the > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> articles in > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> the special issue (Blunden, ours), that is the > > > difference > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> between > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> analysis by elements and unit analysis (Vygotsky > > > 1987). A > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> unit > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> analysis approach is consistent with Spinoza, for > > whom > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> cause-effect > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> explanations were not adequate, requiring instead > an > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> understanding of > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> self-development, perezhivanie as a kernel cell for > > the > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> development > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> of personality. And I think you may be after this > in > > > your > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> article in > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> suggesting a form of continuous movement from > > > > perezhivanie > > > > >>>> to > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> experiencing-as-struggle. But perhaps the major > > > > difficulty > > > > >>>> I > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> find is that, in positing Vygotsky's perezhivanie as "a type of > > > > meaning" > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> and Vasilyuk's perezhivanie (or > > > experiencing-as-struggle) > > > > >>>> as > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> a "type > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> of activity," it is difficult not to see here a > > > division > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> between > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> product and process, a division that then is > > > analytically > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> bridged by > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> the addition of a third term, mediation, that > should > > > > bring > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> back the > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> real movement between the product and the process. > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> A different approach involves considering the > > concrete > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> extension of > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> actual living and lived social relations, and look > at > > > > them > > > > >>>> as > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> generative phenomena. What is there in the > encounter > > > > >>>> between > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> Carla > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> and the child that leads to change? For it is not > > > inside > > > > >>>> the > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> mind, > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> but in real life, in consciousness as the real > > relation > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> between people, that Carla is changed. > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> How is the semantic structure that you nicely > present > > > and > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> attribute > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> to Carla a product of the social relation between > her > > > and > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> the child? > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> I think that to rightfully situate perezhivanie as > a > > > > >>>> concept > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> in a > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> Vygotskian framework, we ought to address its > > relation > > > to > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> the genetic > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> law of development. > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> There is much more to disentangle, but this is long > > > > enough. > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> I hope I > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> have succeeded in making clear these ideas. Thanks > so > > > > much > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> for > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> engaging in the discussion! > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> Alfredo > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> ________________________________________ > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> on > behalf > > of > > > > >>>> Marc > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> Clar? > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> Sent: 02 January 2017 22:14 > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and > > Perezhivanie! > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> Hi, all, and thank you so much, Alfredo, for your > > kind > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> invitation to > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> participate in this discussion. My paper in the MCA > > > > special > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> issue > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> focuses on a distinction between a type of > activity, > > > > which > > > > >>>> I > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> argue > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> that is what Vasilyuk called *perezhivanie* > > > > (experiencing) > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> and a type > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> of semiotic mediator, which I argue that is what > > > > Vygotsky, > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> in The > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> Problem of the Environment, called *perezhivanie.* > I > > > > argue, > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> following > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> Vasilyuk, that in experiencing activities > (Vasilyuk's > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> perezhivanie), > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> this type of mediator is profoundly transformed ? > in > > > > fact, > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> that > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> experiencing activities consist of the semiotic > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> transformation of this type of mediator. > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> As Veresov and Fleer argue in their commentary, > > > > >>>> perezhivanie > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> (as a > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> type of > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> mediator) is for me a psychological phenomenon, one > > > which > > > > >>>> is > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> of > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> course conceptualized from a specific theoretical > > > > >>>> framework. > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> But the > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> phenomenon is also visible from other theoretical > > > > >>>> frameworks > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> as well, > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> as I mention in the paper. This phenomenon is my > main > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> interest, and > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> it is from this interest that I arrived at the > > concept > > > of > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> perezhivanie (not the other way around). > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> Now, the phenomenon is that at least emotion, > > > reasoning, > > > > >>>> and > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> volition > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> (formation of conscious purposes) seem to be > > decisively > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> mediated by > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> holistic situational meaning. My current research > > > concern > > > > >>>> is > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> trying > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> to find ways to study and understand how this > > mediation > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> occurs and > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> how these semiotic mediators are transformed and > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> distributed. From > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> this view, I think that experiencing activities > > > > (Vasilyuk's > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> perezhivanie) may provide a good terrain to study > > these > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> issues > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> (especially regarding the mediation of emotion), > as I > > > > tried > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> to exemplify in the paper. > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> Studying semiotic mediation, however, is of course > > not > > > > >>>> easy. > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> Following Vygotsky, I assume that extended > discourse > > is > > > > the > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> manifestation of thinking within certain > > psychological > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> conditions > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> (Vygotsky's Thinking and Speech, chapter 7), and I > > also > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> assume the > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> Vygotsky's law of the unity of the structure and > > > function > > > > >>>> of > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> thinking > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> (Vygotsky's Thinking and Speech, chapter 6). From > > these > > > > two > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> assumptions, I propose that meaning (and its > > functions > > > in > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> human > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> activity) can be scientifically studied by > > structurally > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> analyzing the > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> narratives generated by subjects, considering that > > the > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> discourse > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> produced in the narrative is the point of departure > > of > > > > this > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> study, > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> but that considerable analytical work must be done > to > > > > move > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> from this > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> discourse to the full characterization of meaning. > It > > > is > > > > in > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> that > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> point where I find useful the work developed by > > > Greimas, > > > > >>>> the > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> usefulness of which I only suggest in the paper. > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> >From this background, I found many interesting > ideas > > > and > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> questions > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> in the > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> other papers of the special issue. In this first > > post I > > > > >>>> will > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> propose > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> two of them for possible discussion. The first one > > was > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> raised by > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> Gonz?lez-Rey, when he introduces, in connection > with > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> perezhivanie, > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> the concepts of personality, and especially, of > > sense. > > > > So, > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> which is > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> the conceptual (and-or > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> phenomenal) relation between perezhivanie and > sense? > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> Gonz?lez-Rey > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> suggests that both concepts are somewhat similar > (and > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> overcome by the > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> concept of ?subjective sense?); my opinion, partly > > > > >>>> expressed > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> in my > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> commentary, is that perezhivanie is a type of > > meaning, > > > > >>>> which > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> includes > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> different levels of depth, and that sense > corresponds > > > to > > > > >>>> the > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> deepest > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> level of meaning (which can be characterized as a > > > system > > > > of > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> semic > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> oppositions). Therefore, sense wouldn't be in > > > opposition > > > > to > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> meaning > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> (as ?a microcosm of human consciousness?, as > Kozulin > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> remembers in his > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> commentary), although it would be in opposition to > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> manifested meaning (the surface level of meaning). > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> The second issue was raised by Roth and Jornet, > and I > > > > think > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> it goes > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> beyond the issue of perezhivanie itself. If I > > > understand > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> them well, > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> they argue that Vygotsky's core proposal of > cultural > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> mediation is > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> influenced by the Cartesian dualism (mind-matter), > > and > > > > >>>> that a > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> promising approach to Cultural Psychology would be > a > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> Spinozist > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> monism. I am actually very interested on the issue > of > > > > which > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> epistemological position can best substantiate the > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> construction of a > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> cultural psychology, and that's why I feel inclined > > to > > > > take > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> the > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> opportunity to ask for your opinions about that. > > About > > > > the > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> proposal > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> of Roth and Jornet, I have some doubts. First, I > > don't > > > > see > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> why > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> Vygotsky's proposals can be seen as dualist (in the > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> Cartesian sense) > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> -I suspect that it is because of the analytical > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> distinctions?. > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> Anyway, in my understanding, Vygotsky explicitly > > > assumes > > > > a > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> materialist monism (for example in The Crisis), and > > in > > > > fact > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> he constructs his proposal on mediation upon reflexology, which > > also > > > > >>> explicitly assumed a materialist monism (e.g. > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> Sechenov). Would a Spinozist monism be a better > point > > > of > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> departure? I > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> don't know, in my understanding it is a more > idealist > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> monism, and I > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> don't clearly see what could be gained. In my > > opinion, > > > a > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> scientific > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> psychology which includes the study of mind is only > > > > >>>> possible > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> if any > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> type of monism is assumed. However, in my view, > for a > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> scientific > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> psychology, the ontological nature of the world is > > > > perhaps > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> less > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> important (it is an issue for metaphysics?), and I > am > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> inclined to assume a neutral monism (e.g. Russell). > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> So from this view, a materialist monism and a > > Spinozist > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> monism > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> wouldn't be so different, so from both views it > could > > > be > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> assumed that > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> all is of the same nature and all is similarly > > knowable > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> (including > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> mind) [which is the ontological nature of the world > > and > > > > to > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> what > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> degree it is knowable are issues that can be left > to > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> philosophy]. > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> However, in my opinion, this does not mean that, > > while > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> assuming a > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> monism, analytical distinctions cannot be done when > > > > >>>> studying > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> the > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> world. In that sense, I had the impression that > Roth > > > and > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> Jornet > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> tended to dilute analytical distinctions in the > name > > of > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> monism; I > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> repeat that I don't know if I understood them well, > > but > > > > if > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> this was > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> the case, in my opinion, analysis would be > impossible > > > > >>>> within > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> the new > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> psychology suggested by Roth and Jornet, and, > > regarding > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> perezhivanie, > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> there would be the danger, noted by Vygotsky in The > > > > Crisis > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> and > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> cautioned by Kozulin in his commentary, that by > > meaning > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> everything, perezhivanie ends by meaning nothing. > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> Best regards and happy new year, > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> Marc. > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> 2017-01-02 9:12 GMT+01:00 Alfredo Jornet Gil< > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> a.j.gil@iped.uio.no> : > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> Dear all, > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> I would like to join David, Luisa, Ana, Henry > and > > > the > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> others to wish > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> you all a Happy New Year! May it be full of > joy, > > > > peace, > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> and opportunity. > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> I also would like to begin the year announcing > > our > > > > >>>> first > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> ?MCA > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> article discussion, ?although in fact > corresponds > > > to > > > > >>>> the > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> last issue > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> of the year > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> we > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> just passed, Issue 4 on Perezhivanie. This is a > > > very > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> special > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> *special* issue, not only because its topic has > > > > raised > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> lots of > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> interest lately in > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> the > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> CHAT community but also because, greatly > > > coordinated > > > > by > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> Andy Blunden > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> and the rest of the editorial team, the issue > > takes > > > > the > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> form of a > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> symposium where authors get the chance to > present > > > and > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> respond to > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> each others' ideas on the subject. In my view, > > this > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> allows having a > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> rich and > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> multidimensional > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> approach to a subject as important as > > perezhivanie. > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> Following with the dialogical spirit in which > the > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> special issue was > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> assembled, we will focus on one lead article, > but > > > > >>>> hoping > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> to also > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> engage ideas and insights present in or > relevant > > to > > > > >>>> other > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> contributions in the issue. ?Marc Clar?'s > > "Vygotsky > > > > and > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> Vasilyuk on > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> Perezhivanie: Two Notions and One Word" will be > > our > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> focus. The > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> article very nicely engages the lead work of > > > > Vygotsky, > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> but also the > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> less known ??(?in educational literature) but > > > totally > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> relevant works > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> of psychologist ?F. Vasilyuk and semiotician > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> A. > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> J. Greimas, mobilising a number of key concepts > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> including those of > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> semiotic > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> mediation and transformation. > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> ?In addition to Marc, who will soon join us, I > > have > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> encouraged some > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> of > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> the > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> other authors in the special issue to also join > > as > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> "relevant > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> others," if time and circumstances allow them. > > > Let's > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> hope that this > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> will help keeping the symposium spirit up. > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> Marc's article is attached to this e-mail and > > will > > > be > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> made open > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> access at the T&F pages as soon as people is > back > > > > from > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> the holidays. > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> The T&F link > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> is > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> this: > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> http://www.tandfonline.com/ > > > doi/full/10.1080/10749039 > > > > . > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> 2016.1186194 > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> The link to the MCA Forum pages, where we > > announce > > > > our > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> discussions > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> and other xmca things, is here: > > > > >>>> http://lchc.ucsd.edu/MCA/ > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> I wish us all a very productive and interesting > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> discussion. > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> Alfredo > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From mcole@ucsd.edu Wed Jan 11 11:22:40 2017 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2017 11:22:40 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! In-Reply-To: References: <1483344752182.40904@iped.uio.no> <1483467423798.57819@iped.uio.no> <1483601196884.31418@iped.uio.no> <5df5e870-3ef8-70d6-0c17-f8647ba17e62@mira.net> <587124d9.d957620a.4a5a8.bd56@mx.google.com> <1483820996800.91513@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: Hi David - I was not flattering you, I was misinterpreting you. I'll go back and read the message again. No point in me sewing confusion. Enough of it as there is! mike On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 9:22 PM, David Kellogg wrote: > You flatter me, Mike. Here's what Vygotsky did say: > > ?????????????, ????? ???????????? ???????, ??????? ?????? ???? ?????? ??? > ???????? ?????,? ??? ??????? ?? ?? ?????????? ??????????? ? ????????????? ? > ??????? ???? ????? ???????: ?????? ????? ???? ???????, ??? ??? ???????? ??? > ???????, ?????? ????????? ??????? ? ????????? ???????? ???? ?????. > ??????, ??????? > ?? ???? ?? ???????. ????? ???? ??? ?? ?????????, ??????? ????? ??? > ??????? ???????? > ??????????. ? ?? ???? ? ????? ???? ? ?????????? ??????????? ??????? > ???????? ?????????? ????????? ?? ??????????. ??, ? ?????, ?????? > ??????????: ? ??? ??????, ????? ??????? ????? ???????? ?????? ?????, ????? > ?? ????? ??????????? ?????? ??????????? ?????, ??? ????????? ? ??????? > ???????? ? ?????, ???? ???? ? ????????? ? ??????? ????? ??????????. > > > > "Consequently, the most substantial shift, which must be carried out in the > study of the environment?a transition from absolute indicators to relative > ones?it is necessary to study the environment for the child: first of all > it is necessary to study what it signifies to the child, what the > relationship of the child is to the different aspects of this environment. > For example, the child of less than one does not speak. Once he speaks, the > speech environment of those in the immediate environment remains unchanged. > And the year before and the year after the absolute indicators of the > culture of speech surrounding him is practically unchanged. But, I think, > everyone will agree that from the minute when the child begins to > understand the first words, when he begins to utter his first sensible > words, his relationship to the moments of speech in the environment and the > role of speech in relationship to the child are very much changed." > > > I thought "absolute indicators" was not a term that would mean a lot to > most people on this list--you really have to read it in relation to > "relative indicators" and Vygotsky's critique of the textbook that his > students are reading (by Aron Zalkind). Vygotsky uses "perezhivanie" as an > example of a relational indicator. But Zalkind's SES, the number of times a > child visits the bathhouse each week, the cubic metres in a family > apartment, the newspapers that the family subscribes to, the dialect a > family speaks--these are all examples of the former. I just thought that > "endowment" would be a little more meaningful to others; even when you > change rubles to dollars, you can't get a samovar at Costco. All indicators > are relative indicators in that sense. > > > David Kellogg > > Macquarie University > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 3:19 PM, mike cole wrote: > > > ?David -- I am finding it very difficult to distinguish what Vygotsky > wrote > > what you are saying that Vygotsky is saying, and what you are saying. > > > > I read the phrase I quoted as coming from LSV not DK. And I went looking > > for the Russian passage in your email to see if I interpreted the notion > of > > endowment the way Vygotsky did, only to find out it was you writing!! > > > > Getting slow in my old age for sure. > > > > mike > > > > > > > > > > > > ? > > > > On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 7:29 PM, David Kellogg > > wrote: > > > > > Tenaciously, Mike. The word "endowment" is a metaphor for something > > given, > > > like the endowment of a university, or the patrimony of an investment > > fund. > > > The child's biological endowment is given to the child by heredity and > > > speech doesn't change that endowment. The most important part of > > > the child's social endowment is, as Bronfenbrenner points out, largely > > > unseen by the child: it's what Mommy and Daddy do for a living. That is > > not > > > changed by the child's learning speech either. > > > > > > Vygotsky's a semiotician: not an environmentalist and he's also not a > > > constructivist. The semiotic truth isn't in the middle; it's > > simultaneously > > > beyond both extremes. It's beyond environmentalism because what the > child > > > obtains from the social and cultural environment is a semiotic and not > > > simply an interpersonal one; it's the context of culture and the > > resources > > > of the language system and not simply the immediate text and the > > immediate > > > situation. It's beyond constructivism, because what the child construes > > in > > > building up a grammar is not simply the meanings but the meaning > > > potentials; not just seen paths for the taking but also the unseen ones > > not > > > taken. > > > > > > That's why even the most social-behavioristic psychologists can > > > underestimate the influence of the environment and even the most > > "childist" > > > constructivists can understate the creativity involved; why people like > > > Chomsky end up invoking biology and conversely people like Skinner end > up > > > invoking culture and environment to make up the deficit. Both assume > that > > > language has to be literally "acquired" or "built up" and cannot see a > > way > > > to do this with finite materials. But the resources are not material at > > > all; they are semiotic, and "construction", like "endowment," is > simply > > a > > > metaphor we use to lend the weightlessness of word meaning a little > mass. > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 1:01 PM, mike cole wrote: > > > > > > > You believe the following, David? > > > > > > > > Neither the biological nor the social endowment > > > > of the child greatly changes in the acquisition of speech; > > > > nevertheless,..... > > > > > > > > mike > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 3:24 PM, David Kellogg > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Andy: > > > > > > > > > > A good paradox! Word meaning is a unit, but the spoken word itself > is > > > > just > > > > > an element--a thing. We can see that this is, on the face of it, > > > > > impossible: within a single holistic analysis, an element can be a > > part > > > > of > > > > > a unit, but a unit can never be a part of an element. So what you > are > > > > > referring to when you say that the word is a thing is the "sonic" > or > > > > > "phasal" quality of the word: its "acoustic" properties, its > > > "phonetics". > > > > > > > > > > But not its phonology. The word that Vygotsky uses for "phoneme" > > refers > > > > to > > > > > the 1929 work of the Prague Circle, originally the Moscow Circle. > He > > > is a > > > > > LITTLE coy about this, because the founders, Jakobson and > Trubetskoy, > > > > were > > > > > not very popular with the authorities and Vygotsky already had > plenty > > > of > > > > > heterodox acquaintances to worry about. Nevertheless, whenever > > Vygotsky > > > > > says "phoneme", we know he really means what Jakobson and > Trubetskoy > > > > called > > > > > "morphophonemes". We know this because the examples he actually > > > > > gives--Russian case endings--are morpho-phonemes and not simply > > > phonemes: > > > > > so for example in English the sound /s/ is a simple phoneme when I > > say > > > > the > > > > > word "self" but if I say "Andy's" the sound /s/ is a > morpho-phoneme: > > a > > > > > difference in sounding that makes a difference in meaning. The > system > > > > (that > > > > > is, the paradigmatic menu) of these differences in soundings are > what > > > the > > > > > Moscow and Prague Circles called "phonology" (as OPPOSED to > > phonetics), > > > > and > > > > > this is the kind of "phoneme" that Vygotsky is really talking > about. > > > > > > > > > > Still, you can see that it is not what he is talking about when he > > says > > > > > word meaning, because these units are still nowhere near big enough > > to > > > > > describe the kinds of changes which must occur when verbal thinking > > > > > develops. I feel the same way about a lot of the examples offered > of > > > > > "perezhivanie", including Marc's. If MacDuff's grief or Carla's > > > epiphany > > > > > about the misbehavior of her kids being due to "outside influences" > > > > really > > > > > is the unit of personality and experience that Vygotsky wants us to > > use > > > > > when we analyse the ontogenesis of personality, then it is no more > > > > > appropriate than using the morpho-phoneme to analyse the whole of > > > verbal > > > > > thinking. Just as evolution (of species) requires very different > > units > > > > from > > > > > history (of classes), development, whether we are talking about > > verbal > > > > > thinking or the personality as a whole, is going to require very > > > > different > > > > > units from learning, whether we are talking about MacDuff or Carla. > > The > > > > > units must be able to develop; that is, the relationship of the > > > elements > > > > > within them must be susceptible to many changes over time. > > > > > > > > > > Let me give three examples of how this happens in different > > > > "perezhivanie". > > > > > They are not mine; they are Vygotsky's, and they are all from the > > > > > Pedological Lectures. > > > > > > > > > > First, the Crisis at One. Neither the biological nor the social > > > endowment > > > > > of the child greatly changes in the acquisition of speech; > > > nevertheless, > > > > > the relationship between the personality and the environment, of > > which > > > > > both personality moments and environmental ones are constituent > > > elements, > > > > > is entirely transformed. Here we are not talking about phonemes, or > > > even > > > > > morpho-phonemes: we are talking about "wordings"--whole utterances. > > In > > > > > Melbourne I presented some data that demonstrated this > beautifully--a > > > > > child's first word is actually an attempt to imitate a whole > > > > conversation. > > > > > > > > > > Second, the Crisis at Three. Vygotsky spends a lot of time > discussing > > > the > > > > > "Seven Stars"--the symptoms of the "Terrible Twos" and > > "Threenagehood" > > > > > noted by harried parents everywhere. But by the end of his analysis > > > it's > > > > > clear that what really happens is a new relationship between wish > and > > > > > will: in extreme cases, the child actually wishes for one thing > (e.g. > > > > > compromise) and wills the opposite (the everlasting "No!"). Again, > > > > neither > > > > > the personality moments as such nor the environmental ones change, > > but > > > > > there is a separation and a sorting which allows the subordination > of > > > > wish > > > > > to will that we see in play. This isn't the kind of "aha" moment > that > > > > Marc > > > > > is offering us at all: Vygotsky actually calls it the "antipode" of > > > > future > > > > > will, because instead of enabling will it actually paralyzes it. > But > > it > > > > is > > > > > indubitably a key moment in the development of the relation of > > > > personality > > > > > to environmental moments that we see in "perizhivanie". > > > > > > > > > > Thirdly, the Crisis at Seven. I think Gonzalez Rey makes a total > hash > > > of > > > > > this, and I get very cross when I read his article. It is not true > > that > > > > the > > > > > essence of perizhivanie remained a mystery to Vygotsky simply > because > > > he > > > > no > > > > > longer subscribes to "the aesthetic reaction" and "catharsis" and > > other > > > > > notions that he toyed with in Psych of Art (he's no longer doing > > > > > experiments on changes in breathing rate when people read the works > > of > > > > > Bunin either!). It might be true that he never offered a system of > > > facts > > > > > and methodological procedures for perezivanie, but that was only > > > because > > > > > one already existed, for example in the work of Wallon and Stern > > > > > and others. It is demonstrably not true that when Vygotsky says > that > > > the > > > > > speech environment of those around him does not change when the > child > > > > > learns to talk at one, he is not "profoundly contradictory with the > > > > concept > > > > > of sense": when you read the quotation in context, it is very clear > > > that > > > > > what he is referring to are the kinds of absolute indicators used > by > > > > > Zalkind: how often the parents read the newspapers, the dialect > they > > > > speak, > > > > > and their educational background. These do not change, and if the > > child > > > > > wants to make sense, these are the factors the child will have to > > > relate > > > > > to. > > > > > > > > > > Vygotsky gives the example of a child who is severely retarded. The > > > child > > > > > wants to play with other children and is rejected. The child walks > > down > > > > the > > > > > street and the other children follow, laughing. The child is > shrieked > > > at, > > > > > insulted, but as soon as the humiliation stops, the child is > > perfectly > > > > > happy with himself. Vygotsky points out that the child is not able > > > > > to "co-generalize" the "perizhivanie" of the humiliations: each is > > > > > unpleasant, but they are entirely separate and cannot be connected > > with > > > > any > > > > > internal sense of inferiority. A normal child, however, is able to > > > > > "internalize" these humiliations and consequently develops a sense > of > > > > > inferiority. We can see that what has happened is the insertion of > > what > > > > > Vygotsky calls an "intellectual" moment: an inner layer, which is > > what > > > > > distinguishes later Chaplin movies from earlier ones (again, > > Vygotsky's > > > > > example, not mine!) and what brings about the "loss of directness > and > > > > > naivete" that we see in pre-schoolers. > > > > > > > > > > I think that the reason people find "perizhivanie" so hard to work > > with > > > > is > > > > > the same reason that they find "word meaning" hard to work with: it > > > > > develops. The feeling of drinking milk as the infant drinks it is > > > > > perizhivanie, and the thought of being humiliated when you are > > mulling > > > it > > > > > over and contemplating revenge is also perizhivanie, and only a > > > profound > > > > > analysis which includes ontogenetic development and not just > learning > > > > will > > > > > show the inner link between them. It's for that reason that I think > > > that > > > > > "activity" is not a useful unit of analysis and I am much more > > inclined > > > > to > > > > > use your word "project", so long as it can include what Vygotsky > > calls > > > > > "inner activeness". > > > > > > > > > > Vygotsky says: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ????? ? ?????????, ?????????? ? ?. ?., ? ???? ???? ? ?????????? > > > > > ???????????, ??? ?????????? ???????????? ??????????????? ????????? > > > > > ??????????????? ?? ??????? ? ??????? ?????????????. ??? ??? ????? > > ????? > > > > > ?????????? ?????????? ? ???????? ???????? ??????????? ? ???, ???, ? > > ?? > > > > > ????? ??? ? ?????????? ???????? ??? ?????????? ???????????? > > > ???????????? > > > > > ???????????????? ????? ? ?????????, ??????? ???????????, ? ???????? > > > > > ???????? ?? ????? ???????????? ?????????????? ???????????, > > ???????????? > > > > > ??????????? ?????????? ?????????? ?? ????????? ? ??????? > > ????????????. > > > > ??? > > > > > ??? ???????, ??????? ????? ??????????, ? ?? ????? ????? ?? ?????? > ??? > > > > ????? > > > > > ???-??????, ???, ? ???????? ????????? ?????????????? ??????? ? > > > ?????????? > > > > > ????????????. > > > > > > > > > > When I think, remember, etc. I am dealing with inner activeness; > this > > > > > psychological process of inner activity is not directly linked to > any > > > > > external activity. The new form of inner activeness in the School > Age > > > > > consists of this: that while during the preschool years these inner > > > > > activities demonstrated an immediate link with action, with > external > > > > > activeness, in the school years we have a relative autonomy which > > > > emerges, > > > > > inner activeness which is relatively independent of external > > > activities. > > > > > Here is already a child who can think, at the same time when he is > > > doing > > > > or > > > > > seeing something, one in whom has emerged a differentiation of > inner > > > and > > > > > outer activities. > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 10:07 AM, Andy Blunden > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > David: "Are words really units?" > > > > > > > > > > > > Well, firstly, "units" is a *relative* term. That is, the > question > > > is: > > > > > are > > > > > > words units of something, some complex process subject to > analysis. > > > And > > > > > > which? > > > > > > > > > > > > Secondly, according to Vygotsky, "no." The concept Vygotsky > > proposes > > > > as a > > > > > > unit is "word meaning" which he says is a unity of sound and > > meaning. > > > > The > > > > > > sound is an artefact, which, detached from its meaningful > utterance > > > in > > > > a > > > > > > transactional context is just a thing, viz., a word. Whereas > "word > > > > > meaning" > > > > > > is an arrtefact-mediated action, a unit of human social activity. > > > > > > > > > > > > It is true that words can be countable or mass according to > > context, > > > > but > > > > > I > > > > > > wasn't talking about words was I? I was talking about word > meaning. > > > > > > > > > > > > Andy > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > Andy Blunden > > > > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > > > > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective- > > > decision-making > > > > > > On 8/01/2017 7:59 AM, David Kellogg wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > >> Are words really units? When we look at their ideational meaning > > > (that > > > > > is, > > > > > >> their logical and experiential content--their capacity for > > > > representing > > > > > >> and > > > > > >> linking together human experiences) they seem to fall into two > > very > > > > > >> different categories: lexical words like "perezhivanie" or > "sense" > > > or > > > > > >> "personality" of "individual" and grammatical words like "of", > or > > > > > "might", > > > > > >> or "is". The lexical words seem to behave like units--they are > > > > bounded, > > > > > >> discrete, and, as Andy would say, "countable" (the problem is > that > > > > > almost > > > > > >> all nouns are both countable and uncountable depending on the > > > context > > > > > you > > > > > >> put them in, so this distinction is really not as essential as > > Andy > > > > > seems > > > > > >> to assume). But the more grammatical words seem to be elements > of > > > some > > > > > >> larger unit, which we can call wording. > > > > > >> > > > > > >> Veresov and Fleer come up against this problem with "edintsvo" > and > > > > > >> "edintsa". Of course, as they say, the two words are distinct. > But > > > > this > > > > > >> doesn't necessarily mean that the former always corresponds to > > > "unity" > > > > > in > > > > > >> English and the latter is always "unit". If you look at the > > > paragraph > > > > > they > > > > > >> translate on 330, you can see that Vygotsky starts with an idea > > that > > > > is > > > > > >> quite "synoptic" and is well expressed by "unit". But in the > last > > > > > sentence > > > > > >> there is a sense that "perezhivanie" is a meta-stable unit--one > > that > > > > > >> remains self-similar only through a process of thorough change, > > > like a > > > > > >> bicycle whose every part is replaced--and in English is it is > > better > > > > to > > > > > >> express this idea with "unity". The problem is that the > > differences > > > > > >> between > > > > > >> "edintsvo" and "edintsva" in Russian is a matter of gender (I > > think) > > > > and > > > > > >> not simply abstractness, and as a result the English version, > > which > > > > > cannot > > > > > >> use the resource of gender,has to rely on abstractness, so the > > words > > > > > >> "unity" and "unit" are somewhat more distinct and less linked > than > > > > > >> "edintsvo" and "edintsva". > > > > > >> > > > > > >> There are other problems that are similar. When Gonzalez Rey > uses > > > the > > > > > word > > > > > >> "final moment" to refer to the final period of Vygotsky's > > thinking, > > > he > > > > > >> leaves the anglophone reader the impression that he is referring > > to > > > > > >> Vygotsky's deathbed thoughts. On the other hand, when Veresov > and > > > > Fleer > > > > > >> use > > > > > >> "factor" to translate the same Russian word that Gonzalez Rey is > > > > using, > > > > > >> they are giving us something more quantitative than Vygotsky > > > intended, > > > > > and > > > > > >> their translation of "dalee nerazloshim'im chastyami etava > > edinstva" > > > > > >> into "vital and further indivisible part of the whole" is quite > > > > opaque > > > > > in > > > > > >> English (notice that here Veresov and Fleer use "whole" to > > translate > > > > > >> "edinstva" rather than "unit"!) At some point you have to accept > > > that > > > > > you > > > > > >> can change Russian words into English words as if you were > > > exchanging > > > > > >> rubles for dollars, but you still won't be able to buy a samovar > > at > > > > > >> Walmart. > > > > > >> > > > > > >> David Kellogg > > > > > >> Macquarie University > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 5:21 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil < > > > > a.j.gil@iped.uio.no > > > > > > > > > > > >> wrote: > > > > > >> > > > > > >> Larry, all, > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> our arguments in the 2014 address a science education > literature > > in > > > > > which > > > > > >>> the constructivist perspective is the leading perspective; We > > note > > > > that > > > > > >>> the > > > > > >>> assertion that people learn from experience is everywhere taken > > for > > > > > >>> granted > > > > > >>> but nowhere accounted for. We resort to pragmatist and > > > > phenomenological > > > > > >>> literature along with Vygotsky's insights to point out the need > > to > > > > > >>> account > > > > > >>> for learning as something that cannot be the result of an > > > > individual's > > > > > >>> construction; in experience there is always something in excess > > of > > > > what > > > > > >>> you > > > > > >>> intended, and this is a basic feature of doing, of performing. > I > > > take > > > > > >>> that > > > > > >>> to be your "trans" in the trans/zhivanie word, Larry, which > > already > > > > is > > > > > >>> denoted in the word PERezhivanie. > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> But I do not wish to move our discussion too far away from > Marc's > > > > paper > > > > > >>> and the Perezhivanie special issue. We also risk disengaging > many > > > > that > > > > > >>> have > > > > > >>> not have the privilege we've had to have the time to read so > many > > > > > >>> articles > > > > > >>> in just few days into the new year. I think we are a point in > the > > > > > >>> discussion where a pretty clear point of > agreement/disagreement, > > > and > > > > > >>> therefore of possibility for growth, has been reached with > regard > > > to > > > > > the > > > > > >>> view of perezhivanie as "an experience" and as the "working > over > > > > it". I > > > > > >>> think that to allow as many as possible to follow, and > hopefully > > > also > > > > > >>> engage, I think it will be helpful to bring the diverse > > > perspectives > > > > > and > > > > > >>> theoretical accounts to matter in accounting for some actual > > > > material. > > > > > >>> And > > > > > >>> there are a number of cases described in the articles, > including > > > > Marc's > > > > > >>> case of a teacher, as well as everyday facts, such as those > > brought > > > > by > > > > > >>> Beth, and in Beth's article... > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> I take the task for myself too, but Saturday morning need to > > attend > > > > to > > > > > >>> other things! > > > > > >>> A > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> ________________________________________ > > > > > >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > > edu > > > > > > > > > > > >>> on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com > > > > > >>> Sent: 07 January 2017 18:26 > > > > > >>> To: Andy Blunden; Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, > > > > Activity; > > > > > >>> Larry Purss > > > > > >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> Andy, Peter, i hope the intention to move beyond politeness to > > > > struggle > > > > > >>> with this topic materializes. > > > > > >>> In this vein i want to introduce exploration of the ?excess? of > > > > actual > > > > > >>> over intended meaning as he sketched his introduction to > > > > ?experience?. > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> Citing Dewey, Alfredo says that this excess of actual learning > > over > > > > > >>> intended learning INCLUDES what Dewey refers to as ?attitudes? > > and > > > > > these > > > > > >>> ?attitudes? are FUNDAMENTALLY what count in the future. > > > > > >>> Alfredo and Roth then add this summary statement : > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> There is therefore, a need to theorize experience in terms that > > do > > > > not > > > > > >>> assume control and rationality as the sine qua non of learning. > > It > > > > also > > > > > >>> implies a need to develop analytical accounts that retain the > > > > > >>> ?uncertainty? > > > > > >>> that is an ?integral part? of human experience. > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> Where are Alfredo and Roth leading us with this sketch of > > > experience? > > > > > To > > > > > >>> highlight ?attitudes? that occur in the excess of actual over > > > > intended > > > > > >>> learning? The word ?attitudes? generates images of (atmosphere) > > and > > > > > >>> (moods) > > > > > >>> that ?flow? like cascading waterfalls that can be imaged as > > (force) > > > > or > > > > > as > > > > > >>> (receptive). Attitudes that flow to places where they are > > received > > > > > >>> within a > > > > > >>> certain attitude of care and concern. Not as forceful an image > as > > > > > moving > > > > > >>> only with control and rationality. Describing ?weaker? > thought > > > that > > > > > >>> remains uncertain but that also opens us to the other?s peril > and > > > > > plight. > > > > > >>> Possibly a post-analytic motion that exceeds the intended by > > > > > >>> living-through > > > > > >>> the actual that develops ?attitudes? that are fundamentally > what > > > > count > > > > > >>> for > > > > > >>> the future. > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> From: Andy Blunden > > > > > >>> Sent: January 7, 2017 5:00 AM > > > > > >>> To: Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > > >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> OK Peter, what you say is all very true I am sure, but it > > > > > >>> entails conflating activity and action (as mass nouns) and > > > > > >>> context and mediation, and makes the required distinction > > > > > >>> much like one could find multiple meanings for the word > > > > > >>> "and" by listing the different phrases and clauses which can > > > > > >>> be linked by "and." > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> Andy > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > >>> Andy Blunden > > > > > >>> http://home.mira.net/~andy > > > > > >>> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective- > > > > decision-making > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> On 7/01/2017 11:42 PM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> Let me try to illustrate. > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> Reading as mediated action: The cultural-historical > > > > > >>>> context of reading mediates how one?s attention and > > > > > >>>> response are channeled in socially constructed ways. So, > > > > > >>>> in one setting, say at home or reading in the company of > > > > > >>>> friends, a novel might bring a reader to tears, or invite > > > > > >>>> readers to share personal stories that parallel those of > > > > > >>>> the plot lines, or laugh out loud. But another setting, a > > > > > >>>> formal school or university class, would have historical > > > > > >>>> values and practices that mute emotional and personal > > > > > >>>> responses, and promote a more sober, analytic way of > > > > > >>>> reading and talking that fits with specific historical > > > > > >>>> critical conventions and genres, and discourages others. > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> Reading as mediating action: The act of reading can be > > > > > >>>> transformational. In reading about an talking about a > > > > > >>>> character?s actions, a reader might reconsider a value > > > > > >>>> system, become more sympathetic to real people who > > > > > >>>> resemble oppressed characters, etc. In other words, > > > > > >>>> reading a text may serve a mediational process in which > > > > > >>>> textual ideas and exemplars enable a reader to think > > > > > >>>> differently. > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> *From:*Andy Blunden [mailto:ablunden@mira.net] > > > > > >>>> *Sent:* Saturday, January 7, 2017 6:28 AM > > > > > >>>> *To:* Peter Smagorinsky ; eXtended Mind, > > > > > >>>> Culture, Activity > > > > > >>>> *Subject:* Re: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> Can you explain in a paragraph or two,. Peter, rather than > > > > > >>>> asking us all to read 10,000 words to extract an answer? > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> Andy > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> Andy Blunden > > > > > >>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy > > > > > >>>> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective- > > > > decision-making > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> On 7/01/2017 11:23 PM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> Andy and others, I tried to work out the > mediated/mediating > > > > > >>>> question > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> in the area of reading....see if this helps. > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> Smagorinsky, P., & O'Donnell-Allen, C. (1998). Reading as > > > > > mediated > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> and mediating action: Composing meaning for literature through > > > > > multimedia > > > > > >>> interpretive texts. Reading Research Quarterly, 33, 198-226. > > > > Available > > > > > >>> athttp://www.petersmagorinsky.net/About/PDF/RRQ/RRQ1998.pdf > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> -----Original Message----- > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > >>>> [mailto: > > > > > xmca-l-bounces@ > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> Sent: Friday, January 6, 2017 7:12 PM > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> To:xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu edu > > > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> I have never understood this supposed distinction, > Alfredo, > > > > > between > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> "mediated activity" and "mediating activity" given that all > > > activity > > > > is > > > > > >>> mediated and all activity mediates. > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> Also, could you spell out what you mean by the "tension" > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> between perezhivanie as meaning and perezhivanie as > > struggle. > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> Andy > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> ------------------------------ > > ------------------------------ > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> Andy Blunden > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective- > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> decision-making > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> On 5/01/2017 6:26 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> Thanks Marc for your careful response. > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> I am familiar to Vygotsky's notion of cultural > > mediation > > > > and > > > > > I > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> am aware and acknowledge that it was elaborated as a means to > > > > overcome > > > > > >>> dualism, and that it is not analog to a computational approach. > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> When I brought the computing analogy, I did so with > > > regard > > > > > not > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> to the concept of cultural mediation in general, but to the way > > it > > > > can > > > > > be > > > > > >>> (and is) deployed analytically. I react to what it seems to me > a > > > > > >>> dichotomy > > > > > >>> between a "meaning" as something that is static (thereby a form > > of > > > > > >>> "representation" or reflection of the relation with the > > environment > > > > > >>> instead > > > > > >>> of?refraction)?? and the experiencing-as-struggling, which is > > > > > described > > > > > >>> as?transformation or change. If so, mediation here would seem > to > > be > > > > > part > > > > > >>> of > > > > > >>> a methodological device that first dissects "a type of meaning" > > > from > > > > "a > > > > > >>> type of activity" (or a given state from the process that > changes > > > > that > > > > > >>> state), and then unites it by adding the term "mediation." And > > this > > > > may > > > > > >>> be > > > > > >>> my misreading, but in that (mis)reading (which perhaps is > mostly > > > due > > > > to > > > > > >>> the > > > > > >>> fact that in your empirical illustration only the initial and > end > > > > > >>> product, > > > > > >>> i.e., perezhivanie, are described, but not the > > > > > experiencing-as-struggle, > > > > > >>> that is, the moving between the two), mediation here seems to > do > > as > > > > > >>> analytical concept precisely what you were afraid our monism > was > > > > doing: > > > > > >>> explaining nothing. Only the end products but not the process > of > > > > > >>> producing > > > > > >>> perezhivanie are revealed. This may be problematic if one > attends > > > to > > > > > what > > > > > >>> Veresov argues in the paper I shared yesterday, where he > defends > > > the > > > > > >>> notion > > > > > >>> of mediation but also specifies that Vygotsky speaks of > > *mediating > > > > > >>> activity* (as opposed to *mediated* activity). That is, not > > > mediation > > > > > by > > > > > >>> signs as products, but mediating activity as the activity of > > > > producing > > > > > >>> signs (which again is an activity of producing social > relations, > > > > > perhaps > > > > > >>> what you refer as "holistic meanings"?). What do you think? > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> I did not think you were trying to deny the influence > > of > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> Spinoza, and I do not think we ever said that Perezhivanie was > > > > > primarily > > > > > >>> a > > > > > >>> move from Cartesian Dualism to Monism, as you suggest in your > > > post. I > > > > > >>> copy > > > > > >>> and paste from my prior post: "The fact is that Vygotsky was > > > > building > > > > > a > > > > > >>> theory on the unity of the affect and the intellect that was to > > be > > > > > >>> grounded > > > > > >>> on Spinoza, and what we try to do is to explore how > perezhivanie, > > > as > > > > a > > > > > >>> concept being developed during the same period (but not > finalised > > > or > > > > > >>> totally settled!), could be seen from the perspective of the > > > > Spinozist > > > > > >>> Vygotsky." > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> I totally believe that bringing the distinction > between > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> perezhivanie as meaning, and perezhivanie as struggle, is > totally > > > > > >>> relevant, > > > > > >>> and Beth Ferholt's vignettes of Where the Wild Things Are do > > indeed > > > > > >>> illustrate this. We really need to address this tension, which > as > > > > > Beth's > > > > > >>> examples and as our own everyday experience shows, is a tension > > > that > > > > > >>> matters not just to books and to theories but to living persons > > > > > >>> (children, > > > > > >>> teachers), a tension that moreover is present and mentioned in > > all > > > > the > > > > > >>> articles of the symposium. The papers offer different > proposals, > > > and > > > > I > > > > > >>> think is so great we have the chance to discuss them! I too, as > > > you, > > > > am > > > > > >>> very interesting in hearing others about the questions you had > > > > > concerning > > > > > >>> sense and meaning. > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> Alfredo > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> on behalf > of > > > > Marc > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> Clar? > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> Sent: 04 January 2017 22:31 > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and > Perezhivanie! > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> Thank you very much, Alfredo, for sharing this > > excellent > > > > > paper > > > > > >>>> by > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> Veresov, and thanks also for your responses, which > > really > > > > > >>>> helped > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> me to > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> better understand your points. My main doubt about > your > > > > > >>>> proposal > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> was/is caused by the statement that the idea of > > cultural > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> mediation/mediator implies a cartesian dualism. This > > > shocks > > > > > me > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> because, to me, the idea of cultural mediation is > > > > absolutely > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> crucial > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> (in fact, the keystone) for the construction of a > > monist > > > > (and > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> scientific) psychology that does not forget mind > ?that > > > is, > > > > a > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> cultural > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> psychology. From your response, however, I realized > > that > > > we > > > > > may > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> be > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> approaching the idea of mediation in different ways. > I > > > talk > > > > > of > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> mediation and mediators in a quite restricted way. > The > > > > > starting > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> point > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> of my understanding of mediation is a dialectical > > > > > relationship > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> (organic, transactional) between the subject and the > > > world > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> (Vygotsky departs from the scheme stimulus-response, from > > > > reflexology). > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> This relationship, that Vygotsky calls primitive > > > > > psychological > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> functions, would be basically biological. However, in > > > human > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> beings > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> this relationship is mediated by cultural means: > signs > > > and > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> tools; or > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> primary, secondary and terciary artifacts. These > > cultural > > > > > means > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> reorganize the primitive functions (dialectic S-O > > > > > >>>> relationship), > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> which > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> become then higher psychological functions (S-M-O) > (see > > > for > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> example, > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> The problem of the cultural development of the child, > > in > > > > The > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> Vygotsky > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> Reader). Now, the subject, the cultural mediators, > and > > > the > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> object form > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> an inseparable dialectical unit, so that the subject > > acts > > > > on > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> (transforms) the object through the prism of the > > cultural > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> mediators, > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> the object acts on (transforms) the subject also > > through > > > > the > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> prism of > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> the cultural mediators, and the cultural means are > > > > themselves > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> also > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> transformed as a consequence of their mediation in > this > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> continuous > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> dynamic dialectical tension. Here, for me, it is > > > important > > > > > the > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> idea > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> that the cultural means are as material (if we > assume a > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> materialist > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> monism) as all the rest of the world; in fact, are > > parts > > > of > > > > > the > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> material world which become signs or tools (and can > be > > > > > >>>> therefore > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> socially distributed). This permits the introduction > of > > > the > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> scientific > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> study of mind-consciousness (as mediating systems of > > > > signs), > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> because > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> mind is not anymore something immaterial and > > > unobservable, > > > > > but > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> it is > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> as material and observable as the rest of the natural > > > > world. > > > > > It > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> is > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> from this view that, for me, the idea of cultural > > > mediation > > > > > is > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> the > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> keystone of a monist psychology that includes mind. > > Thus, > > > > > when > > > > > >>>> I > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> speak > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> of mediators, I refer to the cultural means which > > mediate > > > > in > > > > > >>>> the > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> S-O > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> dialectics; I am especially interested in > > signs/secondary > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> artifacts. > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> Here, it is perhaps necessary to insist that when I > > talk > > > of > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> studying > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> mediators (and their semantic structure), this > doesn't > > > mean > > > > > >>>> that > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> they > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> are taken out from the activity (the flux of live) in > > > which > > > > > >>>> they > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> mediate (since out of activity they are not signs > > > anymore); > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> here, I > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> think Vygotsky tries again to overcome another old > > > > dichotomy, > > > > > >>>> the > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> functionalism-structuralism one. I hope that all this > > > makes > > > > > >>>> also > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> clear the difference between this view and that of > computational > > > > > >>> psychologies (which in general are profoundly and explicitly > > > dualist > > > > > and > > > > > >>> not dialectic). > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> Back to perezhivanie, I'm not obviously trying to > deny > > > the > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> influence > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> of Spinoza on Vygotsky's thinking (this is explicit > in > > > > > >>>> Vygotsky's > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> writings, especially in ?The teaching about > emotions?, > > in > > > > the > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> Vol.6 of > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> the Collected Works). But I have doubts that > Vygotsky's > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> introduction > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> of the concept of perezhivanie is to be regarded > > > primarily > > > > > as a > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> movement towards monism (from a previous cartesian > > > > dualism), > > > > > >>>> and > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> that > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> this movement questions the concept of cultural > > > mediation. > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> Instead, > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> and I think that this is in line with some of > > > Gonz?lez-Rey > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> observations in his paper, my impression is that the > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> introduction of > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> the concept of perezhivanie responds more to a > movement > > > (a > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> further > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> step) towards holism (something that, in my > > > understanding, > > > > > can > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> also be > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> found in Spinoza). Thus, I think that the word > meaning > > is > > > > > still > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> the > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> unit of analysis in the last Vygotsky -and therefore, > > the > > > > > idea > > > > > >>>> of > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> cultural mediation is still crucial (in fact, in The > > > > problem > > > > > of > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> the > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> environment, he connects the concept of perezhivanie, > > > which > > > > > has > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> just > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> introduced, to the development of word meaning > > > [p.345-346, > > > > > also > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> cited > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> in my paper]). However, in my view, in the last > > Vygotsky > > > > the > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> focus is > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> not anymore primarily on the word-meaning as formed > for > > > > > things > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> (or > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> collections of things, as in the ontogenetic research > > > with > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> Sakharov), but the focus is now in the formation of meaning for > > > > > holistic > > > > > >>> situations. > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> Best regards, > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> Marc. > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> 2017-01-03 19:16 GMT+01:00 Alfredo Jornet Gil< > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> a.j.gil@iped.uio.no> : > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> Hi Marc, all, > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> thanks for joining and for your interesting work, > > > > which I > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> follow > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> since I became aware of it. I appreciate the way > in > > > > your > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> paper you > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> show careful and honest attention to the texts of > > the > > > > > >>>> authors > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> involved, but perhaps most of all I appreciate > that > > > the > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> paper makes > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> the transformational dimension related to > struggle > > > and > > > > > >>>> change > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> salient, a dimension all papers deemed central to > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> perezhivanie. And I > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> have learned more about Vasilyuk by reading your > > > paper. > > > > > But > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> I also > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> see that we have approached the question of > > > > perezhivanie > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> differently > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> and I think that addressing the questions that > you > > > > raise > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> concerning > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> our article may be a good way to both respond and > > > > discuss > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> your paper. > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> I am aware that our use of the term monism may be > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> problematic to > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> some, and N. Veresov, who has recently written > > about > > > > this > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> (see > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> attached article), warns against the dangers of > > > simply > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> moving from > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> dualism into an undifferentiating monism that > > > > relativizes > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> everything, > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> making development un-studiable. This seems to be > > the > > > > way > > > > > >>>> in > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> which > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> you have understood our argument, and of course > > this > > > is > > > > > not > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> what we are or want to be doing. > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> Probably many will think that *dialectical > > > materialism* > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> rather than > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> monism is the proper term, and I could agree with > > > them; > > > > > we > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> do in fact > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> use dialectical materialism there and elsewhere. > > Yet, > > > > we > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> wanted to > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> emphasise the Spinozist influence (an influence > > that > > > > also > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> runs > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> through Marx) and so we found it appropriate to > use > > > the > > > > > >>>> term > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> monism, > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> a term that Vygotsky uses before arguing that > > Spinoza > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> "develops an essentially materialistic view" > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> (Collected Works, Vol. 6, p. 124). For us, the > aim > > is > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> working out > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> ways to empirically examine and formulate > problems > > in > > > > > ways > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> that do > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> not reify a mind-body dualism. > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> Although overcoming dualism is foundational to > the > > > CHAT > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> paradigm, I > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> would however not say that Vygotsky did get to > > solve > > > > all > > > > > of > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> the > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> problems that Cartesian dualism had created for > > > > > psychology, > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> even > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> though he recognised those problems brilliantly > as > > > > early > > > > > as > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> in the > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> "Crisis". It should suffice to cite Vygotsky's > own > > > > > remarks, > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> which we quote in the paper (and which A.N. > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> Leont'ev mentions in the introduction to the > > > collected > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> works), where > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> Vygotsky explicitly critiques some of his own > prior > > > > ideas > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> for failing > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> to overcome dualism. We agree with those who, > like > > F. > > > > G. > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> Rey, see > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> Vygotsky's project as a developing rather than > as a > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> finalised one. > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> The fact is that Vygotsky was building a theory > on > > > the > > > > > >>>> unity > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> of the > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> affect and the intellect that was to be grounded > on > > > > > >>>> Spinoza, > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> and what > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> we try to do is to explore how perezhivanie, as a > > > > concept > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> being > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> developed during the same period (but not > finalised > > > or > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> totally > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> settled!), could be seen from the perspective of > > the > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> Spinozist Vygotsky. > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> As you note, in our article we argue that, if one > > > takes > > > > > the > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> Spinozist > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> one-substance approach, classical concepts used > in > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> non-classical > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> psychology, at least in the way they are commonly > > > used > > > > in > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> the current > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> literature, should be revised. One such concept > is > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> mediation. And I > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> personally do not have much of a problem when > > > mediation > > > > > is > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> used to > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> denote the fundamental fact that every thing > exists > > > > > always > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> through > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> *another*, never in and of itself. But I do think > > > that > > > > it > > > > > >>>> is > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> problematic to identify MEDIATORS, such as "a > > > meaning", > > > > > as > > > > > >>>> a > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> means to > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> account for or explain developmental processes > and > > > > > learning > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> events, > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> precisely because it is there, at least in my > view, > > > > that > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> dualism creeps in. > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> For example, I find it paradoxical that you are > > > > concerned > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> that our > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> monist approach risks turning perezhivanie into a > > > > useless > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> category > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> because it may be used to explain everything and > > > > nothing, > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> and yet you > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> do not seem to have a problem using the term > > > mediation > > > > to > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> account for > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> the transformation of perezhivanie without > clearly > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> elaborating on how > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> mediation does change anything or what it looks > > like > > > > as a > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> real > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> process. How is it different saying that a > > > perezhivanie > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> mediates the > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> experiencing-as-struggle from simply saying that > it > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> "affects" or > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> "determines" it? Indeed, if perezhivanie mediates > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> experiencing-as-struggle, does not > > > > > >>>> experiencing-as-struglgle > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> too > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> mediate perezhivanie? And do not both may be said > > to > > > > > >>>> mediate > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> development, or development mediate them? Is not this > explaining > > > > > >>> everything > > > > > >>> and nothing? > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> I do believe you can argue that there is a > > difference > > > > > >>>> between > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> mediation and classical psychology's cause-effect > > > > > >>>> relations, > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> but to > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> show this you need to dig into the dialectical > > > > > >>>> underpinnings > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> of the > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> theory. In your paper, you offer a nice analysis > > of a > > > > > >>>> lovely > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> case of > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> a teacher who, in dealing with a challenge with > one > > > of > > > > > her > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> students, > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> changes her perezhivanie. I think you can rightly > > > argue > > > > > >>>> that > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> there is > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> a semiotic transformation, and I fully support > your > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> statement that by > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> studying discourse we can empirically approach > > > > questions > > > > > of > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> psychological development. The contradictions you > > > show > > > > as > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> being > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> involved and resolved resonate really well with > > what > > > I > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> experience as > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> a parent or as a teacher in the classroom. Yet, > > > without > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> unpacking > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> what this "mediation" taking place between one > > > > > perezhivanie > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> and the > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> next one means as a concrete and real, the same > > > > analysis > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> could be done taking an information processing approach: > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> there is an situation that is processed > > > (represented?) > > > > in > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> one way, > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> which then leads to a (cognitive) dissonance, and > > > then > > > > > >>>> there > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> is a > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> cognitive resolution by means of which the > > situation > > > is > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> presented > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> differently in consciousness (indeed, when seen > in > > > this > > > > > >>>> way, > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> the term > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> perezhivanie and the term "representation" become > > > > almost > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> indistinguishable). How is mediation, as an > > > analytical > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> concept, > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> helping here? And most importantly to the > question > > of > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> perezhivanie, > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> how is this analysis going to show the internal > > > > > connection > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> between > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> intellect and affect that Vygotsky formulates as > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> constitutive of the notion of perezhivanie? > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> I believe that the key lies in understanding what > > > > > Vygotsky > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> means when > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> he says that perezhivanie is a unit of analysis. > I > > > will > > > > > not > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> repeat > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> here what already is written in at least a couple > > of > > > > the > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> articles in > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> the special issue (Blunden, ours), that is the > > > > difference > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> between > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> analysis by elements and unit analysis (Vygotsky > > > > 1987). A > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> unit > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> analysis approach is consistent with Spinoza, for > > > whom > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> cause-effect > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> explanations were not adequate, requiring instead > > an > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> understanding of > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> self-development, perezhivanie as a kernel cell > for > > > the > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> development > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> of personality. And I think you may be after this > > in > > > > your > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> article in > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> suggesting a form of continuous movement from > > > > > perezhivanie > > > > > >>>> to > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> experiencing-as-struggle. But perhaps the major > > > > > difficulty > > > > > >>>> I > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> find is that, in positing Vygotsky's perezhivanie as "a type of > > > > > meaning" > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> and Vasilyuk's perezhivanie (or > > > > experiencing-as-struggle) > > > > > >>>> as > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> a "type > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> of activity," it is difficult not to see here a > > > > division > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> between > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> product and process, a division that then is > > > > analytically > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> bridged by > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> the addition of a third term, mediation, that > > should > > > > > bring > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> back the > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> real movement between the product and the > process. > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> A different approach involves considering the > > > concrete > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> extension of > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> actual living and lived social relations, and > look > > at > > > > > them > > > > > >>>> as > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> generative phenomena. What is there in the > > encounter > > > > > >>>> between > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> Carla > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> and the child that leads to change? For it is not > > > > inside > > > > > >>>> the > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> mind, > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> but in real life, in consciousness as the real > > > relation > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> between people, that Carla is changed. > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> How is the semantic structure that you nicely > > present > > > > and > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> attribute > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> to Carla a product of the social relation between > > her > > > > and > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> the child? > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> I think that to rightfully situate perezhivanie > as > > a > > > > > >>>> concept > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> in a > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> Vygotskian framework, we ought to address its > > > relation > > > > to > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> the genetic > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> law of development. > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> There is much more to disentangle, but this is > long > > > > > enough. > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> I hope I > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> have succeeded in making clear these ideas. > Thanks > > so > > > > > much > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> for > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> engaging in the discussion! > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> Alfredo > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> ________________________________________ > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> on > > behalf > > > of > > > > > >>>> Marc > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> Clar? > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> Sent: 02 January 2017 22:14 > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and > > > Perezhivanie! > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> Hi, all, and thank you so much, Alfredo, for your > > > kind > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> invitation to > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> participate in this discussion. My paper in the > MCA > > > > > special > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> issue > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> focuses on a distinction between a type of > > activity, > > > > > which > > > > > >>>> I > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> argue > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> that is what Vasilyuk called *perezhivanie* > > > > > (experiencing) > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> and a type > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> of semiotic mediator, which I argue that is what > > > > > Vygotsky, > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> in The > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> Problem of the Environment, called > *perezhivanie.* > > I > > > > > argue, > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> following > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> Vasilyuk, that in experiencing activities > > (Vasilyuk's > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> perezhivanie), > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> this type of mediator is profoundly transformed ? > > in > > > > > fact, > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> that > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> experiencing activities consist of the semiotic > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> transformation of this type of mediator. > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> As Veresov and Fleer argue in their commentary, > > > > > >>>> perezhivanie > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> (as a > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> type of > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> mediator) is for me a psychological phenomenon, > one > > > > which > > > > > >>>> is > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> of > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> course conceptualized from a specific theoretical > > > > > >>>> framework. > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> But the > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> phenomenon is also visible from other theoretical > > > > > >>>> frameworks > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> as well, > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> as I mention in the paper. This phenomenon is my > > main > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> interest, and > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> it is from this interest that I arrived at the > > > concept > > > > of > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> perezhivanie (not the other way around). > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> Now, the phenomenon is that at least emotion, > > > > reasoning, > > > > > >>>> and > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> volition > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> (formation of conscious purposes) seem to be > > > decisively > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> mediated by > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> holistic situational meaning. My current research > > > > concern > > > > > >>>> is > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> trying > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> to find ways to study and understand how this > > > mediation > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> occurs and > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> how these semiotic mediators are transformed and > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> distributed. From > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> this view, I think that experiencing activities > > > > > (Vasilyuk's > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> perezhivanie) may provide a good terrain to study > > > these > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> issues > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> (especially regarding the mediation of emotion), > > as I > > > > > tried > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> to exemplify in the paper. > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> Studying semiotic mediation, however, is of > course > > > not > > > > > >>>> easy. > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> Following Vygotsky, I assume that extended > > discourse > > > is > > > > > the > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> manifestation of thinking within certain > > > psychological > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> conditions > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> (Vygotsky's Thinking and Speech, chapter 7), and > I > > > also > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> assume the > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> Vygotsky's law of the unity of the structure and > > > > function > > > > > >>>> of > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> thinking > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> (Vygotsky's Thinking and Speech, chapter 6). From > > > these > > > > > two > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> assumptions, I propose that meaning (and its > > > functions > > > > in > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> human > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> activity) can be scientifically studied by > > > structurally > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> analyzing the > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> narratives generated by subjects, considering > that > > > the > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> discourse > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> produced in the narrative is the point of > departure > > > of > > > > > this > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> study, > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> but that considerable analytical work must be > done > > to > > > > > move > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> from this > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> discourse to the full characterization of > meaning. > > It > > > > is > > > > > in > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> that > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> point where I find useful the work developed by > > > > Greimas, > > > > > >>>> the > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> usefulness of which I only suggest in the paper. > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> >From this background, I found many interesting > > ideas > > > > and > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> questions > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> in the > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> other papers of the special issue. In this first > > > post I > > > > > >>>> will > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> propose > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> two of them for possible discussion. The first > one > > > was > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> raised by > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> Gonz?lez-Rey, when he introduces, in connection > > with > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> perezhivanie, > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> the concepts of personality, and especially, of > > > sense. > > > > > So, > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> which is > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> the conceptual (and-or > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> phenomenal) relation between perezhivanie and > > sense? > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> Gonz?lez-Rey > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> suggests that both concepts are somewhat similar > > (and > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> overcome by the > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> concept of ?subjective sense?); my opinion, > partly > > > > > >>>> expressed > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> in my > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> commentary, is that perezhivanie is a type of > > > meaning, > > > > > >>>> which > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> includes > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> different levels of depth, and that sense > > corresponds > > > > to > > > > > >>>> the > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> deepest > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> level of meaning (which can be characterized as a > > > > system > > > > > of > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> semic > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> oppositions). Therefore, sense wouldn't be in > > > > opposition > > > > > to > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> meaning > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> (as ?a microcosm of human consciousness?, as > > Kozulin > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> remembers in his > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> commentary), although it would be in opposition > to > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> manifested meaning (the surface level of meaning). > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> The second issue was raised by Roth and Jornet, > > and I > > > > > think > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> it goes > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> beyond the issue of perezhivanie itself. If I > > > > understand > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> them well, > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> they argue that Vygotsky's core proposal of > > cultural > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> mediation is > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> influenced by the Cartesian dualism > (mind-matter), > > > and > > > > > >>>> that a > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> promising approach to Cultural Psychology would > be > > a > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> Spinozist > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> monism. I am actually very interested on the > issue > > of > > > > > which > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> epistemological position can best substantiate > the > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> construction of a > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> cultural psychology, and that's why I feel > inclined > > > to > > > > > take > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> the > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> opportunity to ask for your opinions about that. > > > About > > > > > the > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> proposal > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> of Roth and Jornet, I have some doubts. First, I > > > don't > > > > > see > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> why > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> Vygotsky's proposals can be seen as dualist (in > the > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> Cartesian sense) > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> -I suspect that it is because of the analytical > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> distinctions?. > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> Anyway, in my understanding, Vygotsky explicitly > > > > assumes > > > > > a > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> materialist monism (for example in The Crisis), > and > > > in > > > > > fact > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> he constructs his proposal on mediation upon reflexology, which > > > also > > > > > >>> explicitly assumed a materialist monism (e.g. > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> Sechenov). Would a Spinozist monism be a better > > point > > > > of > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> departure? I > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> don't know, in my understanding it is a more > > idealist > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> monism, and I > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> don't clearly see what could be gained. In my > > > opinion, > > > > a > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> scientific > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> psychology which includes the study of mind is > only > > > > > >>>> possible > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> if any > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> type of monism is assumed. However, in my view, > > for a > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> scientific > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> psychology, the ontological nature of the world > is > > > > > perhaps > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> less > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> important (it is an issue for metaphysics?), and > I > > am > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> inclined to assume a neutral monism (e.g. Russell). > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> So from this view, a materialist monism and a > > > Spinozist > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> monism > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> wouldn't be so different, so from both views it > > could > > > > be > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> assumed that > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> all is of the same nature and all is similarly > > > knowable > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> (including > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> mind) [which is the ontological nature of the > world > > > and > > > > > to > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> what > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> degree it is knowable are issues that can be left > > to > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> philosophy]. > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> However, in my opinion, this does not mean that, > > > while > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> assuming a > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> monism, analytical distinctions cannot be done > when > > > > > >>>> studying > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> the > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> world. In that sense, I had the impression that > > Roth > > > > and > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> Jornet > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> tended to dilute analytical distinctions in the > > name > > > of > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> monism; I > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> repeat that I don't know if I understood them > well, > > > but > > > > > if > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> this was > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> the case, in my opinion, analysis would be > > impossible > > > > > >>>> within > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> the new > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> psychology suggested by Roth and Jornet, and, > > > regarding > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> perezhivanie, > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> there would be the danger, noted by Vygotsky in > The > > > > > Crisis > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> and > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> cautioned by Kozulin in his commentary, that by > > > meaning > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> everything, perezhivanie ends by meaning nothing. > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> Best regards and happy new year, > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> Marc. > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> 2017-01-02 9:12 GMT+01:00 Alfredo Jornet Gil< > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> a.j.gil@iped.uio.no> : > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> Dear all, > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> I would like to join David, Luisa, Ana, Henry > > and > > > > the > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> others to wish > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> you all a Happy New Year! May it be full of > > joy, > > > > > peace, > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> and opportunity. > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> I also would like to begin the year > announcing > > > our > > > > > >>>> first > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> ?MCA > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> article discussion, ?although in fact > > corresponds > > > > to > > > > > >>>> the > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> last issue > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> of the year > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> we > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> just passed, Issue 4 on Perezhivanie. This > is a > > > > very > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> special > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> *special* issue, not only because its topic > has > > > > > raised > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> lots of > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> interest lately in > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> the > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> CHAT community but also because, greatly > > > > coordinated > > > > > by > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> Andy Blunden > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> and the rest of the editorial team, the issue > > > takes > > > > > the > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> form of a > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> symposium where authors get the chance to > > present > > > > and > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> respond to > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> each others' ideas on the subject. In my > view, > > > this > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> allows having a > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> rich and > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> multidimensional > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> approach to a subject as important as > > > perezhivanie. > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> Following with the dialogical spirit in which > > the > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> special issue was > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> assembled, we will focus on one lead article, > > but > > > > > >>>> hoping > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> to also > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> engage ideas and insights present in or > > relevant > > > to > > > > > >>>> other > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> contributions in the issue. ?Marc Clar?'s > > > "Vygotsky > > > > > and > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> Vasilyuk on > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> Perezhivanie: Two Notions and One Word" will > be > > > our > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> focus. The > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> article very nicely engages the lead work of > > > > > Vygotsky, > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> but also the > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> less known ??(?in educational literature) but > > > > totally > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> relevant works > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> of psychologist ?F. Vasilyuk and semiotician > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> A. > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> J. Greimas, mobilising a number of key > concepts > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> including those of > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> semiotic > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> mediation and transformation. > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> ?In addition to Marc, who will soon join us, > I > > > have > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> encouraged some > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> of > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> the > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> other authors in the special issue to also > join > > > as > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> "relevant > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> others," if time and circumstances allow > them. > > > > Let's > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> hope that this > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> will help keeping the symposium spirit up. > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> Marc's article is attached to this e-mail and > > > will > > > > be > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> made open > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> access at the T&F pages as soon as people is > > back > > > > > from > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> the holidays. > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> The T&F link > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> is > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> this: > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> http://www.tandfonline.com/ > > > > doi/full/10.1080/10749039 > > > > > . > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> 2016.1186194 > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> The link to the MCA Forum pages, where we > > > announce > > > > > our > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> discussions > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> and other xmca things, is here: > > > > > >>>> http://lchc.ucsd.edu/MCA/ > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> I wish us all a very productive and > interesting > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> discussion. > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> Alfredo > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From lpscholar2@gmail.com Wed Jan 11 13:09:01 2017 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2017 13:09:01 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! In-Reply-To: References: <1483344752182.40904@iped.uio.no> <1483467423798.57819@iped.uio.no> <1483601196884.31418@iped.uio.no> <5df5e870-3ef8-70d6-0c17-f8647ba17e62@mira.net> <587124d9.d957620a.4a5a8.bd56@mx.google.com> <1483820996800.91513@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <58769f15.05ae630a.8dd48.1a17@mx.google.com> David, taking Vygotsky?s chess metaphor for how perezhivanie is ?internalized? how do you understand the following comment from Alfredo and Jornet in this month?s article of MCA. (perezhivanie ? a monist concept for a monist theory)?: Notions such as ?internalization?, when they suppose a movement from the external to the internal, therefore cannot work as valid analytical concepts, because all that matters to change already is internal to ?the? unit. Similarly, in ?perezhivanie?, personal characteristics and environmental characteristics are but two attributes of a single reality?: The concrete event, the real ?social drama? that INCLUDES thinking, doing, and emoting in ?necessary? unity/identity and not just as the fortuitous outcome of external analyses. Is this notion of ?internalization? aligned with your notion of ?internalization?? Alfredo and Roth add that in their ?new? view thinking and action are not different ?things? that interact. There is not activity on the one hand and meaning on the other hand. There are not two things external to each other that require being ?connected? by external MEDIATORS. I am attempting to grasp or handle or comPREhend these subtle nuances. Do you agree with Alfredo and Roth that it may be useful to apply to ?perezhivanie? what pragmatist philosophers have said about the Anglo-Saxon concept ?experience? held strictly to a single definite use: That namely, of calling attention to the fact (the truth?) that ?Existence? has organism and environment as its aspects. In other words the method Alfredo and Roth apply of reading Dewey ?through? Vygotsky & reading Vygotsky ?through Dewey. This conversation on my growing edge and very slippery. I struggle to get a grip or to handle the nuances but i do love the topic. Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: David Kellogg Sent: January 10, 2017 7:52 PM To: Andy Blunden; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! Vygotsky's got a terrific metaphor for how "perezhivanie" is internalized: it is like internalizing the rules of the game of chess. The child who doesn't know how to play chess simply plays WITH the pieces instead of playing them. She or he might try to create a piece-board structure by putting black pieces on black squares and white pieces on white squares, but the structure is a visual one and not a semiotic one; it's about color and not about meaning. The child who DOES know how to play chess plays the pieces instead of playing with them. She or he too creates "structures" but this time they are semiotic ones: a black knight in a completely different column and a completely different row, can capture a white pawn. The board is the same and so are the kids; the children may have very similar biological and very similar cultural endowments, but they do not have the same semiotic context at all. Hence different perezhivanie and different personalities. David Kellogg Macquarie University On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 11:54 AM, Andy Blunden wrote: > How to understand the personality? ... i.e., the *development* of the > personality? > > The subject's inheritance, and The subject's experiences (/perezhivaniya/) > > ... just think of how you'd go about writing a good biography or > Bildungsroman. > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Andy Blunden > http://home.mira.net/~andy > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > On 11/01/2017 10:24 AM, David Kellogg wrote: > >> Andy: >> >> A good paradox! Word meaning is a unit, but the spoken word itself is >> just an element--a thing. We can see that this is, on the face of it, >> impossible: within a single holistic analysis, an element can be a part of >> a unit, but a unit can never be a part of an element. So what you are >> referring to when you say that the word is a thing is the "sonic" or >> "phasal" quality of the word: its "acoustic" properties, its "phonetics". >> >> But not its phonology. The word that Vygotsky uses for "phoneme" refers >> to the 1929 work of the Prague Circle, originally the Moscow Circle. He is >> a LITTLE coy about this, because the founders, Jakobson and Trubetskoy, >> were not very popular with the authorities and Vygotsky already had plenty >> of heterodox acquaintances to worry about. Nevertheless, whenever Vygotsky >> says "phoneme", we know he really means what Jakobson and Trubetskoy called >> "morphophonemes". We know this because the examples he actually >> gives--Russian case endings--are morpho-phonemes and not simply phonemes: >> so for example in English the sound /s/ is a simple phoneme when I say the >> word "self" but if I say "Andy's" the sound /s/ is a morpho-phoneme: a >> difference in sounding that makes a difference in meaning. The system (that >> is, the paradigmatic menu) of these differences in soundings are what the >> Moscow and Prague Circles called "phonology" (as OPPOSED to phonetics), and >> this is the kind of "phoneme" that Vygotsky is really talking about. >> >> Still, you can see that it is not what he is talking about when he says >> word meaning, because these units are still nowhere near big enough to >> describe the kinds of changes which must occur when verbal thinking >> develops. I feel the same way about a lot of the examples offered of >> "perezhivanie", including Marc's. If MacDuff's grief or Carla's epiphany >> about the misbehavior of her kids being due to "outside influences" really >> is the unit of personality and experience that Vygotsky wants us to use >> when we analyse the ontogenesis of personality, then it is no more >> appropriate than using the morpho-phoneme to analyse the whole of verbal >> thinking. Just as evolution (of species) requires very different units from >> history (of classes), development, whether we are talking about verbal >> thinking or the personality as a whole, is going to require very different >> units from learning, whether we are talking about MacDuff or Carla. The >> units must be able to develop; that is, the relationship of the elements >> within them must be susceptible to many changes over time. >> >> Let me give three examples of how this happens in different >> "perezhivanie". They are not mine; they are Vygotsky's, and they are all >> from the Pedological Lectures. >> >> First, the Crisis at One. Neither the biological nor the social endowment >> of the child greatly changes in the acquisition of speech; nevertheless, >> the relationship between the personality and the environment, of which both >> personality moments and environmental ones are constituent elements, is >> entirely transformed. Here we are not talking about phonemes, or even >> morpho-phonemes: we are talking about "wordings"--whole utterances. In >> Melbourne I presented some data that demonstrated this beautifully--a >> child's first word is actually an attempt to imitate a whole conversation. >> >> Second, the Crisis at Three. Vygotsky spends a lot of time discussing the >> "Seven Stars"--the symptoms of the "Terrible Twos" and "Threenagehood" >> noted by harried parents everywhere. But by the end of his analysis it's >> clear that what really happens is a new relationship between wish and will: >> in extreme cases, the child actually wishes for one thing (e.g. compromise) >> and wills the opposite (the everlasting "No!"). Again, neither the >> personality moments as such nor the environmental ones change, but there is >> a separation and a sorting which allows the subordination of wish to will >> that we see in play. This isn't the kind of "aha" moment that Marc is >> offering us at all: Vygotsky actually calls it the "antipode" of future >> will, because instead of enabling will it actually paralyzes it. But it is >> indubitably a key moment in the development of the relation of personality >> to environmental moments that we see in "perizhivanie". >> >> Thirdly, the Crisis at Seven. I think Gonzalez Rey makes a total hash of >> this, and I get very cross when I read his article. It is not true that the >> essence of perizhivanie remained a mystery to Vygotsky simply because he no >> longer subscribes to "the aesthetic reaction" and "catharsis" and other >> notions that he toyed with in Psych of Art (he's no longer doing >> experiments on changes in breathing rate when people read the works of >> Bunin either!). It might be true that he never offered a system of facts >> and methodological procedures for perezivanie, but that was only because >> one already existed, for example in the work of Wallon and Stern and >> others. It is demonstrably not true that when Vygotsky says that the speech >> environment of those around him does not change when the child learns to >> talk at one, he is not "profoundly contradictory with the concept of >> sense": when you read the quotation in context, it is very clear that what >> he is referring to are the kinds of absolute indicators used by Zalkind: >> how often the parents read the newspapers, the dialect they speak, and >> their educational background. These do not change, and if the child wants >> to make sense, these are the factors the child will have to relate to. >> >> Vygotsky gives the example of a child who is severely retarded. The child >> wants to play with other children and is rejected. The child walks down the >> street and the other children follow, laughing. The child is shrieked at, >> insulted, but as soon as the humiliation stops, the child is perfectly >> happy with himself. Vygotsky points out that the child is not able to >> "co-generalize" the "perizhivanie" of the humiliations: each is unpleasant, >> but they are entirely separate and cannot be connected with any internal >> sense of inferiority. A normal child, however, is able to "internalize" >> these humiliations and consequently develops a sense of inferiority. We can >> see that what has happened is the insertion of what Vygotsky calls an >> "intellectual" moment: an inner layer, which is what distinguishes later >> Chaplin movies from earlier ones (again, Vygotsky's example, not mine!) and >> what brings about the "loss of directness and naivete" that we see in >> pre-schoolers. >> >> I think that the reason people find "perizhivanie" so hard to work with >> is the same reason that they find "word meaning" hard to work with: it >> develops. The feeling of drinking milk as the infant drinks it is >> perizhivanie, and the thought of being humiliated when you are mulling it >> over and contemplating revenge is also perizhivanie, and only a profound >> analysis which includes ontogenetic development and not just learning will >> show the inner link between them. It's for that reason that I think that >> "activity" is not a useful unit of analysis and I am much more inclined to >> use your word "project", so long as it can include what Vygotsky calls >> "inner activeness". >> >> Vygotsky says: >> >> >> ????? ? ?????????, ?????????? ? ?. ?., ? ???? ???? ? ?????????? >> ???????????, ??? ?????????? ???????????? ??????????????? ????????? >> ??????????????? ?? ??????? ? ??????? ?????????????. ??? ??? ????? ????? >> ?????????? ?????????? ? ???????? ???????? ??????????? ? ???, ???, ? ?? >> ????? ??? ? ?????????? ???????? ??? ?????????? ???????????? ???????????? >> ???????????????? ????? ? ?????????, ??????? ???????????, ? ???????? >> ???????? ?? ????? ???????????? ?????????????? ???????????, ???????????? >> ??????????? ?????????? ?????????? ?? ????????? ? ??????? ????????????. ??? >> ??? ???????, ??????? ????? ??????????, ? ?? ????? ????? ?? ?????? ??? ????? >> ???-??????, ???, ? ???????? ????????? ?????????????? ??????? ? ?????????? >> ????????????. >> >> When I think, remember, etc. I am dealing withinner activeness; this >> psychological process of inner activity is not directly linked to any >> external activity. The new form of inner activeness in the School Age >> consists of this: that while during the preschool years these inner >> activities demonstrated an immediate link with action, with external >> activeness, in the school years we have a relative autonomy which emerges, >> inner activeness which is relatively independent of external activities. >> Here is already a child who can think, at the same time when he is doing or >> seeing something, one in whom has emerged a differentiation of inner and >> outer activities. >> >> David Kellogg >> Macquarie University >> >> >> >> On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 10:07 AM, Andy Blunden > ablunden@mira.net>> wrote: >> >> David: "Are words really units?" >> >> Well, firstly, "units" is a *relative* term. That is, >> the question is: are words units of something, some >> complex process subject to analysis. And which? >> >> Secondly, according to Vygotsky, "no." The concept >> Vygotsky proposes as a unit is "word meaning" which he >> says is a unity of sound and meaning. The sound is an >> artefact, which, detached from its meaningful >> utterance in a transactional context is just a thing, >> viz., a word. Whereas "word meaning" is an >> arrtefact-mediated action, a unit of human social >> activity. >> >> It is true that words can be countable or mass >> according to context, but I wasn't talking about words >> was I? I was talking about word meaning. >> >> Andy >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------ >> Andy Blunden >> http://home.mira.net/~andy >> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making >> > decision-making> >> >> On 8/01/2017 7:59 AM, David Kellogg wrote: >> >> Are words really units? When we look at their >> ideational meaning (that is, >> their logical and experiential content--their >> capacity for representing and >> linking together human experiences) they seem to >> fall into two very >> different categories: lexical words like >> "perezhivanie" or "sense" or >> "personality" of "individual" and grammatical >> words like "of", or "might", >> or "is". The lexical words seem to behave like >> units--they are bounded, >> discrete, and, as Andy would say, "countable" (the >> problem is that almost >> all nouns are both countable and uncountable >> depending on the context you >> put them in, so this distinction is really not as >> essential as Andy seems >> to assume). But the more grammatical words seem to >> be elements of some >> larger unit, which we can call wording. >> >> Veresov and Fleer come up against this problem >> with "edintsvo" and >> "edintsa". Of course, as they say, the two words >> are distinct. But this >> doesn't necessarily mean that the former always >> corresponds to "unity" in >> English and the latter is always "unit". If you >> look at the paragraph they >> translate on 330, you can see that Vygotsky starts >> with an idea that is >> quite "synoptic" and is well expressed by "unit". >> But in the last sentence >> there is a sense that "perezhivanie" is a >> meta-stable unit--one that >> remains self-similar only through a process of >> thorough change, like a >> bicycle whose every part is replaced--and in >> English is it is better to >> express this idea with "unity". The problem is >> that the differences between >> "edintsvo" and "edintsva" in Russian is a matter >> of gender (I think) and >> not simply abstractness, and as a result the >> English version, which cannot >> use the resource of gender,has to rely on >> abstractness, so the words >> "unity" and "unit" are somewhat more distinct and >> less linked than >> "edintsvo" and "edintsva". >> >> There are other problems that are similar. When >> Gonzalez Rey uses the word >> "final moment" to refer to the final period of >> Vygotsky's thinking, he >> leaves the anglophone reader the impression that >> he is referring to >> Vygotsky's deathbed thoughts. On the other hand, >> when Veresov and Fleer use >> "factor" to translate the same Russian word that >> Gonzalez Rey is using, >> they are giving us something more quantitative >> than Vygotsky intended, and >> their translation of "dalee nerazloshim'im >> chastyami etava edinstva" >> into "vital and further indivisible part of the >> whole" is quite opaque in >> English (notice that here Veresov and Fleer use >> "whole" to translate >> "edinstva" rather than "unit"!) At some point you >> have to accept that you >> can change Russian words into English words as if >> you were exchanging >> rubles for dollars, but you still won't be able to >> buy a samovar at Walmart. >> >> David Kellogg >> Macquarie University >> >> >> >> On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 5:21 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >> > >> wrote: >> >> Larry, all, >> >> our arguments in the 2014 address a science >> education literature in which >> the constructivist perspective is the leading >> perspective; We note that the >> assertion that people learn from experience is >> everywhere taken for granted >> but nowhere accounted for. We resort to >> pragmatist and phenomenological >> literature along with Vygotsky's insights to >> point out the need to account >> for learning as something that cannot be the >> result of an individual's >> construction; in experience there is always >> something in excess of what you >> intended, and this is a basic feature of >> doing, of performing. I take that >> to be your "trans" in the trans/zhivanie word, >> Larry, which already is >> denoted in the word PERezhivanie. >> >> But I do not wish to move our discussion too >> far away from Marc's paper >> and the Perezhivanie special issue. We also >> risk disengaging many that have >> not have the privilege we've had to have the >> time to read so many articles >> in just few days into the new year. I think we >> are a point in the >> discussion where a pretty clear point of >> agreement/disagreement, and >> therefore of possibility for growth, has been >> reached with regard to the >> view of perezhivanie as "an experience" and as >> the "working over it". I >> think that to allow as many as possible to >> follow, and hopefully also >> engage, I think it will be helpful to bring >> the diverse perspectives and >> theoretical accounts to matter in accounting >> for some actual material. And >> there are a number of cases described in the >> articles, including Marc's >> case of a teacher, as well as everyday facts, >> such as those brought by >> Beth, and in Beth's article... >> >> I take the task for myself too, but Saturday >> morning need to attend to >> other things! >> A >> >> >> >> ________________________________________ >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> >> > > >> on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com >> >> > > >> Sent: 07 January 2017 18:26 >> To: Andy Blunden; Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended >> Mind, Culture, Activity; >> Larry Purss >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and >> Perezhivanie! >> >> Andy, Peter, i hope the intention to move >> beyond politeness to struggle >> with this topic materializes. >> In this vein i want to introduce exploration >> of the ?excess? of actual >> over intended meaning as he sketched his >> introduction to ?experience?. >> >> Citing Dewey, Alfredo says that this excess of >> actual learning over >> intended learning INCLUDES what Dewey refers >> to as ?attitudes? and these >> ?attitudes? are FUNDAMENTALLY what count in >> the future. >> Alfredo and Roth then add this summary >> statement : >> >> There is therefore, a need to theorize >> experience in terms that do not >> assume control and rationality as the sine qua >> non of learning. It also >> implies a need to develop analytical accounts >> that retain the ?uncertainty? >> that is an ?integral part? of human experience. >> >> Where are Alfredo and Roth leading us with >> this sketch of experience? To >> highlight ?attitudes? that occur in the excess >> of actual over intended >> learning? The word ?attitudes? generates >> images of (atmosphere) and (moods) >> that ?flow? like cascading waterfalls that can >> be imaged as (force) or as >> (receptive). Attitudes that flow to places >> where they are received within a >> certain attitude of care and concern. Not as >> forceful an image as moving >> only with control and rationality. Describing >> ?weaker? thought that >> remains uncertain but that also opens us to >> the other?s peril and plight. >> Possibly a post-analytic motion that exceeds >> the intended by living-through >> the actual that develops ?attitudes? that are >> fundamentally what count for >> the future. >> >> >> Sent from my Windows 10 phone >> >> From: Andy Blunden >> Sent: January 7, 2017 5:00 AM >> To: Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, >> Activity >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and >> Perezhivanie! >> >> OK Peter, what you say is all very true I am >> sure, but it >> entails conflating activity and action (as >> mass nouns) and >> context and mediation, and makes the required >> distinction >> much like one could find multiple meanings for >> the word >> "and" by listing the different phrases and >> clauses which can >> be linked by "and." >> >> Andy >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------ >> Andy Blunden >> http://home.mira.net/~andy >> >> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decisi >> on-making >> > decision-making> >> >> On 7/01/2017 11:42 PM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: >> >> Let me try to illustrate. >> >> Reading as mediated action: The >> cultural-historical >> context of reading mediates how one?s >> attention and >> response are channeled in socially >> constructed ways. So, >> in one setting, say at home or reading in >> the company of >> friends, a novel might bring a reader to >> tears, or invite >> readers to share personal stories that >> parallel those of >> the plot lines, or laugh out loud. But >> another setting, a >> formal school or university class, would >> have historical >> values and practices that mute emotional >> and personal >> responses, and promote a more sober, >> analytic way of >> reading and talking that fits with >> specific historical >> critical conventions and genres, and >> discourages others. >> >> Reading as mediating action: The act of >> reading can be >> transformational. In reading about an >> talking about a >> character?s actions, a reader might >> reconsider a value >> system, become more sympathetic to real >> people who >> resemble oppressed characters, etc. In >> other words, >> reading a text may serve a mediational >> process in which >> textual ideas and exemplars enable a >> reader to think >> differently. >> >> *From:*Andy Blunden >> [mailto:ablunden@mira.net >> ] >> *Sent:* Saturday, January 7, 2017 6:28 AM >> *To:* Peter Smagorinsky > >; eXtended Mind, >> Culture, Activity > > >> *Subject:* Re: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year >> and Perezhivanie! >> >> Can you explain in a paragraph or two,. >> Peter, rather than >> asking us all to read 10,000 words to >> extract an answer? >> >> Andy >> >> ------------------------------ >> ------------------------------ >> >> Andy Blunden >> http://home.mira.net/~andy >> >> >> http://www.brill.com/products/ >> book/origins-collective-decision-making >> > decision-making> >> >> >> On 7/01/2017 11:23 PM, Peter Smagorinsky >> wrote: >> >> Andy and others, I tried to work out >> the mediated/mediating question >> >> in the area of reading....see if this helps. >> >> Smagorinsky, P., & O'Donnell-Allen, >> C. (1998). Reading as mediated >> >> and mediating action: Composing meaning for >> literature through multimedia >> interpretive texts. Reading Research >> Quarterly, 33, 198-226. Available >> athttp://www.petersmagorinsky.net/About/PDF/RRQ/RRQ1998.pdf >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >> From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> >> > .ucsd.edu >> > >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ >> >> >> mailman.ucsd.edu ] On >> Behalf Of Andy Blunden >> >> Sent: Friday, January 6, 2017 7:12 PM >> >> To:xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu >> >> > > >> >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year >> and Perezhivanie! >> >> I have never understood this supposed >> distinction, Alfredo, between >> >> "mediated activity" and "mediating activity" >> given that all activity is >> mediated and all activity mediates. >> >> Also, could you spell out what you >> mean by the "tension" >> >> between perezhivanie as meaning and >> perezhivanie as struggle. >> >> Andy >> >> ------------------------------ >> ------------------------------ >> >> Andy Blunden >> >> http://home.mira.net/~andy >> >> >> >> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective- >> >> >> decision-making >> >> On 5/01/2017 6:26 PM, Alfredo Jornet >> Gil wrote: >> >> Thanks Marc for your careful >> response. >> >> I am familiar to Vygotsky's >> notion of cultural mediation and I >> >> am aware and acknowledge that it was >> elaborated as a means to overcome >> dualism, and that it is not analog to a >> computational approach. >> >> When I brought the computing >> analogy, I did so with regard not >> >> to the concept of cultural mediation in >> general, but to the way it can be >> (and is) deployed analytically. I react to >> what it seems to me a dichotomy >> between a "meaning" as something that is >> static (thereby a form of >> "representation" or reflection of the relation >> with the environment instead >> of?refraction)?? and the >> experiencing-as-struggling, which is described >> as?transformation or change. If so, mediation >> here would seem to be part of >> a methodological device that first dissects "a >> type of meaning" from "a >> type of activity" (or a given state from the >> process that changes that >> state), and then unites it by adding the term >> "mediation." And this may be >> my misreading, but in that (mis)reading (which >> perhaps is mostly due to the >> fact that in your empirical illustration only >> the initial and end product, >> i.e., perezhivanie, are described, but not the >> experiencing-as-struggle, >> that is, the moving between the two), >> mediation here seems to do as >> analytical concept precisely what you were >> afraid our monism was doing: >> explaining nothing. Only the end products but >> not the process of producing >> perezhivanie are revealed. This may be >> problematic if one attends to what >> Veresov argues in the paper I shared >> yesterday, where he defends the notion >> of mediation but also specifies that Vygotsky >> speaks of *mediating >> activity* (as opposed to *mediated* activity). >> That is, not mediation by >> signs as products, but mediating activity as >> the activity of producing >> signs (which again is an activity of producing >> social relations, perhaps >> what you refer as "holistic meanings"?). What >> do you think? >> >> I did not think you were trying >> to deny the influence of >> >> Spinoza, and I do not think we ever said that >> Perezhivanie was primarily a >> move from Cartesian Dualism to Monism, as you >> suggest in your post. I copy >> and paste from my prior post: "The fact is >> that Vygotsky was building a >> theory on the unity of the affect and the >> intellect that was to be grounded >> on Spinoza, and what we try to do is to >> explore how perezhivanie, as a >> concept being developed during the same period >> (but not finalised or >> totally settled!), could be seen from the >> perspective of the Spinozist >> Vygotsky." >> >> I totally believe that bringing >> the distinction between >> >> perezhivanie as meaning, and perezhivanie as >> struggle, is totally relevant, >> and Beth Ferholt's vignettes of Where the Wild >> Things Are do indeed >> illustrate this. We really need to address >> this tension, which as Beth's >> examples and as our own everyday experience >> shows, is a tension that >> matters not just to books and to theories but >> to living persons (children, >> teachers), a tension that moreover is present >> and mentioned in all the >> articles of the symposium. The papers offer >> different proposals, and I >> think is so great we have the chance to >> discuss them! I too, as you, am >> very interesting in hearing others about the >> questions you had concerning >> sense and meaning. >> >> Alfredo >> >> From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> >> > .ucsd.edu >> > >> >> > > >> > .ucsd.edu >> > >> on behalf of Marc >> >> Clar? >> >> > > >> > > >> >> Sent: 04 January 2017 22:31 >> >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New >> Year and Perezhivanie! >> >> Thank you very much, Alfredo, for >> sharing this excellent paper by >> >> Veresov, and thanks also for your >> responses, which really helped >> >> me to >> >> better understand your points. My >> main doubt about your proposal >> >> was/is caused by the statement >> that the idea of cultural >> >> mediation/mediator implies a >> cartesian dualism. This shocks me >> >> because, to me, the idea of >> cultural mediation is absolutely >> >> crucial >> >> (in fact, the keystone) for the >> construction of a monist (and >> >> scientific) psychology that does >> not forget mind ?that is, a >> >> cultural >> >> psychology. From your response, >> however, I realized that we may >> >> be >> >> approaching the idea of mediation >> in different ways. I talk of >> >> mediation and mediators in a >> quite restricted way. The starting >> >> point >> >> of my understanding of mediation >> is a dialectical relationship >> >> (organic, transactional) between >> the subject and the world >> >> (Vygotsky departs from the scheme >> stimulus-response, from reflexology). >> >> This relationship, that Vygotsky >> calls primitive psychological >> >> functions, would be basically >> biological. However, in human >> >> beings >> >> this relationship is mediated by >> cultural means: signs and >> >> tools; or >> >> primary, secondary and terciary >> artifacts. These cultural means >> >> reorganize the primitive >> functions (dialectic S-O relationship), >> >> which >> >> become then higher psychological >> functions (S-M-O) (see for >> >> example, >> >> The problem of the cultural >> development of the child, in The >> >> Vygotsky >> >> Reader). Now, the subject, the >> cultural mediators, and the >> >> object form >> >> an inseparable dialectical unit, >> so that the subject acts on >> >> (transforms) the object through >> the prism of the cultural >> >> mediators, >> >> the object acts on (transforms) >> the subject also through the >> >> prism of >> >> the cultural mediators, and the >> cultural means are themselves >> >> also >> >> transformed as a consequence of >> their mediation in this >> >> continuous >> >> dynamic dialectical tension. >> Here, for me, it is important the >> >> idea >> >> that the cultural means are as >> material (if we assume a >> >> materialist >> >> monism) as all the rest of the >> world; in fact, are parts of the >> >> material world which become signs >> or tools (and can be therefore >> >> socially distributed). This >> permits the introduction of the >> >> scientific >> >> study of mind-consciousness (as >> mediating systems of signs), >> >> because >> >> mind is not anymore something >> immaterial and unobservable, but >> >> it is >> >> as material and observable as the >> rest of the natural world. It >> >> is >> >> from this view that, for me, the >> idea of cultural mediation is >> >> the >> >> keystone of a monist psychology >> that includes mind. Thus, when I >> >> speak >> >> of mediators, I refer to the >> cultural means which mediate in the >> >> S-O >> >> dialectics; I am especially >> interested in signs/secondary >> >> artifacts. >> >> Here, it is perhaps necessary to >> insist that when I talk of >> >> studying >> >> mediators (and their semantic >> structure), this doesn't mean that >> >> they >> >> are taken out from the activity >> (the flux of live) in which they >> >> mediate (since out of activity >> they are not signs anymore); >> >> here, I >> >> think Vygotsky tries again to >> overcome another old dichotomy, the >> >> functionalism-structuralism one. >> I hope that all this makes also >> >> clear the difference between this view and >> that of computational >> psychologies (which in general are profoundly >> and explicitly dualist and >> not dialectic). >> >> Back to perezhivanie, I'm not >> obviously trying to deny the >> >> influence >> >> of Spinoza on Vygotsky's thinking >> (this is explicit in Vygotsky's >> >> writings, especially in ?The >> teaching about emotions?, in the >> >> Vol.6 of >> >> the Collected Works). But I have >> doubts that Vygotsky's >> >> introduction >> >> of the concept of perezhivanie is >> to be regarded primarily as a >> >> movement towards monism (from a >> previous cartesian dualism), and >> >> that >> >> this movement questions the >> concept of cultural mediation. >> >> Instead, >> >> and I think that this is in line >> with some of Gonz?lez-Rey >> >> observations in his paper, my >> impression is that the >> >> introduction of >> >> the concept of perezhivanie >> responds more to a movement (a >> >> further >> >> step) towards holism (something >> that, in my understanding, can >> >> also be >> >> found in Spinoza). Thus, I think >> that the word meaning is still >> >> the >> >> unit of analysis in the last >> Vygotsky -and therefore, the idea of >> >> cultural mediation is still >> crucial (in fact, in The problem of >> >> the >> >> environment, he connects the >> concept of perezhivanie, which has >> >> just >> >> introduced, to the development of >> word meaning [p.345-346, also >> >> cited >> >> in my paper]). However, in my >> view, in the last Vygotsky the >> >> focus is >> >> not anymore primarily on the >> word-meaning as formed for things >> >> (or >> >> collections of things, as in the >> ontogenetic research with >> >> Sakharov), but the focus is now in the >> formation of meaning for holistic >> situations. >> >> Best regards, >> >> Marc. >> >> 2017-01-03 19:16 GMT+01:00 >> Alfredo Jornet Gil< >> >> a.j.gil@iped.uio.no >> > >> > >: >> >> Hi Marc, all, >> >> thanks for joining and for >> your interesting work, which I >> >> follow >> >> since I became aware of it. I >> appreciate the way in your >> >> paper you >> >> show careful and honest >> attention to the texts of the authors >> >> involved, but perhaps most of >> all I appreciate that the >> >> paper makes >> >> the transformational >> dimension related to struggle and change >> >> salient, a dimension all >> papers deemed central to >> >> perezhivanie. And I >> >> have learned more about >> Vasilyuk by reading your paper. But >> >> I also >> >> see that we have approached >> the question of perezhivanie >> >> differently >> >> and I think that addressing >> the questions that you raise >> >> concerning >> >> our article may be a good way >> to both respond and discuss >> >> your paper. >> >> I am aware that our use of >> the term monism may be >> >> problematic to >> >> some, and N. Veresov, who has >> recently written about this >> >> (see >> >> attached article), warns >> against the dangers of simply >> >> moving from >> >> dualism into an >> undifferentiating monism that relativizes >> >> everything, >> >> making development >> un-studiable. This seems to be the way in >> >> which >> >> you have understood our >> argument, and of course this is not >> >> what we are or want to be doing. >> >> Probably many will think that >> *dialectical materialism* >> >> rather than >> >> monism is the proper term, >> and I could agree with them; we >> >> do in fact >> >> use dialectical materialism >> there and elsewhere. Yet, we >> >> wanted to >> >> emphasise the Spinozist >> influence (an influence that also >> >> runs >> >> through Marx) and so we found >> it appropriate to use the term >> >> monism, >> >> a term that Vygotsky uses >> before arguing that Spinoza >> >> "develops an essentially materialistic view" >> >> (Collected Works, Vol. 6, p. >> 124). For us, the aim is >> >> working out >> >> ways to empirically examine >> and formulate problems in ways >> >> that do >> >> not reify a mind-body dualism. >> >> Although overcoming dualism >> is foundational to the CHAT >> >> paradigm, I >> >> would however not say that >> Vygotsky did get to solve all of >> >> the >> >> problems that Cartesian >> dualism had created for psychology, >> >> even >> >> though he recognised those >> problems brilliantly as early as >> >> in the >> >> "Crisis". It should suffice >> to cite Vygotsky's own remarks, >> >> which we quote in the paper (and which A.N. >> >> Leont'ev mentions in the >> introduction to the collected >> >> works), where >> >> Vygotsky explicitly critiques >> some of his own prior ideas >> >> for failing >> >> to overcome dualism. We agree >> with those who, like F. G. >> >> Rey, see >> >> Vygotsky's project as a >> developing rather than as a >> >> finalised one. >> >> The fact is that Vygotsky was >> building a theory on the unity >> >> of the >> >> affect and the intellect that >> was to be grounded on Spinoza, >> >> and what >> >> we try to do is to explore >> how perezhivanie, as a concept >> >> being >> >> developed during the same >> period (but not finalised or >> >> totally >> >> settled!), could be seen from >> the perspective of the >> >> Spinozist Vygotsky. >> >> As you note, in our article >> we argue that, if one takes the >> >> Spinozist >> >> one-substance approach, >> classical concepts used in >> >> non-classical >> >> psychology, at least in the >> way they are commonly used in >> >> the current >> >> literature, should be >> revised. One such concept is >> >> mediation. And I >> >> personally do not have much >> of a problem when mediation is >> >> used to >> >> denote the fundamental fact >> that every thing exists always >> >> through >> >> *another*, never in and of >> itself. But I do think that it is >> >> problematic to identify >> MEDIATORS, such as "a meaning", as a >> >> means to >> >> account for or explain >> developmental processes and learning >> >> events, >> >> precisely because it is >> there, at least in my view, that >> >> dualism creeps in. >> >> For example, I find it >> paradoxical that you are concerned >> >> that our >> >> monist approach risks turning >> perezhivanie into a useless >> >> category >> >> because it may be used to >> explain everything and nothing, >> >> and yet you >> >> do not seem to have a problem >> using the term mediation to >> >> account for >> >> the transformation of >> perezhivanie without clearly >> >> elaborating on how >> >> mediation does change >> anything or what it looks like as a >> >> real >> >> process. How is it different >> saying that a perezhivanie >> >> mediates the >> >> experiencing-as-struggle from >> simply saying that it >> >> "affects" or >> >> "determines" it? Indeed, if >> perezhivanie mediates >> >> experiencing-as-struggle, >> does not experiencing-as-struglgle >> >> too >> >> mediate perezhivanie? And do >> not both may be said to mediate >> >> development, or development mediate them? Is >> not this explaining everything >> and nothing? >> >> I do believe you can argue >> that there is a difference between >> >> mediation and classical >> psychology's cause-effect relations, >> >> but to >> >> show this you need to dig >> into the dialectical underpinnings >> >> of the >> >> theory. In your paper, you >> offer a nice analysis of a lovely >> >> case of >> >> a teacher who, in dealing >> with a challenge with one of her >> >> students, >> >> changes her perezhivanie. I >> think you can rightly argue that >> >> there is >> >> a semiotic transformation, >> and I fully support your >> >> statement that by >> >> studying discourse we can >> empirically approach questions of >> >> psychological development. >> The contradictions you show as >> >> being >> >> involved and resolved >> resonate really well with what I >> >> experience as >> >> a parent or as a teacher in >> the classroom. Yet, without >> >> unpacking >> >> what this "mediation" taking >> place between one perezhivanie >> >> and the >> >> next one means as a concrete >> and real, the same analysis >> >> could be done taking an information processing >> approach: >> >> there is an situation that is >> processed (represented?) in >> >> one way, >> >> which then leads to a >> (cognitive) dissonance, and then there >> >> is a >> >> cognitive resolution by means >> of which the situation is >> >> presented >> >> differently in consciousness >> (indeed, when seen in this way, >> >> the term >> >> perezhivanie and the term >> "representation" become almost >> >> indistinguishable). How is >> mediation, as an analytical >> >> concept, >> >> helping here? And most >> importantly to the question of >> >> perezhivanie, >> >> how is this analysis going to >> show the internal connection >> >> between >> >> intellect and affect that >> Vygotsky formulates as >> >> constitutive of the notion of perezhivanie? >> >> I believe that the key lies >> in understanding what Vygotsky >> >> means when >> >> he says that perezhivanie is >> a unit of analysis. I will not >> >> repeat >> >> here what already is written >> in at least a couple of the >> >> articles in >> >> the special issue (Blunden, >> ours), that is the difference >> >> between >> >> analysis by elements and unit >> analysis (Vygotsky 1987). A >> >> unit >> >> analysis approach is >> consistent with Spinoza, for whom >> >> cause-effect >> >> explanations were not >> adequate, requiring instead an >> >> understanding of >> >> self-development, >> perezhivanie as a kernel cell for the >> >> development >> >> of personality. And I think >> you may be after this in your >> >> article in > > From davidsubero@gmail.com Wed Jan 11 23:23:09 2017 From: davidsubero@gmail.com (David Subero) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2017 08:23:09 +0100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Mailing list submision Message-ID: <5DEC642C-8CEC-448F-98AB-910870D979AB@gmail.com> davidsubero@gmail.com Enviat des del meu iPhone From lpscholar2@gmail.com Thu Jan 12 09:58:33 2017 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2017 09:58:33 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Alex Kozulin & the MYSTERY of Perezhivanie Message-ID: <5877c3f0.024a620a.6048c.7791@mx.google.com> I decided to open another thread to focus on the way Alex ?concludes? this month?s special issue by opening multiple doors in only 6 paragraphs that are thought provoking. I will focus here on paragraph 5 where Alex says we will have to reconcile ?perezhivanie? as a dynamic UNIT of consciousness with Vasliyuk?s interpretation of ?perezhivanie?. Vasilyuk suggests that all life-relationships that ?are NOT realized? in the current goal-oriented activity ?appear in my life? in a form of perzhivanie. In other words, perezhivanie is NOT related to my experience, feelings, or understanding as they are involved ?in current? leading activity, but on the contrary (what is LEFT beyond THIS activity). Kozulin says if we take Vasilyuk?s interpretation as a ?new starting point? we may re-formulate the problem in the following way?: To what extent ?perezhivanie? as a dynamic unit of consciousness helps us to elucidate TRANSition from one type of leading activity to the next one. This way of re-formulating the topic accents the gap or pause or interval or ma moment that ?occurs within? events* or episodes* as concrete actual occurrences or happenings. It may also be a region or field that must first be ?lived through? or ?worked through? PRIOR to being interPREted. This insight from Alfredo and Roth reading through Dewey?s notion of having ?an? experience/perezhivanie. This topic is rich in nuances ;- ) Sent from my Windows 10 phone From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Thu Jan 12 12:41:42 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2017 20:41:42 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! In-Reply-To: References: <1483344752182.40904@iped.uio.no> <1483467423798.57819@iped.uio.no> <1483601196884.31418@iped.uio.no> <5df5e870-3ef8-70d6-0c17-f8647ba17e62@mira.net> <587124d9.d957620a.4a5a8.bd56@mx.google.com> <1483820996800.91513@iped.uio.no> , Message-ID: <1484253698990.7728@iped.uio.no> David, I admire much of what you write in your first three examples in your prior post. But I am reacting to your latter post on Chess. It is the second or third time that you bring the CHESS example to bear in xmca, and I always feel uneasy about it. I see the point that there are different developmental stages and that these can be best categorised according to the type of generalisation that the child can engage into. Obviously, treating a piece of marble "as if" it was a piece in the game of chess involves a different type of generalization than treating the same piece of marble as if it was a piece in the game of "let's put the black pieces in black squares and white pieces in white squares". But I do not think that my 20 months daughter will put black pieces on black squares in any systematic manner simply because she can PERCEIVE and act upon the difference between black and white; and indeed I do not think that my 7 years old first daughter will do any of these things with the chess pieces, considering she has never learned to play chess. Indeed, why would any child do that? I do strongly believe that to get any of my daughters to arrange the pieces by color, there would have first to be a TEACHING/LEARNING situation, which itself would involve establishing a semantic field, a field that perhaps out of my ignorance I would call semiotic (sign). In my view, in both cases there are rules and therefore imagination, if we listen to Vygotsky's writings on play, and perhaps, as Vygotsky notes, there may be a difference in the "moral attitude", but I would be cautious by gross divisions between perceptual and semantic structures. Yes,there are different levels, types, or stages in the way semantic fields are organised, and that playing the chess pieces as pieces of the CHESS game involves a qualitative leap compared to playing them as pieces in the game of putting them together by shape or color; but there is a game going on in both cases, and therefore a perceptual as much as a semiotic structure being at play. These are different semiotic contexts, as you say at the end of your e-mail, but I do think that your assertion that in playing with the chess pieces by color "the structure would be visual but not semiotic" can be problematic and may lead to what I consider an incorrect view of the relation between higher and lower functions in development. Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of David Kellogg Sent: 11 January 2017 04:50 To: Andy Blunden; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! Vygotsky's got a terrific metaphor for how "perezhivanie" is internalized: it is like internalizing the rules of the game of chess. The child who doesn't know how to play chess simply plays WITH the pieces instead of playing them. She or he might try to create a piece-board structure by putting black pieces on black squares and white pieces on white squares, but the structure is a visual one and not a semiotic one; it's about color and not about meaning. The child who DOES know how to play chess plays the pieces instead of playing with them. She or he too creates "structures" but this time they are semiotic ones: a black knight in a completely different column and a completely different row, can capture a white pawn. The board is the same and so are the kids; the children may have very similar biological and very similar cultural endowments, but they do not have the same semiotic context at all. Hence different perezhivanie and different personalities. David Kellogg Macquarie University On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 11:54 AM, Andy Blunden wrote: > How to understand the personality? ... i.e., the *development* of the > personality? > > The subject's inheritance, and The subject's experiences (/perezhivaniya/) > > ... just think of how you'd go about writing a good biography or > Bildungsroman. > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Andy Blunden > http://home.mira.net/~andy > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > On 11/01/2017 10:24 AM, David Kellogg wrote: > >> Andy: >> >> A good paradox! Word meaning is a unit, but the spoken word itself is >> just an element--a thing. We can see that this is, on the face of it, >> impossible: within a single holistic analysis, an element can be a part of >> a unit, but a unit can never be a part of an element. So what you are >> referring to when you say that the word is a thing is the "sonic" or >> "phasal" quality of the word: its "acoustic" properties, its "phonetics". >> >> But not its phonology. The word that Vygotsky uses for "phoneme" refers >> to the 1929 work of the Prague Circle, originally the Moscow Circle. He is >> a LITTLE coy about this, because the founders, Jakobson and Trubetskoy, >> were not very popular with the authorities and Vygotsky already had plenty >> of heterodox acquaintances to worry about. Nevertheless, whenever Vygotsky >> says "phoneme", we know he really means what Jakobson and Trubetskoy called >> "morphophonemes". We know this because the examples he actually >> gives--Russian case endings--are morpho-phonemes and not simply phonemes: >> so for example in English the sound /s/ is a simple phoneme when I say the >> word "self" but if I say "Andy's" the sound /s/ is a morpho-phoneme: a >> difference in sounding that makes a difference in meaning. The system (that >> is, the paradigmatic menu) of these differences in soundings are what the >> Moscow and Prague Circles called "phonology" (as OPPOSED to phonetics), and >> this is the kind of "phoneme" that Vygotsky is really talking about. >> >> Still, you can see that it is not what he is talking about when he says >> word meaning, because these units are still nowhere near big enough to >> describe the kinds of changes which must occur when verbal thinking >> develops. I feel the same way about a lot of the examples offered of >> "perezhivanie", including Marc's. If MacDuff's grief or Carla's epiphany >> about the misbehavior of her kids being due to "outside influences" really >> is the unit of personality and experience that Vygotsky wants us to use >> when we analyse the ontogenesis of personality, then it is no more >> appropriate than using the morpho-phoneme to analyse the whole of verbal >> thinking. Just as evolution (of species) requires very different units from >> history (of classes), development, whether we are talking about verbal >> thinking or the personality as a whole, is going to require very different >> units from learning, whether we are talking about MacDuff or Carla. The >> units must be able to develop; that is, the relationship of the elements >> within them must be susceptible to many changes over time. >> >> Let me give three examples of how this happens in different >> "perezhivanie". They are not mine; they are Vygotsky's, and they are all >> from the Pedological Lectures. >> >> First, the Crisis at One. Neither the biological nor the social endowment >> of the child greatly changes in the acquisition of speech; nevertheless, >> the relationship between the personality and the environment, of which both >> personality moments and environmental ones are constituent elements, is >> entirely transformed. Here we are not talking about phonemes, or even >> morpho-phonemes: we are talking about "wordings"--whole utterances. In >> Melbourne I presented some data that demonstrated this beautifully--a >> child's first word is actually an attempt to imitate a whole conversation. >> >> Second, the Crisis at Three. Vygotsky spends a lot of time discussing the >> "Seven Stars"--the symptoms of the "Terrible Twos" and "Threenagehood" >> noted by harried parents everywhere. But by the end of his analysis it's >> clear that what really happens is a new relationship between wish and will: >> in extreme cases, the child actually wishes for one thing (e.g. compromise) >> and wills the opposite (the everlasting "No!"). Again, neither the >> personality moments as such nor the environmental ones change, but there is >> a separation and a sorting which allows the subordination of wish to will >> that we see in play. This isn't the kind of "aha" moment that Marc is >> offering us at all: Vygotsky actually calls it the "antipode" of future >> will, because instead of enabling will it actually paralyzes it. But it is >> indubitably a key moment in the development of the relation of personality >> to environmental moments that we see in "perizhivanie". >> >> Thirdly, the Crisis at Seven. I think Gonzalez Rey makes a total hash of >> this, and I get very cross when I read his article. It is not true that the >> essence of perizhivanie remained a mystery to Vygotsky simply because he no >> longer subscribes to "the aesthetic reaction" and "catharsis" and other >> notions that he toyed with in Psych of Art (he's no longer doing >> experiments on changes in breathing rate when people read the works of >> Bunin either!). It might be true that he never offered a system of facts >> and methodological procedures for perezivanie, but that was only because >> one already existed, for example in the work of Wallon and Stern and >> others. It is demonstrably not true that when Vygotsky says that the speech >> environment of those around him does not change when the child learns to >> talk at one, he is not "profoundly contradictory with the concept of >> sense": when you read the quotation in context, it is very clear that what >> he is referring to are the kinds of absolute indicators used by Zalkind: >> how often the parents read the newspapers, the dialect they speak, and >> their educational background. These do not change, and if the child wants >> to make sense, these are the factors the child will have to relate to. >> >> Vygotsky gives the example of a child who is severely retarded. The child >> wants to play with other children and is rejected. The child walks down the >> street and the other children follow, laughing. The child is shrieked at, >> insulted, but as soon as the humiliation stops, the child is perfectly >> happy with himself. Vygotsky points out that the child is not able to >> "co-generalize" the "perizhivanie" of the humiliations: each is unpleasant, >> but they are entirely separate and cannot be connected with any internal >> sense of inferiority. A normal child, however, is able to "internalize" >> these humiliations and consequently develops a sense of inferiority. We can >> see that what has happened is the insertion of what Vygotsky calls an >> "intellectual" moment: an inner layer, which is what distinguishes later >> Chaplin movies from earlier ones (again, Vygotsky's example, not mine!) and >> what brings about the "loss of directness and naivete" that we see in >> pre-schoolers. >> >> I think that the reason people find "perizhivanie" so hard to work with >> is the same reason that they find "word meaning" hard to work with: it >> develops. The feeling of drinking milk as the infant drinks it is >> perizhivanie, and the thought of being humiliated when you are mulling it >> over and contemplating revenge is also perizhivanie, and only a profound >> analysis which includes ontogenetic development and not just learning will >> show the inner link between them. It's for that reason that I think that >> "activity" is not a useful unit of analysis and I am much more inclined to >> use your word "project", so long as it can include what Vygotsky calls >> "inner activeness". >> >> Vygotsky says: >> >> >> ????? ? ?????????, ?????????? ? ?. ?., ? ???? ???? ? ?????????? >> ???????????, ??? ?????????? ???????????? ??????????????? ????????? >> ??????????????? ?? ??????? ? ??????? ?????????????. ??? ??? ????? ????? >> ?????????? ?????????? ? ???????? ???????? ??????????? ? ???, ???, ? ?? >> ????? ??? ? ?????????? ???????? ??? ?????????? ???????????? ???????????? >> ???????????????? ????? ? ?????????, ??????? ???????????, ? ???????? >> ???????? ?? ????? ???????????? ?????????????? ???????????, ???????????? >> ??????????? ?????????? ?????????? ?? ????????? ? ??????? ????????????. ??? >> ??? ???????, ??????? ????? ??????????, ? ?? ????? ????? ?? ?????? ??? ????? >> ???-??????, ???, ? ???????? ????????? ?????????????? ??????? ? ?????????? >> ????????????. >> >> When I think, remember, etc. I am dealing withinner activeness; this >> psychological process of inner activity is not directly linked to any >> external activity. The new form of inner activeness in the School Age >> consists of this: that while during the preschool years these inner >> activities demonstrated an immediate link with action, with external >> activeness, in the school years we have a relative autonomy which emerges, >> inner activeness which is relatively independent of external activities. >> Here is already a child who can think, at the same time when he is doing or >> seeing something, one in whom has emerged a differentiation of inner and >> outer activities. >> >> David Kellogg >> Macquarie University >> >> >> >> On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 10:07 AM, Andy Blunden > ablunden@mira.net>> wrote: >> >> David: "Are words really units?" >> >> Well, firstly, "units" is a *relative* term. That is, >> the question is: are words units of something, some >> complex process subject to analysis. And which? >> >> Secondly, according to Vygotsky, "no." The concept >> Vygotsky proposes as a unit is "word meaning" which he >> says is a unity of sound and meaning. The sound is an >> artefact, which, detached from its meaningful >> utterance in a transactional context is just a thing, >> viz., a word. Whereas "word meaning" is an >> arrtefact-mediated action, a unit of human social >> activity. >> >> It is true that words can be countable or mass >> according to context, but I wasn't talking about words >> was I? I was talking about word meaning. >> >> Andy >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------ >> Andy Blunden >> http://home.mira.net/~andy >> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making >> > decision-making> >> >> On 8/01/2017 7:59 AM, David Kellogg wrote: >> >> Are words really units? When we look at their >> ideational meaning (that is, >> their logical and experiential content--their >> capacity for representing and >> linking together human experiences) they seem to >> fall into two very >> different categories: lexical words like >> "perezhivanie" or "sense" or >> "personality" of "individual" and grammatical >> words like "of", or "might", >> or "is". The lexical words seem to behave like >> units--they are bounded, >> discrete, and, as Andy would say, "countable" (the >> problem is that almost >> all nouns are both countable and uncountable >> depending on the context you >> put them in, so this distinction is really not as >> essential as Andy seems >> to assume). But the more grammatical words seem to >> be elements of some >> larger unit, which we can call wording. >> >> Veresov and Fleer come up against this problem >> with "edintsvo" and >> "edintsa". Of course, as they say, the two words >> are distinct. But this >> doesn't necessarily mean that the former always >> corresponds to "unity" in >> English and the latter is always "unit". If you >> look at the paragraph they >> translate on 330, you can see that Vygotsky starts >> with an idea that is >> quite "synoptic" and is well expressed by "unit". >> But in the last sentence >> there is a sense that "perezhivanie" is a >> meta-stable unit--one that >> remains self-similar only through a process of >> thorough change, like a >> bicycle whose every part is replaced--and in >> English is it is better to >> express this idea with "unity". The problem is >> that the differences between >> "edintsvo" and "edintsva" in Russian is a matter >> of gender (I think) and >> not simply abstractness, and as a result the >> English version, which cannot >> use the resource of gender,has to rely on >> abstractness, so the words >> "unity" and "unit" are somewhat more distinct and >> less linked than >> "edintsvo" and "edintsva". >> >> There are other problems that are similar. When >> Gonzalez Rey uses the word >> "final moment" to refer to the final period of >> Vygotsky's thinking, he >> leaves the anglophone reader the impression that >> he is referring to >> Vygotsky's deathbed thoughts. On the other hand, >> when Veresov and Fleer use >> "factor" to translate the same Russian word that >> Gonzalez Rey is using, >> they are giving us something more quantitative >> than Vygotsky intended, and >> their translation of "dalee nerazloshim'im >> chastyami etava edinstva" >> into "vital and further indivisible part of the >> whole" is quite opaque in >> English (notice that here Veresov and Fleer use >> "whole" to translate >> "edinstva" rather than "unit"!) At some point you >> have to accept that you >> can change Russian words into English words as if >> you were exchanging >> rubles for dollars, but you still won't be able to >> buy a samovar at Walmart. >> >> David Kellogg >> Macquarie University >> >> >> >> On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 5:21 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >> > >> wrote: >> >> Larry, all, >> >> our arguments in the 2014 address a science >> education literature in which >> the constructivist perspective is the leading >> perspective; We note that the >> assertion that people learn from experience is >> everywhere taken for granted >> but nowhere accounted for. We resort to >> pragmatist and phenomenological >> literature along with Vygotsky's insights to >> point out the need to account >> for learning as something that cannot be the >> result of an individual's >> construction; in experience there is always >> something in excess of what you >> intended, and this is a basic feature of >> doing, of performing. I take that >> to be your "trans" in the trans/zhivanie word, >> Larry, which already is >> denoted in the word PERezhivanie. >> >> But I do not wish to move our discussion too >> far away from Marc's paper >> and the Perezhivanie special issue. We also >> risk disengaging many that have >> not have the privilege we've had to have the >> time to read so many articles >> in just few days into the new year. I think we >> are a point in the >> discussion where a pretty clear point of >> agreement/disagreement, and >> therefore of possibility for growth, has been >> reached with regard to the >> view of perezhivanie as "an experience" and as >> the "working over it". I >> think that to allow as many as possible to >> follow, and hopefully also >> engage, I think it will be helpful to bring >> the diverse perspectives and >> theoretical accounts to matter in accounting >> for some actual material. And >> there are a number of cases described in the >> articles, including Marc's >> case of a teacher, as well as everyday facts, >> such as those brought by >> Beth, and in Beth's article... >> >> I take the task for myself too, but Saturday >> morning need to attend to >> other things! >> A >> >> >> >> ________________________________________ >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> >> > > >> on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com >> >> > > >> Sent: 07 January 2017 18:26 >> To: Andy Blunden; Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended >> Mind, Culture, Activity; >> Larry Purss >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and >> Perezhivanie! >> >> Andy, Peter, i hope the intention to move >> beyond politeness to struggle >> with this topic materializes. >> In this vein i want to introduce exploration >> of the 'excess' of actual >> over intended meaning as he sketched his >> introduction to 'experience'. >> >> Citing Dewey, Alfredo says that this excess of >> actual learning over >> intended learning INCLUDES what Dewey refers >> to as 'attitudes' and these >> 'attitudes' are FUNDAMENTALLY what count in >> the future. >> Alfredo and Roth then add this summary >> statement : >> >> There is therefore, a need to theorize >> experience in terms that do not >> assume control and rationality as the sine qua >> non of learning. It also >> implies a need to develop analytical accounts >> that retain the 'uncertainty' >> that is an 'integral part' of human experience. >> >> Where are Alfredo and Roth leading us with >> this sketch of experience? To >> highlight 'attitudes' that occur in the excess >> of actual over intended >> learning? The word 'attitudes' generates >> images of (atmosphere) and (moods) >> that 'flow' like cascading waterfalls that can >> be imaged as (force) or as >> (receptive). Attitudes that flow to places >> where they are received within a >> certain attitude of care and concern. Not as >> forceful an image as moving >> only with control and rationality. Describing >> 'weaker' thought that >> remains uncertain but that also opens us to >> the other's peril and plight. >> Possibly a post-analytic motion that exceeds >> the intended by living-through >> the actual that develops 'attitudes' that are >> fundamentally what count for >> the future. >> >> >> Sent from my Windows 10 phone >> >> From: Andy Blunden >> Sent: January 7, 2017 5:00 AM >> To: Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, >> Activity >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and >> Perezhivanie! >> >> OK Peter, what you say is all very true I am >> sure, but it >> entails conflating activity and action (as >> mass nouns) and >> context and mediation, and makes the required >> distinction >> much like one could find multiple meanings for >> the word >> "and" by listing the different phrases and >> clauses which can >> be linked by "and." >> >> Andy >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------ >> Andy Blunden >> http://home.mira.net/~andy >> >> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decisi >> on-making >> > decision-making> >> >> On 7/01/2017 11:42 PM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: >> >> Let me try to illustrate. >> >> Reading as mediated action: The >> cultural-historical >> context of reading mediates how one's >> attention and >> response are channeled in socially >> constructed ways. So, >> in one setting, say at home or reading in >> the company of >> friends, a novel might bring a reader to >> tears, or invite >> readers to share personal stories that >> parallel those of >> the plot lines, or laugh out loud. But >> another setting, a >> formal school or university class, would >> have historical >> values and practices that mute emotional >> and personal >> responses, and promote a more sober, >> analytic way of >> reading and talking that fits with >> specific historical >> critical conventions and genres, and >> discourages others. >> >> Reading as mediating action: The act of >> reading can be >> transformational. In reading about an >> talking about a >> character's actions, a reader might >> reconsider a value >> system, become more sympathetic to real >> people who >> resemble oppressed characters, etc. In >> other words, >> reading a text may serve a mediational >> process in which >> textual ideas and exemplars enable a >> reader to think >> differently. >> >> *From:*Andy Blunden >> [mailto:ablunden@mira.net >> ] >> *Sent:* Saturday, January 7, 2017 6:28 AM >> *To:* Peter Smagorinsky > >; eXtended Mind, >> Culture, Activity > > >> *Subject:* Re: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year >> and Perezhivanie! >> >> Can you explain in a paragraph or two,. >> Peter, rather than >> asking us all to read 10,000 words to >> extract an answer? >> >> Andy >> >> ------------------------------ >> ------------------------------ >> >> Andy Blunden >> http://home.mira.net/~andy >> >> >> http://www.brill.com/products/ >> book/origins-collective-decision-making >> > decision-making> >> >> >> On 7/01/2017 11:23 PM, Peter Smagorinsky >> wrote: >> >> Andy and others, I tried to work out >> the mediated/mediating question >> >> in the area of reading....see if this helps. >> >> Smagorinsky, P., & O'Donnell-Allen, >> C. (1998). Reading as mediated >> >> and mediating action: Composing meaning for >> literature through multimedia >> interpretive texts. Reading Research >> Quarterly, 33, 198-226. Available >> athttp://www.petersmagorinsky.net/About/PDF/RRQ/RRQ1998.pdf >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >> From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> >> > .ucsd.edu >> > >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ >> >> >> mailman.ucsd.edu ] On >> Behalf Of Andy Blunden >> >> Sent: Friday, January 6, 2017 7:12 PM >> >> To:xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu >> >> > > >> >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year >> and Perezhivanie! >> >> I have never understood this supposed >> distinction, Alfredo, between >> >> "mediated activity" and "mediating activity" >> given that all activity is >> mediated and all activity mediates. >> >> Also, could you spell out what you >> mean by the "tension" >> >> between perezhivanie as meaning and >> perezhivanie as struggle. >> >> Andy >> >> ------------------------------ >> ------------------------------ >> >> Andy Blunden >> >> http://home.mira.net/~andy >> >> >> >> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective- >> >> >> decision-making >> >> On 5/01/2017 6:26 PM, Alfredo Jornet >> Gil wrote: >> >> Thanks Marc for your careful >> response. >> >> I am familiar to Vygotsky's >> notion of cultural mediation and I >> >> am aware and acknowledge that it was >> elaborated as a means to overcome >> dualism, and that it is not analog to a >> computational approach. >> >> When I brought the computing >> analogy, I did so with regard not >> >> to the concept of cultural mediation in >> general, but to the way it can be >> (and is) deployed analytically. I react to >> what it seems to me a dichotomy >> between a "meaning" as something that is >> static (thereby a form of >> "representation" or reflection of the relation >> with the environment instead >> of?refraction)?? and the >> experiencing-as-struggling, which is described >> as?transformation or change. If so, mediation >> here would seem to be part of >> a methodological device that first dissects "a >> type of meaning" from "a >> type of activity" (or a given state from the >> process that changes that >> state), and then unites it by adding the term >> "mediation." And this may be >> my misreading, but in that (mis)reading (which >> perhaps is mostly due to the >> fact that in your empirical illustration only >> the initial and end product, >> i.e., perezhivanie, are described, but not the >> experiencing-as-struggle, >> that is, the moving between the two), >> mediation here seems to do as >> analytical concept precisely what you were >> afraid our monism was doing: >> explaining nothing. Only the end products but >> not the process of producing >> perezhivanie are revealed. This may be >> problematic if one attends to what >> Veresov argues in the paper I shared >> yesterday, where he defends the notion >> of mediation but also specifies that Vygotsky >> speaks of *mediating >> activity* (as opposed to *mediated* activity). >> That is, not mediation by >> signs as products, but mediating activity as >> the activity of producing >> signs (which again is an activity of producing >> social relations, perhaps >> what you refer as "holistic meanings"?). What >> do you think? >> >> I did not think you were trying >> to deny the influence of >> >> Spinoza, and I do not think we ever said that >> Perezhivanie was primarily a >> move from Cartesian Dualism to Monism, as you >> suggest in your post. I copy >> and paste from my prior post: "The fact is >> that Vygotsky was building a >> theory on the unity of the affect and the >> intellect that was to be grounded >> on Spinoza, and what we try to do is to >> explore how perezhivanie, as a >> concept being developed during the same period >> (but not finalised or >> totally settled!), could be seen from the >> perspective of the Spinozist >> Vygotsky." >> >> I totally believe that bringing >> the distinction between >> >> perezhivanie as meaning, and perezhivanie as >> struggle, is totally relevant, >> and Beth Ferholt's vignettes of Where the Wild >> Things Are do indeed >> illustrate this. We really need to address >> this tension, which as Beth's >> examples and as our own everyday experience >> shows, is a tension that >> matters not just to books and to theories but >> to living persons (children, >> teachers), a tension that moreover is present >> and mentioned in all the >> articles of the symposium. The papers offer >> different proposals, and I >> think is so great we have the chance to >> discuss them! I too, as you, am >> very interesting in hearing others about the >> questions you had concerning >> sense and meaning. >> >> Alfredo >> >> From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> >> > .ucsd.edu >> > >> >> > > >> > .ucsd.edu >> > >> on behalf of Marc >> >> Clara >> >> > > >> > > >> >> Sent: 04 January 2017 22:31 >> >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New >> Year and Perezhivanie! >> >> Thank you very much, Alfredo, for >> sharing this excellent paper by >> >> Veresov, and thanks also for your >> responses, which really helped >> >> me to >> >> better understand your points. My >> main doubt about your proposal >> >> was/is caused by the statement >> that the idea of cultural >> >> mediation/mediator implies a >> cartesian dualism. This shocks me >> >> because, to me, the idea of >> cultural mediation is absolutely >> >> crucial >> >> (in fact, the keystone) for the >> construction of a monist (and >> >> scientific) psychology that does >> not forget mind -that is, a >> >> cultural >> >> psychology. From your response, >> however, I realized that we may >> >> be >> >> approaching the idea of mediation >> in different ways. I talk of >> >> mediation and mediators in a >> quite restricted way. The starting >> >> point >> >> of my understanding of mediation >> is a dialectical relationship >> >> (organic, transactional) between >> the subject and the world >> >> (Vygotsky departs from the scheme >> stimulus-response, from reflexology). >> >> This relationship, that Vygotsky >> calls primitive psychological >> >> functions, would be basically >> biological. However, in human >> >> beings >> >> this relationship is mediated by >> cultural means: signs and >> >> tools; or >> >> primary, secondary and terciary >> artifacts. These cultural means >> >> reorganize the primitive >> functions (dialectic S-O relationship), >> >> which >> >> become then higher psychological >> functions (S-M-O) (see for >> >> example, >> >> The problem of the cultural >> development of the child, in The >> >> Vygotsky >> >> Reader). Now, the subject, the >> cultural mediators, and the >> >> object form >> >> an inseparable dialectical unit, >> so that the subject acts on >> >> (transforms) the object through >> the prism of the cultural >> >> mediators, >> >> the object acts on (transforms) >> the subject also through the >> >> prism of >> >> the cultural mediators, and the >> cultural means are themselves >> >> also >> >> transformed as a consequence of >> their mediation in this >> >> continuous >> >> dynamic dialectical tension. >> Here, for me, it is important the >> >> idea >> >> that the cultural means are as >> material (if we assume a >> >> materialist >> >> monism) as all the rest of the >> world; in fact, are parts of the >> >> material world which become signs >> or tools (and can be therefore >> >> socially distributed). This >> permits the introduction of the >> >> scientific >> >> study of mind-consciousness (as >> mediating systems of signs), >> >> because >> >> mind is not anymore something >> immaterial and unobservable, but >> >> it is >> >> as material and observable as the >> rest of the natural world. It >> >> is >> >> from this view that, for me, the >> idea of cultural mediation is >> >> the >> >> keystone of a monist psychology >> that includes mind. Thus, when I >> >> speak >> >> of mediators, I refer to the >> cultural means which mediate in the >> >> S-O >> >> dialectics; I am especially >> interested in signs/secondary >> >> artifacts. >> >> Here, it is perhaps necessary to >> insist that when I talk of >> >> studying >> >> mediators (and their semantic >> structure), this doesn't mean that >> >> they >> >> are taken out from the activity >> (the flux of live) in which they >> >> mediate (since out of activity >> they are not signs anymore); >> >> here, I >> >> think Vygotsky tries again to >> overcome another old dichotomy, the >> >> functionalism-structuralism one. >> I hope that all this makes also >> >> clear the difference between this view and >> that of computational >> psychologies (which in general are profoundly >> and explicitly dualist and >> not dialectic). >> >> Back to perezhivanie, I'm not >> obviously trying to deny the >> >> influence >> >> of Spinoza on Vygotsky's thinking >> (this is explicit in Vygotsky's >> >> writings, especially in "The >> teaching about emotions", in the >> >> Vol.6 of >> >> the Collected Works). But I have >> doubts that Vygotsky's >> >> introduction >> >> of the concept of perezhivanie is >> to be regarded primarily as a >> >> movement towards monism (from a >> previous cartesian dualism), and >> >> that >> >> this movement questions the >> concept of cultural mediation. >> >> Instead, >> >> and I think that this is in line >> with some of Gonzalez-Rey >> >> observations in his paper, my >> impression is that the >> >> introduction of >> >> the concept of perezhivanie >> responds more to a movement (a >> >> further >> >> step) towards holism (something >> that, in my understanding, can >> >> also be >> >> found in Spinoza). Thus, I think >> that the word meaning is still >> >> the >> >> unit of analysis in the last >> Vygotsky -and therefore, the idea of >> >> cultural mediation is still >> crucial (in fact, in The problem of >> >> the >> >> environment, he connects the >> concept of perezhivanie, which has >> >> just >> >> introduced, to the development of >> word meaning [p.345-346, also >> >> cited >> >> in my paper]). However, in my >> view, in the last Vygotsky the >> >> focus is >> >> not anymore primarily on the >> word-meaning as formed for things >> >> (or >> >> collections of things, as in the >> ontogenetic research with >> >> Sakharov), but the focus is now in the >> formation of meaning for holistic >> situations. >> >> Best regards, >> >> Marc. >> >> 2017-01-03 19:16 GMT+01:00 >> Alfredo Jornet Gil< >> >> a.j.gil@iped.uio.no >> > >> > >: >> >> Hi Marc, all, >> >> thanks for joining and for >> your interesting work, which I >> >> follow >> >> since I became aware of it. I >> appreciate the way in your >> >> paper you >> >> show careful and honest >> attention to the texts of the authors >> >> involved, but perhaps most of >> all I appreciate that the >> >> paper makes >> >> the transformational >> dimension related to struggle and change >> >> salient, a dimension all >> papers deemed central to >> >> perezhivanie. And I >> >> have learned more about >> Vasilyuk by reading your paper. But >> >> I also >> >> see that we have approached >> the question of perezhivanie >> >> differently >> >> and I think that addressing >> the questions that you raise >> >> concerning >> >> our article may be a good way >> to both respond and discuss >> >> your paper. >> >> I am aware that our use of >> the term monism may be >> >> problematic to >> >> some, and N. Veresov, who has >> recently written about this >> >> (see >> >> attached article), warns >> against the dangers of simply >> >> moving from >> >> dualism into an >> undifferentiating monism that relativizes >> >> everything, >> >> making development >> un-studiable. This seems to be the way in >> >> which >> >> you have understood our >> argument, and of course this is not >> >> what we are or want to be doing. >> >> Probably many will think that >> *dialectical materialism* >> >> rather than >> >> monism is the proper term, >> and I could agree with them; we >> >> do in fact >> >> use dialectical materialism >> there and elsewhere. Yet, we >> >> wanted to >> >> emphasise the Spinozist >> influence (an influence that also >> >> runs >> >> through Marx) and so we found >> it appropriate to use the term >> >> monism, >> >> a term that Vygotsky uses >> before arguing that Spinoza >> >> "develops an essentially materialistic view" >> >> (Collected Works, Vol. 6, p. >> 124). For us, the aim is >> >> working out >> >> ways to empirically examine >> and formulate problems in ways >> >> that do >> >> not reify a mind-body dualism. >> >> Although overcoming dualism >> is foundational to the CHAT >> >> paradigm, I >> >> would however not say that >> Vygotsky did get to solve all of >> >> the >> >> problems that Cartesian >> dualism had created for psychology, >> >> even >> >> though he recognised those >> problems brilliantly as early as >> >> in the >> >> "Crisis". It should suffice >> to cite Vygotsky's own remarks, >> >> which we quote in the paper (and which A.N. >> >> Leont'ev mentions in the >> introduction to the collected >> >> works), where >> >> Vygotsky explicitly critiques >> some of his own prior ideas >> >> for failing >> >> to overcome dualism. We agree >> with those who, like F. G. >> >> Rey, see >> >> Vygotsky's project as a >> developing rather than as a >> >> finalised one. >> >> The fact is that Vygotsky was >> building a theory on the unity >> >> of the >> >> affect and the intellect that >> was to be grounded on Spinoza, >> >> and what >> >> we try to do is to explore >> how perezhivanie, as a concept >> >> being >> >> developed during the same >> period (but not finalised or >> >> totally >> >> settled!), could be seen from >> the perspective of the >> >> Spinozist Vygotsky. >> >> As you note, in our article >> we argue that, if one takes the >> >> Spinozist >> >> one-substance approach, >> classical concepts used in >> >> non-classical >> >> psychology, at least in the >> way they are commonly used in >> >> the current >> >> literature, should be >> revised. One such concept is >> >> mediation. And I >> >> personally do not have much >> of a problem when mediation is >> >> used to >> >> denote the fundamental fact >> that every thing exists always >> >> through >> >> *another*, never in and of >> itself. But I do think that it is >> >> problematic to identify >> MEDIATORS, such as "a meaning", as a >> >> means to >> >> account for or explain >> developmental processes and learning >> >> events, >> >> precisely because it is >> there, at least in my view, that >> >> dualism creeps in. >> >> For example, I find it >> paradoxical that you are concerned >> >> that our >> >> monist approach risks turning >> perezhivanie into a useless >> >> category >> >> because it may be used to >> explain everything and nothing, >> >> and yet you >> >> do not seem to have a problem >> using the term mediation to >> >> account for >> >> the transformation of >> perezhivanie without clearly >> >> elaborating on how >> >> mediation does change >> anything or what it looks like as a >> >> real >> >> process. How is it different >> saying that a perezhivanie >> >> mediates the >> >> experiencing-as-struggle from >> simply saying that it >> >> "affects" or >> >> "determines" it? Indeed, if >> perezhivanie mediates >> >> experiencing-as-struggle, >> does not experiencing-as-struglgle >> >> too >> >> mediate perezhivanie? And do >> not both may be said to mediate >> >> development, or development mediate them? Is >> not this explaining everything >> and nothing? >> >> I do believe you can argue >> that there is a difference between >> >> mediation and classical >> psychology's cause-effect relations, >> >> but to >> >> show this you need to dig >> into the dialectical underpinnings >> >> of the >> >> theory. In your paper, you >> offer a nice analysis of a lovely >> >> case of >> >> a teacher who, in dealing >> with a challenge with one of her >> >> students, >> >> changes her perezhivanie. I >> think you can rightly argue that >> >> there is >> >> a semiotic transformation, >> and I fully support your >> >> statement that by >> >> studying discourse we can >> empirically approach questions of >> >> psychological development. >> The contradictions you show as >> >> being >> >> involved and resolved >> resonate really well with what I >> >> experience as >> >> a parent or as a teacher in >> the classroom. Yet, without >> >> unpacking >> >> what this "mediation" taking >> place between one perezhivanie >> >> and the >> >> next one means as a concrete >> and real, the same analysis >> >> could be done taking an information processing >> approach: >> >> there is an situation that is >> processed (represented?) in >> >> one way, >> >> which then leads to a >> (cognitive) dissonance, and then there >> >> is a >> >> cognitive resolution by means >> of which the situation is >> >> presented >> >> differently in consciousness >> (indeed, when seen in this way, >> >> the term >> >> perezhivanie and the term >> "representation" become almost >> >> indistinguishable). How is >> mediation, as an analytical >> >> concept, >> >> helping here? And most >> importantly to the question of >> >> perezhivanie, >> >> how is this analysis going to >> show the internal connection >> >> between >> >> intellect and affect that >> Vygotsky formulates as >> >> constitutive of the notion of perezhivanie? >> >> I believe that the key lies >> in understanding what Vygotsky >> >> means when >> >> he says that perezhivanie is >> a unit of analysis. I will not >> >> repeat >> >> here what already is written >> in at least a couple of the >> >> articles in >> >> the special issue (Blunden, >> ours), that is the difference >> >> between >> >> analysis by elements and unit >> analysis (Vygotsky 1987). A >> >> unit >> >> analysis approach is >> consistent with Spinoza, for whom >> >> cause-effect >> >> explanations were not >> adequate, requiring instead an >> >> understanding of >> >> self-development, >> perezhivanie as a kernel cell for the >> >> development >> >> of personality. And I think >> you may be after this in your >> >> article in > > From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Thu Jan 12 12:50:55 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2017 20:50:55 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Two IRECE Special Issues: Play and Perezhivanie Message-ID: <1484254255030.12584@iped.uio.no> Right in line with our very recent discussion concerning examples of play with regard to Perezhivanie, there are two new Special Issues published by the (open access) International Research in Early Childhood Education? journal. The link to the special issue on Play is this: https://figshare.com/search?q=%3Adescription%3A+International+Research+in+Early+Childhood+Education%2C+vol.+7%2C+no.+2 The link to the special issue on Perezhivanie is this: https://figshare.com/collections/International_Research_in_Early_Childhood_Education_2016_7_1_-_Special_issue/3594551 The Perezhivanie issue is an outcome of the Australia-Brazil ISCAR symposium. I also paste here some comments from Nikolai V. (editor-in-chief) about the special issue on play: The issue was designed around new translation of famous Vygotsky's paper on play, published in Russian exactly 50 years ago in 1966. This new translation was done by Nikolai Veresov (Australia) and Myra Barrs (The UK). By doing this the journal contributes to the celebration of 120th anniversary of Vygotsky. Candy for many xmca'ers, I believe.? Alfredo From bjones@ucsd.edu Thu Jan 12 13:09:53 2017 From: bjones@ucsd.edu (Bruce Jones) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2017 13:09:53 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Mailing list submision In-Reply-To: <5DEC642C-8CEC-448F-98AB-910870D979AB@gmail.com> References: <5DEC642C-8CEC-448F-98AB-910870D979AB@gmail.com> Message-ID: <5d30a029-381e-52e7-b047-c36b57d1bdc0@ucsd.edu> On 1/11/17 11:23 PM, David Subero wrote: > davidsubero@gmail.com > > Enviat des del meu iPhone > To subscribe to XMCA, go to: http://lchc-resources.org/xmca/signup.php -- Bruce Jones Sys Admin, LCHC bjones@ucsd.edu 619-823-8281 -- From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Thu Jan 12 13:21:31 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2017 21:21:31 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! Message-ID: <1484256089562.1752@iped.uio.no> Marc, at the beginning of the discussion you raised the following question: >From Marc: <> I am here forwarding Fernando G. Rey's response to your question concerning sense and meaning. I have not edited any of his notes but have copied and pasted them as he wrote them. Fernando is positively recovering from a medical intervention, but has been kind enough to follow up the discussion and is willing to take up specific questions if these rise. >From Fernando: <> ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil Sent: 12 January 2017 21:41 To: Andy Blunden; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! David, I admire much of what you write in your first three examples in your prior post. But I am reacting to your latter post on Chess. It is the second or third time that you bring the CHESS example to bear in xmca, and I always feel uneasy about it. I see the point that there are different developmental stages and that these can be best categorised according to the type of generalisation that the child can engage into. Obviously, treating a piece of marble "as if" it was a piece in the game of chess involves a different type of generalization than treating the same piece of marble as if it was a piece in the game of "let's put the black pieces in black squares and white pieces in white squares". But I do not think that my 20 months daughter will put black pieces on black squares in any systematic manner simply because she can PERCEIVE and act upon the difference between black and white; and indeed I do not think that my 7 years old first daughter will do any of these things with the chess pieces, considering she has never learned to play chess. Indeed, why would any child do that? I do strongly believe that to get any of my daughters to arrange the pieces by color, there would have first to be a TEACHING/LEARNING situation, which itself would involve establishing a semantic field, a field that perhaps out of my ignorance I would call semiotic (sign). In my view, in both cases there are rules and therefore imagination, if we listen to Vygotsky's writings on play, and perhaps, as Vygotsky notes, there may be a difference in the "moral attitude", but I would be cautious by gross divisions between perceptual and semantic structures. Yes,there are different levels, types, or stages in the way semantic fields are organised, and that playing the chess pieces as pieces of the CHESS game involves a qualitative leap compared to playing them as pieces in the game of putting them together by shape or color; but there is a game going on in both cases, and therefore a perceptual as much as a semiotic structure being at play. These are different semiotic contexts, as you say at the end of your e-mail, but I do think that your assertion that in playing with the chess pieces by color "the structure would be visual but not semiotic" can be problematic and may lead to what I consider an incorrect view of the relation between higher and lower functions in development. Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of David Kellogg Sent: 11 January 2017 04:50 To: Andy Blunden; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! Vygotsky's got a terrific metaphor for how "perezhivanie" is internalized: it is like internalizing the rules of the game of chess. The child who doesn't know how to play chess simply plays WITH the pieces instead of playing them. She or he might try to create a piece-board structure by putting black pieces on black squares and white pieces on white squares, but the structure is a visual one and not a semiotic one; it's about color and not about meaning. The child who DOES know how to play chess plays the pieces instead of playing with them. She or he too creates "structures" but this time they are semiotic ones: a black knight in a completely different column and a completely different row, can capture a white pawn. The board is the same and so are the kids; the children may have very similar biological and very similar cultural endowments, but they do not have the same semiotic context at all. Hence different perezhivanie and different personalities. David Kellogg Macquarie University On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 11:54 AM, Andy Blunden wrote: > How to understand the personality? ... i.e., the *development* of the > personality? > > The subject's inheritance, and The subject's experiences (/perezhivaniya/) > > ... just think of how you'd go about writing a good biography or > Bildungsroman. > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Andy Blunden > http://home.mira.net/~andy > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > On 11/01/2017 10:24 AM, David Kellogg wrote: > >> Andy: >> >> A good paradox! Word meaning is a unit, but the spoken word itself is >> just an element--a thing. We can see that this is, on the face of it, >> impossible: within a single holistic analysis, an element can be a part of >> a unit, but a unit can never be a part of an element. So what you are >> referring to when you say that the word is a thing is the "sonic" or >> "phasal" quality of the word: its "acoustic" properties, its "phonetics". >> >> But not its phonology. The word that Vygotsky uses for "phoneme" refers >> to the 1929 work of the Prague Circle, originally the Moscow Circle. He is >> a LITTLE coy about this, because the founders, Jakobson and Trubetskoy, >> were not very popular with the authorities and Vygotsky already had plenty >> of heterodox acquaintances to worry about. Nevertheless, whenever Vygotsky >> says "phoneme", we know he really means what Jakobson and Trubetskoy called >> "morphophonemes". We know this because the examples he actually >> gives--Russian case endings--are morpho-phonemes and not simply phonemes: >> so for example in English the sound /s/ is a simple phoneme when I say the >> word "self" but if I say "Andy's" the sound /s/ is a morpho-phoneme: a >> difference in sounding that makes a difference in meaning. The system (that >> is, the paradigmatic menu) of these differences in soundings are what the >> Moscow and Prague Circles called "phonology" (as OPPOSED to phonetics), and >> this is the kind of "phoneme" that Vygotsky is really talking about. >> >> Still, you can see that it is not what he is talking about when he says >> word meaning, because these units are still nowhere near big enough to >> describe the kinds of changes which must occur when verbal thinking >> develops. I feel the same way about a lot of the examples offered of >> "perezhivanie", including Marc's. If MacDuff's grief or Carla's epiphany >> about the misbehavior of her kids being due to "outside influences" really >> is the unit of personality and experience that Vygotsky wants us to use >> when we analyse the ontogenesis of personality, then it is no more >> appropriate than using the morpho-phoneme to analyse the whole of verbal >> thinking. Just as evolution (of species) requires very different units from >> history (of classes), development, whether we are talking about verbal >> thinking or the personality as a whole, is going to require very different >> units from learning, whether we are talking about MacDuff or Carla. The >> units must be able to develop; that is, the relationship of the elements >> within them must be susceptible to many changes over time. >> >> Let me give three examples of how this happens in different >> "perezhivanie". They are not mine; they are Vygotsky's, and they are all >> from the Pedological Lectures. >> >> First, the Crisis at One. Neither the biological nor the social endowment >> of the child greatly changes in the acquisition of speech; nevertheless, >> the relationship between the personality and the environment, of which both >> personality moments and environmental ones are constituent elements, is >> entirely transformed. Here we are not talking about phonemes, or even >> morpho-phonemes: we are talking about "wordings"--whole utterances. In >> Melbourne I presented some data that demonstrated this beautifully--a >> child's first word is actually an attempt to imitate a whole conversation. >> >> Second, the Crisis at Three. Vygotsky spends a lot of time discussing the >> "Seven Stars"--the symptoms of the "Terrible Twos" and "Threenagehood" >> noted by harried parents everywhere. But by the end of his analysis it's >> clear that what really happens is a new relationship between wish and will: >> in extreme cases, the child actually wishes for one thing (e.g. compromise) >> and wills the opposite (the everlasting "No!"). Again, neither the >> personality moments as such nor the environmental ones change, but there is >> a separation and a sorting which allows the subordination of wish to will >> that we see in play. This isn't the kind of "aha" moment that Marc is >> offering us at all: Vygotsky actually calls it the "antipode" of future >> will, because instead of enabling will it actually paralyzes it. But it is >> indubitably a key moment in the development of the relation of personality >> to environmental moments that we see in "perizhivanie". >> >> Thirdly, the Crisis at Seven. I think Gonzalez Rey makes a total hash of >> this, and I get very cross when I read his article. It is not true that the >> essence of perizhivanie remained a mystery to Vygotsky simply because he no >> longer subscribes to "the aesthetic reaction" and "catharsis" and other >> notions that he toyed with in Psych of Art (he's no longer doing >> experiments on changes in breathing rate when people read the works of >> Bunin either!). It might be true that he never offered a system of facts >> and methodological procedures for perezivanie, but that was only because >> one already existed, for example in the work of Wallon and Stern and >> others. It is demonstrably not true that when Vygotsky says that the speech >> environment of those around him does not change when the child learns to >> talk at one, he is not "profoundly contradictory with the concept of >> sense": when you read the quotation in context, it is very clear that what >> he is referring to are the kinds of absolute indicators used by Zalkind: >> how often the parents read the newspapers, the dialect they speak, and >> their educational background. These do not change, and if the child wants >> to make sense, these are the factors the child will have to relate to. >> >> Vygotsky gives the example of a child who is severely retarded. The child >> wants to play with other children and is rejected. The child walks down the >> street and the other children follow, laughing. The child is shrieked at, >> insulted, but as soon as the humiliation stops, the child is perfectly >> happy with himself. Vygotsky points out that the child is not able to >> "co-generalize" the "perizhivanie" of the humiliations: each is unpleasant, >> but they are entirely separate and cannot be connected with any internal >> sense of inferiority. A normal child, however, is able to "internalize" >> these humiliations and consequently develops a sense of inferiority. We can >> see that what has happened is the insertion of what Vygotsky calls an >> "intellectual" moment: an inner layer, which is what distinguishes later >> Chaplin movies from earlier ones (again, Vygotsky's example, not mine!) and >> what brings about the "loss of directness and naivete" that we see in >> pre-schoolers. >> >> I think that the reason people find "perizhivanie" so hard to work with >> is the same reason that they find "word meaning" hard to work with: it >> develops. The feeling of drinking milk as the infant drinks it is >> perizhivanie, and the thought of being humiliated when you are mulling it >> over and contemplating revenge is also perizhivanie, and only a profound >> analysis which includes ontogenetic development and not just learning will >> show the inner link between them. It's for that reason that I think that >> "activity" is not a useful unit of analysis and I am much more inclined to >> use your word "project", so long as it can include what Vygotsky calls >> "inner activeness". >> >> Vygotsky says: >> >> >> ????? ? ?????????, ?????????? ? ?. ?., ? ???? ???? ? ?????????? >> ???????????, ??? ?????????? ???????????? ??????????????? ????????? >> ??????????????? ?? ??????? ? ??????? ?????????????. ??? ??? ????? ????? >> ?????????? ?????????? ? ???????? ???????? ??????????? ? ???, ???, ? ?? >> ????? ??? ? ?????????? ???????? ??? ?????????? ???????????? ???????????? >> ???????????????? ????? ? ?????????, ??????? ???????????, ? ???????? >> ???????? ?? ????? ???????????? ?????????????? ???????????, ???????????? >> ??????????? ?????????? ?????????? ?? ????????? ? ??????? ????????????. ??? >> ??? ???????, ??????? ????? ??????????, ? ?? ????? ????? ?? ?????? ??? ????? >> ???-??????, ???, ? ???????? ????????? ?????????????? ??????? ? ?????????? >> ????????????. >> >> When I think, remember, etc. I am dealing withinner activeness; this >> psychological process of inner activity is not directly linked to any >> external activity. The new form of inner activeness in the School Age >> consists of this: that while during the preschool years these inner >> activities demonstrated an immediate link with action, with external >> activeness, in the school years we have a relative autonomy which emerges, >> inner activeness which is relatively independent of external activities. >> Here is already a child who can think, at the same time when he is doing or >> seeing something, one in whom has emerged a differentiation of inner and >> outer activities. >> >> David Kellogg >> Macquarie University >> >> >> >> On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 10:07 AM, Andy Blunden > ablunden@mira.net>> wrote: >> >> David: "Are words really units?" >> >> Well, firstly, "units" is a *relative* term. That is, >> the question is: are words units of something, some >> complex process subject to analysis. And which? >> >> Secondly, according to Vygotsky, "no." The concept >> Vygotsky proposes as a unit is "word meaning" which he >> says is a unity of sound and meaning. The sound is an >> artefact, which, detached from its meaningful >> utterance in a transactional context is just a thing, >> viz., a word. Whereas "word meaning" is an >> arrtefact-mediated action, a unit of human social >> activity. >> >> It is true that words can be countable or mass >> according to context, but I wasn't talking about words >> was I? I was talking about word meaning. >> >> Andy >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------ >> Andy Blunden >> http://home.mira.net/~andy >> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making >> > decision-making> >> >> On 8/01/2017 7:59 AM, David Kellogg wrote: >> >> Are words really units? When we look at their >> ideational meaning (that is, >> their logical and experiential content--their >> capacity for representing and >> linking together human experiences) they seem to >> fall into two very >> different categories: lexical words like >> "perezhivanie" or "sense" or >> "personality" of "individual" and grammatical >> words like "of", or "might", >> or "is". The lexical words seem to behave like >> units--they are bounded, >> discrete, and, as Andy would say, "countable" (the >> problem is that almost >> all nouns are both countable and uncountable >> depending on the context you >> put them in, so this distinction is really not as >> essential as Andy seems >> to assume). But the more grammatical words seem to >> be elements of some >> larger unit, which we can call wording. >> >> Veresov and Fleer come up against this problem >> with "edintsvo" and >> "edintsa". Of course, as they say, the two words >> are distinct. But this >> doesn't necessarily mean that the former always >> corresponds to "unity" in >> English and the latter is always "unit". If you >> look at the paragraph they >> translate on 330, you can see that Vygotsky starts >> with an idea that is >> quite "synoptic" and is well expressed by "unit". >> But in the last sentence >> there is a sense that "perezhivanie" is a >> meta-stable unit--one that >> remains self-similar only through a process of >> thorough change, like a >> bicycle whose every part is replaced--and in >> English is it is better to >> express this idea with "unity". The problem is >> that the differences between >> "edintsvo" and "edintsva" in Russian is a matter >> of gender (I think) and >> not simply abstractness, and as a result the >> English version, which cannot >> use the resource of gender,has to rely on >> abstractness, so the words >> "unity" and "unit" are somewhat more distinct and >> less linked than >> "edintsvo" and "edintsva". >> >> There are other problems that are similar. When >> Gonzalez Rey uses the word >> "final moment" to refer to the final period of >> Vygotsky's thinking, he >> leaves the anglophone reader the impression that >> he is referring to >> Vygotsky's deathbed thoughts. On the other hand, >> when Veresov and Fleer use >> "factor" to translate the same Russian word that >> Gonzalez Rey is using, >> they are giving us something more quantitative >> than Vygotsky intended, and >> their translation of "dalee nerazloshim'im >> chastyami etava edinstva" >> into "vital and further indivisible part of the >> whole" is quite opaque in >> English (notice that here Veresov and Fleer use >> "whole" to translate >> "edinstva" rather than "unit"!) At some point you >> have to accept that you >> can change Russian words into English words as if >> you were exchanging >> rubles for dollars, but you still won't be able to >> buy a samovar at Walmart. >> >> David Kellogg >> Macquarie University >> >> >> >> On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 5:21 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >> > >> wrote: >> >> Larry, all, >> >> our arguments in the 2014 address a science >> education literature in which >> the constructivist perspective is the leading >> perspective; We note that the >> assertion that people learn from experience is >> everywhere taken for granted >> but nowhere accounted for. We resort to >> pragmatist and phenomenological >> literature along with Vygotsky's insights to >> point out the need to account >> for learning as something that cannot be the >> result of an individual's >> construction; in experience there is always >> something in excess of what you >> intended, and this is a basic feature of >> doing, of performing. I take that >> to be your "trans" in the trans/zhivanie word, >> Larry, which already is >> denoted in the word PERezhivanie. >> >> But I do not wish to move our discussion too >> far away from Marc's paper >> and the Perezhivanie special issue. We also >> risk disengaging many that have >> not have the privilege we've had to have the >> time to read so many articles >> in just few days into the new year. I think we >> are a point in the >> discussion where a pretty clear point of >> agreement/disagreement, and >> therefore of possibility for growth, has been >> reached with regard to the >> view of perezhivanie as "an experience" and as >> the "working over it". I >> think that to allow as many as possible to >> follow, and hopefully also >> engage, I think it will be helpful to bring >> the diverse perspectives and >> theoretical accounts to matter in accounting >> for some actual material. And >> there are a number of cases described in the >> articles, including Marc's >> case of a teacher, as well as everyday facts, >> such as those brought by >> Beth, and in Beth's article... >> >> I take the task for myself too, but Saturday >> morning need to attend to >> other things! >> A >> >> >> >> ________________________________________ >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> >> > > >> on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com >> >> > > >> Sent: 07 January 2017 18:26 >> To: Andy Blunden; Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended >> Mind, Culture, Activity; >> Larry Purss >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and >> Perezhivanie! >> >> Andy, Peter, i hope the intention to move >> beyond politeness to struggle >> with this topic materializes. >> In this vein i want to introduce exploration >> of the 'excess' of actual >> over intended meaning as he sketched his >> introduction to 'experience'. >> >> Citing Dewey, Alfredo says that this excess of >> actual learning over >> intended learning INCLUDES what Dewey refers >> to as 'attitudes' and these >> 'attitudes' are FUNDAMENTALLY what count in >> the future. >> Alfredo and Roth then add this summary >> statement : >> >> There is therefore, a need to theorize >> experience in terms that do not >> assume control and rationality as the sine qua >> non of learning. It also >> implies a need to develop analytical accounts >> that retain the 'uncertainty' >> that is an 'integral part' of human experience. >> >> Where are Alfredo and Roth leading us with >> this sketch of experience? To >> highlight 'attitudes' that occur in the excess >> of actual over intended >> learning? The word 'attitudes' generates >> images of (atmosphere) and (moods) >> that 'flow' like cascading waterfalls that can >> be imaged as (force) or as >> (receptive). Attitudes that flow to places >> where they are received within a >> certain attitude of care and concern. Not as >> forceful an image as moving >> only with control and rationality. Describing >> 'weaker' thought that >> remains uncertain but that also opens us to >> the other's peril and plight. >> Possibly a post-analytic motion that exceeds >> the intended by living-through >> the actual that develops 'attitudes' that are >> fundamentally what count for >> the future. >> >> >> Sent from my Windows 10 phone >> >> From: Andy Blunden >> Sent: January 7, 2017 5:00 AM >> To: Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, >> Activity >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and >> Perezhivanie! >> >> OK Peter, what you say is all very true I am >> sure, but it >> entails conflating activity and action (as >> mass nouns) and >> context and mediation, and makes the required >> distinction >> much like one could find multiple meanings for >> the word >> "and" by listing the different phrases and >> clauses which can >> be linked by "and." >> >> Andy >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------ >> Andy Blunden >> http://home.mira.net/~andy >> >> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decisi >> on-making >> > decision-making> >> >> On 7/01/2017 11:42 PM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: >> >> Let me try to illustrate. >> >> Reading as mediated action: The >> cultural-historical >> context of reading mediates how one's >> attention and >> response are channeled in socially >> constructed ways. So, >> in one setting, say at home or reading in >> the company of >> friends, a novel might bring a reader to >> tears, or invite >> readers to share personal stories that >> parallel those of >> the plot lines, or laugh out loud. But >> another setting, a >> formal school or university class, would >> have historical >> values and practices that mute emotional >> and personal >> responses, and promote a more sober, >> analytic way of >> reading and talking that fits with >> specific historical >> critical conventions and genres, and >> discourages others. >> >> Reading as mediating action: The act of >> reading can be >> transformational. In reading about an >> talking about a >> character's actions, a reader might >> reconsider a value >> system, become more sympathetic to real >> people who >> resemble oppressed characters, etc. In >> other words, >> reading a text may serve a mediational >> process in which >> textual ideas and exemplars enable a >> reader to think >> differently. >> >> *From:*Andy Blunden >> [mailto:ablunden@mira.net >> ] >> *Sent:* Saturday, January 7, 2017 6:28 AM >> *To:* Peter Smagorinsky > >; eXtended Mind, >> Culture, Activity > > >> *Subject:* Re: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year >> and Perezhivanie! >> >> Can you explain in a paragraph or two,. >> Peter, rather than >> asking us all to read 10,000 words to >> extract an answer? >> >> Andy >> >> ------------------------------ >> ------------------------------ >> >> Andy Blunden >> http://home.mira.net/~andy >> >> >> http://www.brill.com/products/ >> book/origins-collective-decision-making >> > decision-making> >> >> >> On 7/01/2017 11:23 PM, Peter Smagorinsky >> wrote: >> >> Andy and others, I tried to work out >> the mediated/mediating question >> >> in the area of reading....see if this helps. >> >> Smagorinsky, P., & O'Donnell-Allen, >> C. (1998). Reading as mediated >> >> and mediating action: Composing meaning for >> literature through multimedia >> interpretive texts. Reading Research >> Quarterly, 33, 198-226. Available >> athttp://www.petersmagorinsky.net/About/PDF/RRQ/RRQ1998.pdf >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >> From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> >> > .ucsd.edu >> > >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ >> >> >> mailman.ucsd.edu ] On >> Behalf Of Andy Blunden >> >> Sent: Friday, January 6, 2017 7:12 PM >> >> To:xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu >> >> > > >> >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year >> and Perezhivanie! >> >> I have never understood this supposed >> distinction, Alfredo, between >> >> "mediated activity" and "mediating activity" >> given that all activity is >> mediated and all activity mediates. >> >> Also, could you spell out what you >> mean by the "tension" >> >> between perezhivanie as meaning and >> perezhivanie as struggle. >> >> Andy >> >> ------------------------------ >> ------------------------------ >> >> Andy Blunden >> >> http://home.mira.net/~andy >> >> >> >> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective- >> >> >> decision-making >> >> On 5/01/2017 6:26 PM, Alfredo Jornet >> Gil wrote: >> >> Thanks Marc for your careful >> response. >> >> I am familiar to Vygotsky's >> notion of cultural mediation and I >> >> am aware and acknowledge that it was >> elaborated as a means to overcome >> dualism, and that it is not analog to a >> computational approach. >> >> When I brought the computing >> analogy, I did so with regard not >> >> to the concept of cultural mediation in >> general, but to the way it can be >> (and is) deployed analytically. I react to >> what it seems to me a dichotomy >> between a "meaning" as something that is >> static (thereby a form of >> "representation" or reflection of the relation >> with the environment instead >> of?refraction)?? and the >> experiencing-as-struggling, which is described >> as?transformation or change. If so, mediation >> here would seem to be part of >> a methodological device that first dissects "a >> type of meaning" from "a >> type of activity" (or a given state from the >> process that changes that >> state), and then unites it by adding the term >> "mediation." And this may be >> my misreading, but in that (mis)reading (which >> perhaps is mostly due to the >> fact that in your empirical illustration only >> the initial and end product, >> i.e., perezhivanie, are described, but not the >> experiencing-as-struggle, >> that is, the moving between the two), >> mediation here seems to do as >> analytical concept precisely what you were >> afraid our monism was doing: >> explaining nothing. Only the end products but >> not the process of producing >> perezhivanie are revealed. This may be >> problematic if one attends to what >> Veresov argues in the paper I shared >> yesterday, where he defends the notion >> of mediation but also specifies that Vygotsky >> speaks of *mediating >> activity* (as opposed to *mediated* activity). >> That is, not mediation by >> signs as products, but mediating activity as >> the activity of producing >> signs (which again is an activity of producing >> social relations, perhaps >> what you refer as "holistic meanings"?). What >> do you think? >> >> I did not think you were trying >> to deny the influence of >> >> Spinoza, and I do not think we ever said that >> Perezhivanie was primarily a >> move from Cartesian Dualism to Monism, as you >> suggest in your post. I copy >> and paste from my prior post: "The fact is >> that Vygotsky was building a >> theory on the unity of the affect and the >> intellect that was to be grounded >> on Spinoza, and what we try to do is to >> explore how perezhivanie, as a >> concept being developed during the same period >> (but not finalised or >> totally settled!), could be seen from the >> perspective of the Spinozist >> Vygotsky." >> >> I totally believe that bringing >> the distinction between >> >> perezhivanie as meaning, and perezhivanie as >> struggle, is totally relevant, >> and Beth Ferholt's vignettes of Where the Wild >> Things Are do indeed >> illustrate this. We really need to address >> this tension, which as Beth's >> examples and as our own everyday experience >> shows, is a tension that >> matters not just to books and to theories but >> to living persons (children, >> teachers), a tension that moreover is present >> and mentioned in all the >> articles of the symposium. The papers offer >> different proposals, and I >> think is so great we have the chance to >> discuss them! I too, as you, am >> very interesting in hearing others about the >> questions you had concerning >> sense and meaning. >> >> Alfredo >> >> From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> >> > .ucsd.edu >> > >> >> > > >> > .ucsd.edu >> > >> on behalf of Marc >> >> Clara >> >> > > >> > > >> >> Sent: 04 January 2017 22:31 >> >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New >> Year and Perezhivanie! >> >> Thank you very much, Alfredo, for >> sharing this excellent paper by >> >> Veresov, and thanks also for your >> responses, which really helped >> >> me to >> >> better understand your points. My >> main doubt about your proposal >> >> was/is caused by the statement >> that the idea of cultural >> >> mediation/mediator implies a >> cartesian dualism. This shocks me >> >> because, to me, the idea of >> cultural mediation is absolutely >> >> crucial >> >> (in fact, the keystone) for the >> construction of a monist (and >> >> scientific) psychology that does >> not forget mind -that is, a >> >> cultural >> >> psychology. From your response, >> however, I realized that we may >> >> be >> >> approaching the idea of mediation >> in different ways. I talk of >> >> mediation and mediators in a >> quite restricted way. The starting >> >> point >> >> of my understanding of mediation >> is a dialectical relationship >> >> (organic, transactional) between >> the subject and the world >> >> (Vygotsky departs from the scheme >> stimulus-response, from reflexology). >> >> This relationship, that Vygotsky >> calls primitive psychological >> >> functions, would be basically >> biological. However, in human >> >> beings >> >> this relationship is mediated by >> cultural means: signs and >> >> tools; or >> >> primary, secondary and terciary >> artifacts. These cultural means >> >> reorganize the primitive >> functions (dialectic S-O relationship), >> >> which >> >> become then higher psychological >> functions (S-M-O) (see for >> >> example, >> >> The problem of the cultural >> development of the child, in The >> >> Vygotsky >> >> Reader). Now, the subject, the >> cultural mediators, and the >> >> object form >> >> an inseparable dialectical unit, >> so that the subject acts on >> >> (transforms) the object through >> the prism of the cultural >> >> mediators, >> >> the object acts on (transforms) >> the subject also through the >> >> prism of >> >> the cultural mediators, and the >> cultural means are themselves >> >> also >> >> transformed as a consequence of >> their mediation in this >> >> continuous >> >> dynamic dialectical tension. >> Here, for me, it is important the >> >> idea >> >> that the cultural means are as >> material (if we assume a >> >> materialist >> >> monism) as all the rest of the >> world; in fact, are parts of the >> >> material world which become signs >> or tools (and can be therefore >> >> socially distributed). This >> permits the introduction of the >> >> scientific >> >> study of mind-consciousness (as >> mediating systems of signs), >> >> because >> >> mind is not anymore something >> immaterial and unobservable, but >> >> it is >> >> as material and observable as the >> rest of the natural world. It >> >> is >> >> from this view that, for me, the >> idea of cultural mediation is >> >> the >> >> keystone of a monist psychology >> that includes mind. Thus, when I >> >> speak >> >> of mediators, I refer to the >> cultural means which mediate in the >> >> S-O >> >> dialectics; I am especially >> interested in signs/secondary >> >> artifacts. >> >> Here, it is perhaps necessary to >> insist that when I talk of >> >> studying >> >> mediators (and their semantic >> structure), this doesn't mean that >> >> they >> >> are taken out from the activity >> (the flux of live) in which they >> >> mediate (since out of activity >> they are not signs anymore); >> >> here, I >> >> think Vygotsky tries again to >> overcome another old dichotomy, the >> >> functionalism-structuralism one. >> I hope that all this makes also >> >> clear the difference between this view and >> that of computational >> psychologies (which in general are profoundly >> and explicitly dualist and >> not dialectic). >> >> Back to perezhivanie, I'm not >> obviously trying to deny the >> >> influence >> >> of Spinoza on Vygotsky's thinking >> (this is explicit in Vygotsky's >> >> writings, especially in "The >> teaching about emotions", in the >> >> Vol.6 of >> >> the Collected Works). But I have >> doubts that Vygotsky's >> >> introduction >> >> of the concept of perezhivanie is >> to be regarded primarily as a >> >> movement towards monism (from a >> previous cartesian dualism), and >> >> that >> >> this movement questions the >> concept of cultural mediation. >> >> Instead, >> >> and I think that this is in line >> with some of Gonzalez-Rey >> >> observations in his paper, my >> impression is that the >> >> introduction of >> >> the concept of perezhivanie >> responds more to a movement (a >> >> further >> >> step) towards holism (something >> that, in my understanding, can >> >> also be >> >> found in Spinoza). Thus, I think >> that the word meaning is still >> >> the >> >> unit of analysis in the last >> Vygotsky -and therefore, the idea of >> >> cultural mediation is still >> crucial (in fact, in The problem of >> >> the >> >> environment, he connects the >> concept of perezhivanie, which has >> >> just >> >> introduced, to the development of >> word meaning [p.345-346, also >> >> cited >> >> in my paper]). However, in my >> view, in the last Vygotsky the >> >> focus is >> >> not anymore primarily on the >> word-meaning as formed for things >> >> (or >> >> collections of things, as in the >> ontogenetic research with >> >> Sakharov), but the focus is now in the >> formation of meaning for holistic >> situations. >> >> Best regards, >> >> Marc. >> >> 2017-01-03 19:16 GMT+01:00 >> Alfredo Jornet Gil< >> >> a.j.gil@iped.uio.no >> > >> > >: >> >> Hi Marc, all, >> >> thanks for joining and for >> your interesting work, which I >> >> follow >> >> since I became aware of it. I >> appreciate the way in your >> >> paper you >> >> show careful and honest >> attention to the texts of the authors >> >> involved, but perhaps most of >> all I appreciate that the >> >> paper makes >> >> the transformational >> dimension related to struggle and change >> >> salient, a dimension all >> papers deemed central to >> >> perezhivanie. And I >> >> have learned more about >> Vasilyuk by reading your paper. But >> >> I also >> >> see that we have approached >> the question of perezhivanie >> >> differently >> >> and I think that addressing >> the questions that you raise >> >> concerning >> >> our article may be a good way >> to both respond and discuss >> >> your paper. >> >> I am aware that our use of >> the term monism may be >> >> problematic to >> >> some, and N. Veresov, who has >> recently written about this >> >> (see >> >> attached article), warns >> against the dangers of simply >> >> moving from >> >> dualism into an >> undifferentiating monism that relativizes >> >> everything, >> >> making development >> un-studiable. This seems to be the way in >> >> which >> >> you have understood our >> argument, and of course this is not >> >> what we are or want to be doing. >> >> Probably many will think that >> *dialectical materialism* >> >> rather than >> >> monism is the proper term, >> and I could agree with them; we >> >> do in fact >> >> use dialectical materialism >> there and elsewhere. Yet, we >> >> wanted to >> >> emphasise the Spinozist >> influence (an influence that also >> >> runs >> >> through Marx) and so we found >> it appropriate to use the term >> >> monism, >> >> a term that Vygotsky uses >> before arguing that Spinoza >> >> "develops an essentially materialistic view" >> >> (Collected Works, Vol. 6, p. >> 124). For us, the aim is >> >> working out >> >> ways to empirically examine >> and formulate problems in ways >> >> that do >> >> not reify a mind-body dualism. >> >> Although overcoming dualism >> is foundational to the CHAT >> >> paradigm, I >> >> would however not say that >> Vygotsky did get to solve all of >> >> the >> >> problems that Cartesian >> dualism had created for psychology, >> >> even >> >> though he recognised those >> problems brilliantly as early as >> >> in the >> >> "Crisis". It should suffice >> to cite Vygotsky's own remarks, >> >> which we quote in the paper (and which A.N. >> >> Leont'ev mentions in the >> introduction to the collected >> >> works), where >> >> Vygotsky explicitly critiques >> some of his own prior ideas >> >> for failing >> >> to overcome dualism. We agree >> with those who, like F. G. >> >> Rey, see >> >> Vygotsky's project as a >> developing rather than as a >> >> finalised one. >> >> The fact is that Vygotsky was >> building a theory on the unity >> >> of the >> >> affect and the intellect that >> was to be grounded on Spinoza, >> >> and what >> >> we try to do is to explore >> how perezhivanie, as a concept >> >> being >> >> developed during the same >> period (but not finalised or >> >> totally >> >> settled!), could be seen from >> the perspective of the >> >> Spinozist Vygotsky. >> >> As you note, in our article >> we argue that, if one takes the >> >> Spinozist >> >> one-substance approach, >> classical concepts used in >> >> non-classical >> >> psychology, at least in the >> way they are commonly used in >> >> the current >> >> literature, should be >> revised. One such concept is >> >> mediation. And I >> >> personally do not have much >> of a problem when mediation is >> >> used to >> >> denote the fundamental fact >> that every thing exists always >> >> through >> >> *another*, never in and of >> itself. But I do think that it is >> >> problematic to identify >> MEDIATORS, such as "a meaning", as a >> >> means to >> >> account for or explain >> developmental processes and learning >> >> events, >> >> precisely because it is >> there, at least in my view, that >> >> dualism creeps in. >> >> For example, I find it >> paradoxical that you are concerned >> >> that our >> >> monist approach risks turning >> perezhivanie into a useless >> >> category >> >> because it may be used to >> explain everything and nothing, >> >> and yet you >> >> do not seem to have a problem >> using the term mediation to >> >> account for >> >> the transformation of >> perezhivanie without clearly >> >> elaborating on how >> >> mediation does change >> anything or what it looks like as a >> >> real >> >> process. How is it different >> saying that a perezhivanie >> >> mediates the >> >> experiencing-as-struggle from >> simply saying that it >> >> "affects" or >> >> "determines" it? Indeed, if >> perezhivanie mediates >> >> experiencing-as-struggle, >> does not experiencing-as-struglgle >> >> too >> >> mediate perezhivanie? And do >> not both may be said to mediate >> >> development, or development mediate them? Is >> not this explaining everything >> and nothing? >> >> I do believe you can argue >> that there is a difference between >> >> mediation and classical >> psychology's cause-effect relations, >> >> but to >> >> show this you need to dig >> into the dialectical underpinnings >> >> of the >> >> theory. In your paper, you >> offer a nice analysis of a lovely >> >> case of >> >> a teacher who, in dealing >> with a challenge with one of her >> >> students, >> >> changes her perezhivanie. I >> think you can rightly argue that >> >> there is >> >> a semiotic transformation, >> and I fully support your >> >> statement that by >> >> studying discourse we can >> empirically approach questions of >> >> psychological development. >> The contradictions you show as >> >> being >> >> involved and resolved >> resonate really well with what I >> >> experience as >> >> a parent or as a teacher in >> the classroom. Yet, without >> >> unpacking >> >> what this "mediation" taking >> place between one perezhivanie >> >> and the >> >> next one means as a concrete >> and real, the same analysis >> >> could be done taking an information processing >> approach: >> >> there is an situation that is >> processed (represented?) in >> >> one way, >> >> which then leads to a >> (cognitive) dissonance, and then there >> >> is a >> >> cognitive resolution by means >> of which the situation is >> >> presented >> >> differently in consciousness >> (indeed, when seen in this way, >> >> the term >> >> perezhivanie and the term >> "representation" become almost >> >> indistinguishable). How is >> mediation, as an analytical >> >> concept, >> >> helping here? And most >> importantly to the question of >> >> perezhivanie, >> >> how is this analysis going to >> show the internal connection >> >> between >> >> intellect and affect that >> Vygotsky formulates as >> >> constitutive of the notion of perezhivanie? >> >> I believe that the key lies >> in understanding what Vygotsky >> >> means when >> >> he says that perezhivanie is >> a unit of analysis. I will not >> >> repeat >> >> here what already is written >> in at least a couple of the >> >> articles in >> >> the special issue (Blunden, >> ours), that is the difference >> >> between >> >> analysis by elements and unit >> analysis (Vygotsky 1987). A >> >> unit >> >> analysis approach is >> consistent with Spinoza, for whom >> >> cause-effect >> >> explanations were not >> adequate, requiring instead an >> >> understanding of >> >> self-development, >> perezhivanie as a kernel cell for the >> >> development >> >> of personality. And I think >> you may be after this in your >> >> article in > > From dkellogg60@gmail.com Thu Jan 12 16:02:36 2017 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2017 11:02:36 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! In-Reply-To: <1484253698990.7728@iped.uio.no> References: <1483344752182.40904@iped.uio.no> <1483467423798.57819@iped.uio.no> <1483601196884.31418@iped.uio.no> <5df5e870-3ef8-70d6-0c17-f8647ba17e62@mira.net> <587124d9.d957620a.4a5a8.bd56@mx.google.com> <1483820996800.91513@iped.uio.no> <1484253698990.7728@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: Alfredo: Let's apply your reasoning to the distinction between non-language, proto-language, and language proper. Imagine a nursery in which there are three beds, one with a child who is only week old and who responds with pleasure to a nipple and with pain to being shaken or dropped, one with a child who is about ten months old and has worked out a system of squeaks and directed cries in order to get attention and deliver an affective response, and one with a child who is nearly two and can ask for objects, evaluate them, and reject them. As you say, perception and semiosis are at work in each situation. But contrary to what you say, they are not equally at work, and the outcomes are very different. There is a good reason why children develop: it's in their interests, both in the long term sense in that it allows a much wider variety of outcomes and in the short term sense in that it allows an escape from ennui. A child who plays the "game" of putting black pieces on black squares and white pieces on white squares will find this game very dull in a matter of hours. A child who plays the game of chess will, in many cases, find a lifetime vocation. Yes, there are "structures" that include perception and semiosis in both cases, but the precise make-up isn't insignificant or irrelevant. One important reason why perezhivanie is such an important unit of structure is that it at last allows us to assign real, concrete, specific values to the influence of its two elements, personality and environment. These vary from period to period--for example, in periods of crisis, the personality always appears to play a leading role (e.g. proto-language in the Crisis at One, negativism in the Crisis at Three, "acting out" in the Crisis at Seven). During stable periods, the environment always appears to dominate (e.g. speech proper in early childhood, play in preschool, and thinking but not thinking-about-thinking in school age). Some "child-centred" pedagogies would like to treat childhood as one long crisis. I think this is a disservice to the child, because it is precisely during the stable periods that the critical neoformations (e.g. protospeech) find a supporting but absolutely crucial role. The child doesn't forget the expressiveness of intonation and stress learned in proto-language, any more than the child who plays chess no longer distinguishes white squares from black ones. David Kellogg Macquarie University On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 7:41 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > David, I admire much of what you write in your first three examples in > your prior post. But I am reacting to your latter post on Chess. It is the > second or third time that you bring the CHESS example to bear in xmca, and > I always feel uneasy about it. > > I see the point that there are different developmental stages and that > these can be best categorised according to the type of generalisation that > the child can engage into. Obviously, treating a piece of marble "as if" it > was a piece in the game of chess involves a different type of > generalization than treating the same piece of marble as if it was a piece > in the game of "let's put the black pieces in black squares and white > pieces in white squares". But I do not think that my 20 months daughter > will put black pieces on black squares in any systematic manner simply > because she can PERCEIVE and act upon the difference between black and > white; and indeed I do not think that my 7 years old first daughter will do > any of these things with the chess pieces, considering she has never > learned to play chess. Indeed, why would any child do that? I do strongly > believe that to get any of my daughters to arrange the pieces by color, > there would have first to be a TEACHING/LEARNING situation, which itself > would involve establishing a semantic field, a field that perhaps out of my > ignorance I would call semiotic (sign). > > In my view, in both cases there are rules and therefore imagination, if > we listen to Vygotsky's writings on play, and perhaps, as Vygotsky notes, > there may be a difference in the "moral attitude", but I would be cautious > by gross divisions between perceptual and semantic structures. Yes,there > are different levels, types, or stages in the way semantic fields are > organised, and that playing the chess pieces as pieces of the CHESS game > involves a qualitative leap compared to playing them as pieces in the game > of putting them together by shape or color; but there is a game going on in > both cases, and therefore a perceptual as much as a semiotic structure > being at play. These are different semiotic contexts, as you say at the end > of your e-mail, but I do think that your assertion that in playing with the > chess pieces by color "the structure would be visual but not semiotic" can > be problematic and may lead to what I consider an incorrect view of the > relation between higher and lower functions in development. > > Alfredo > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of David Kellogg > Sent: 11 January 2017 04:50 > To: Andy Blunden; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > Vygotsky's got a terrific metaphor for how "perezhivanie" is internalized: > it is like internalizing the rules of the game of chess. > > The child who doesn't know how to play chess simply plays WITH the pieces > instead of playing them. She or he might try to create a piece-board > structure by putting black pieces on black squares and white pieces on > white squares, but the structure is a visual one and not a semiotic one; > it's about color and not about meaning. The child who DOES know how to play > chess plays the pieces instead of playing with them. She or he too creates > "structures" but this time they are semiotic ones: a black knight in a > completely different column and a completely different row, can capture a > white pawn. > > The board is the same and so are the kids; the children may have very > similar biological and very similar cultural endowments, but they do not > have the same semiotic context at all. Hence different perezhivanie and > different personalities. > > David Kellogg > Macquarie University > > > > On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 11:54 AM, Andy Blunden wrote: > > > How to understand the personality? ... i.e., the *development* of the > > personality? > > > > The subject's inheritance, and The subject's experiences > (/perezhivaniya/) > > > > ... just think of how you'd go about writing a good biography or > > Bildungsroman. > > > > Andy > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > Andy Blunden > > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > On 11/01/2017 10:24 AM, David Kellogg wrote: > > > >> Andy: > >> > >> A good paradox! Word meaning is a unit, but the spoken word itself is > >> just an element--a thing. We can see that this is, on the face of it, > >> impossible: within a single holistic analysis, an element can be a part > of > >> a unit, but a unit can never be a part of an element. So what you are > >> referring to when you say that the word is a thing is the "sonic" or > >> "phasal" quality of the word: its "acoustic" properties, its > "phonetics". > >> > >> But not its phonology. The word that Vygotsky uses for "phoneme" refers > >> to the 1929 work of the Prague Circle, originally the Moscow Circle. He > is > >> a LITTLE coy about this, because the founders, Jakobson and Trubetskoy, > >> were not very popular with the authorities and Vygotsky already had > plenty > >> of heterodox acquaintances to worry about. Nevertheless, whenever > Vygotsky > >> says "phoneme", we know he really means what Jakobson and Trubetskoy > called > >> "morphophonemes". We know this because the examples he actually > >> gives--Russian case endings--are morpho-phonemes and not simply > phonemes: > >> so for example in English the sound /s/ is a simple phoneme when I say > the > >> word "self" but if I say "Andy's" the sound /s/ is a morpho-phoneme: a > >> difference in sounding that makes a difference in meaning. The system > (that > >> is, the paradigmatic menu) of these differences in soundings are what > the > >> Moscow and Prague Circles called "phonology" (as OPPOSED to phonetics), > and > >> this is the kind of "phoneme" that Vygotsky is really talking about. > >> > >> Still, you can see that it is not what he is talking about when he says > >> word meaning, because these units are still nowhere near big enough to > >> describe the kinds of changes which must occur when verbal thinking > >> develops. I feel the same way about a lot of the examples offered of > >> "perezhivanie", including Marc's. If MacDuff's grief or Carla's epiphany > >> about the misbehavior of her kids being due to "outside influences" > really > >> is the unit of personality and experience that Vygotsky wants us to use > >> when we analyse the ontogenesis of personality, then it is no more > >> appropriate than using the morpho-phoneme to analyse the whole of verbal > >> thinking. Just as evolution (of species) requires very different units > from > >> history (of classes), development, whether we are talking about verbal > >> thinking or the personality as a whole, is going to require very > different > >> units from learning, whether we are talking about MacDuff or Carla. The > >> units must be able to develop; that is, the relationship of the elements > >> within them must be susceptible to many changes over time. > >> > >> Let me give three examples of how this happens in different > >> "perezhivanie". They are not mine; they are Vygotsky's, and they are all > >> from the Pedological Lectures. > >> > >> First, the Crisis at One. Neither the biological nor the social > endowment > >> of the child greatly changes in the acquisition of speech; nevertheless, > >> the relationship between the personality and the environment, of which > both > >> personality moments and environmental ones are constituent elements, is > >> entirely transformed. Here we are not talking about phonemes, or even > >> morpho-phonemes: we are talking about "wordings"--whole utterances. In > >> Melbourne I presented some data that demonstrated this beautifully--a > >> child's first word is actually an attempt to imitate a whole > conversation. > >> > >> Second, the Crisis at Three. Vygotsky spends a lot of time discussing > the > >> "Seven Stars"--the symptoms of the "Terrible Twos" and "Threenagehood" > >> noted by harried parents everywhere. But by the end of his analysis it's > >> clear that what really happens is a new relationship between wish and > will: > >> in extreme cases, the child actually wishes for one thing (e.g. > compromise) > >> and wills the opposite (the everlasting "No!"). Again, neither the > >> personality moments as such nor the environmental ones change, but > there is > >> a separation and a sorting which allows the subordination of wish to > will > >> that we see in play. This isn't the kind of "aha" moment that Marc is > >> offering us at all: Vygotsky actually calls it the "antipode" of future > >> will, because instead of enabling will it actually paralyzes it. But it > is > >> indubitably a key moment in the development of the relation of > personality > >> to environmental moments that we see in "perizhivanie". > >> > >> Thirdly, the Crisis at Seven. I think Gonzalez Rey makes a total hash of > >> this, and I get very cross when I read his article. It is not true that > the > >> essence of perizhivanie remained a mystery to Vygotsky simply because > he no > >> longer subscribes to "the aesthetic reaction" and "catharsis" and other > >> notions that he toyed with in Psych of Art (he's no longer doing > >> experiments on changes in breathing rate when people read the works of > >> Bunin either!). It might be true that he never offered a system of facts > >> and methodological procedures for perezivanie, but that was only because > >> one already existed, for example in the work of Wallon and Stern and > >> others. It is demonstrably not true that when Vygotsky says that the > speech > >> environment of those around him does not change when the child learns to > >> talk at one, he is not "profoundly contradictory with the concept of > >> sense": when you read the quotation in context, it is very clear that > what > >> he is referring to are the kinds of absolute indicators used by Zalkind: > >> how often the parents read the newspapers, the dialect they speak, and > >> their educational background. These do not change, and if the child > wants > >> to make sense, these are the factors the child will have to relate to. > >> > >> Vygotsky gives the example of a child who is severely retarded. The > child > >> wants to play with other children and is rejected. The child walks down > the > >> street and the other children follow, laughing. The child is shrieked > at, > >> insulted, but as soon as the humiliation stops, the child is perfectly > >> happy with himself. Vygotsky points out that the child is not able to > >> "co-generalize" the "perizhivanie" of the humiliations: each is > unpleasant, > >> but they are entirely separate and cannot be connected with any internal > >> sense of inferiority. A normal child, however, is able to "internalize" > >> these humiliations and consequently develops a sense of inferiority. We > can > >> see that what has happened is the insertion of what Vygotsky calls an > >> "intellectual" moment: an inner layer, which is what distinguishes later > >> Chaplin movies from earlier ones (again, Vygotsky's example, not mine!) > and > >> what brings about the "loss of directness and naivete" that we see in > >> pre-schoolers. > >> > >> I think that the reason people find "perizhivanie" so hard to work with > >> is the same reason that they find "word meaning" hard to work with: it > >> develops. The feeling of drinking milk as the infant drinks it is > >> perizhivanie, and the thought of being humiliated when you are mulling > it > >> over and contemplating revenge is also perizhivanie, and only a profound > >> analysis which includes ontogenetic development and not just learning > will > >> show the inner link between them. It's for that reason that I think that > >> "activity" is not a useful unit of analysis and I am much more inclined > to > >> use your word "project", so long as it can include what Vygotsky calls > >> "inner activeness". > >> > >> Vygotsky says: > >> > >> > >> ????? ? ?????????, ?????????? ? ?. ?., ? ???? ???? ? ?????????? > >> ???????????, ??? ?????????? ???????????? ??????????????? ????????? > >> ??????????????? ?? ??????? ? ??????? ?????????????. ??? ??? ????? ????? > >> ?????????? ?????????? ? ???????? ???????? ??????????? ? ???, ???, ? ?? > >> ????? ??? ? ?????????? ???????? ??? ?????????? ???????????? ???????????? > >> ???????????????? ????? ? ?????????, ??????? ???????????, ? ???????? > >> ???????? ?? ????? ???????????? ?????????????? ???????????, ???????????? > >> ??????????? ?????????? ?????????? ?? ????????? ? ??????? ????????????. > ??? > >> ??? ???????, ??????? ????? ??????????, ? ?? ????? ????? ?? ?????? ??? > ????? > >> ???-??????, ???, ? ???????? ????????? ?????????????? ??????? ? > ?????????? > >> ????????????. > >> > >> When I think, remember, etc. I am dealing withinner activeness; this > >> psychological process of inner activity is not directly linked to any > >> external activity. The new form of inner activeness in the School Age > >> consists of this: that while during the preschool years these inner > >> activities demonstrated an immediate link with action, with external > >> activeness, in the school years we have a relative autonomy which > emerges, > >> inner activeness which is relatively independent of external activities. > >> Here is already a child who can think, at the same time when he is > doing or > >> seeing something, one in whom has emerged a differentiation of inner and > >> outer activities. > >> > >> David Kellogg > >> Macquarie University > >> > >> > >> > >> On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 10:07 AM, Andy Blunden >> ablunden@mira.net>> wrote: > >> > >> David: "Are words really units?" > >> > >> Well, firstly, "units" is a *relative* term. That is, > >> the question is: are words units of something, some > >> complex process subject to analysis. And which? > >> > >> Secondly, according to Vygotsky, "no." The concept > >> Vygotsky proposes as a unit is "word meaning" which he > >> says is a unity of sound and meaning. The sound is an > >> artefact, which, detached from its meaningful > >> utterance in a transactional context is just a thing, > >> viz., a word. Whereas "word meaning" is an > >> arrtefact-mediated action, a unit of human social > >> activity. > >> > >> It is true that words can be countable or mass > >> according to context, but I wasn't talking about words > >> was I? I was talking about word meaning. > >> > >> Andy > >> > >> ------------------------------------------------------------ > >> Andy Blunden > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy > >> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective- > decision-making > >> >> decision-making> > >> > >> On 8/01/2017 7:59 AM, David Kellogg wrote: > >> > >> Are words really units? When we look at their > >> ideational meaning (that is, > >> their logical and experiential content--their > >> capacity for representing and > >> linking together human experiences) they seem to > >> fall into two very > >> different categories: lexical words like > >> "perezhivanie" or "sense" or > >> "personality" of "individual" and grammatical > >> words like "of", or "might", > >> or "is". The lexical words seem to behave like > >> units--they are bounded, > >> discrete, and, as Andy would say, "countable" (the > >> problem is that almost > >> all nouns are both countable and uncountable > >> depending on the context you > >> put them in, so this distinction is really not as > >> essential as Andy seems > >> to assume). But the more grammatical words seem to > >> be elements of some > >> larger unit, which we can call wording. > >> > >> Veresov and Fleer come up against this problem > >> with "edintsvo" and > >> "edintsa". Of course, as they say, the two words > >> are distinct. But this > >> doesn't necessarily mean that the former always > >> corresponds to "unity" in > >> English and the latter is always "unit". If you > >> look at the paragraph they > >> translate on 330, you can see that Vygotsky starts > >> with an idea that is > >> quite "synoptic" and is well expressed by "unit". > >> But in the last sentence > >> there is a sense that "perezhivanie" is a > >> meta-stable unit--one that > >> remains self-similar only through a process of > >> thorough change, like a > >> bicycle whose every part is replaced--and in > >> English is it is better to > >> express this idea with "unity". The problem is > >> that the differences between > >> "edintsvo" and "edintsva" in Russian is a matter > >> of gender (I think) and > >> not simply abstractness, and as a result the > >> English version, which cannot > >> use the resource of gender,has to rely on > >> abstractness, so the words > >> "unity" and "unit" are somewhat more distinct and > >> less linked than > >> "edintsvo" and "edintsva". > >> > >> There are other problems that are similar. When > >> Gonzalez Rey uses the word > >> "final moment" to refer to the final period of > >> Vygotsky's thinking, he > >> leaves the anglophone reader the impression that > >> he is referring to > >> Vygotsky's deathbed thoughts. On the other hand, > >> when Veresov and Fleer use > >> "factor" to translate the same Russian word that > >> Gonzalez Rey is using, > >> they are giving us something more quantitative > >> than Vygotsky intended, and > >> their translation of "dalee nerazloshim'im > >> chastyami etava edinstva" > >> into "vital and further indivisible part of the > >> whole" is quite opaque in > >> English (notice that here Veresov and Fleer use > >> "whole" to translate > >> "edinstva" rather than "unit"!) At some point you > >> have to accept that you > >> can change Russian words into English words as if > >> you were exchanging > >> rubles for dollars, but you still won't be able to > >> buy a samovar at Walmart. > >> > >> David Kellogg > >> Macquarie University > >> > >> > >> > >> On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 5:21 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > >> > > >> wrote: > >> > >> Larry, all, > >> > >> our arguments in the 2014 address a science > >> education literature in which > >> the constructivist perspective is the leading > >> perspective; We note that the > >> assertion that people learn from experience is > >> everywhere taken for granted > >> but nowhere accounted for. We resort to > >> pragmatist and phenomenological > >> literature along with Vygotsky's insights to > >> point out the need to account > >> for learning as something that cannot be the > >> result of an individual's > >> construction; in experience there is always > >> something in excess of what you > >> intended, and this is a basic feature of > >> doing, of performing. I take that > >> to be your "trans" in the trans/zhivanie word, > >> Larry, which already is > >> denoted in the word PERezhivanie. > >> > >> But I do not wish to move our discussion too > >> far away from Marc's paper > >> and the Perezhivanie special issue. We also > >> risk disengaging many that have > >> not have the privilege we've had to have the > >> time to read so many articles > >> in just few days into the new year. I think we > >> are a point in the > >> discussion where a pretty clear point of > >> agreement/disagreement, and > >> therefore of possibility for growth, has been > >> reached with regard to the > >> view of perezhivanie as "an experience" and as > >> the "working over it". I > >> think that to allow as many as possible to > >> follow, and hopefully also > >> engage, I think it will be helpful to bring > >> the diverse perspectives and > >> theoretical accounts to matter in accounting > >> for some actual material. And > >> there are a number of cases described in the > >> articles, including Marc's > >> case of a teacher, as well as everyday facts, > >> such as those brought by > >> Beth, and in Beth's article... > >> > >> I take the task for myself too, but Saturday > >> morning need to attend to > >> other things! > >> A > >> > >> > >> > >> ________________________________________ > >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > >> > >> >> > > >> on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com > >> > >> >> > > >> Sent: 07 January 2017 18:26 > >> To: Andy Blunden; Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended > >> Mind, Culture, Activity; > >> Larry Purss > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and > >> Perezhivanie! > >> > >> Andy, Peter, i hope the intention to move > >> beyond politeness to struggle > >> with this topic materializes. > >> In this vein i want to introduce exploration > >> of the 'excess' of actual > >> over intended meaning as he sketched his > >> introduction to 'experience'. > >> > >> Citing Dewey, Alfredo says that this excess of > >> actual learning over > >> intended learning INCLUDES what Dewey refers > >> to as 'attitudes' and these > >> 'attitudes' are FUNDAMENTALLY what count in > >> the future. > >> Alfredo and Roth then add this summary > >> statement : > >> > >> There is therefore, a need to theorize > >> experience in terms that do not > >> assume control and rationality as the sine qua > >> non of learning. It also > >> implies a need to develop analytical accounts > >> that retain the 'uncertainty' > >> that is an 'integral part' of human experience. > >> > >> Where are Alfredo and Roth leading us with > >> this sketch of experience? To > >> highlight 'attitudes' that occur in the excess > >> of actual over intended > >> learning? The word 'attitudes' generates > >> images of (atmosphere) and (moods) > >> that 'flow' like cascading waterfalls that can > >> be imaged as (force) or as > >> (receptive). Attitudes that flow to places > >> where they are received within a > >> certain attitude of care and concern. Not as > >> forceful an image as moving > >> only with control and rationality. Describing > >> 'weaker' thought that > >> remains uncertain but that also opens us to > >> the other's peril and plight. > >> Possibly a post-analytic motion that exceeds > >> the intended by living-through > >> the actual that develops 'attitudes' that are > >> fundamentally what count for > >> the future. > >> > >> > >> Sent from my Windows 10 phone > >> > >> From: Andy Blunden > >> Sent: January 7, 2017 5:00 AM > >> To: Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, > >> Activity > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and > >> Perezhivanie! > >> > >> OK Peter, what you say is all very true I am > >> sure, but it > >> entails conflating activity and action (as > >> mass nouns) and > >> context and mediation, and makes the required > >> distinction > >> much like one could find multiple meanings for > >> the word > >> "and" by listing the different phrases and > >> clauses which can > >> be linked by "and." > >> > >> Andy > >> > >> ------------------------------ > ------------------------------ > >> Andy Blunden > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy > >> > >> http://www.brill.com/products/ > book/origins-collective-decisi > >> on-making > >> >> decision-making> > >> > >> On 7/01/2017 11:42 PM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > >> > >> Let me try to illustrate. > >> > >> Reading as mediated action: The > >> cultural-historical > >> context of reading mediates how one's > >> attention and > >> response are channeled in socially > >> constructed ways. So, > >> in one setting, say at home or reading in > >> the company of > >> friends, a novel might bring a reader to > >> tears, or invite > >> readers to share personal stories that > >> parallel those of > >> the plot lines, or laugh out loud. But > >> another setting, a > >> formal school or university class, would > >> have historical > >> values and practices that mute emotional > >> and personal > >> responses, and promote a more sober, > >> analytic way of > >> reading and talking that fits with > >> specific historical > >> critical conventions and genres, and > >> discourages others. > >> > >> Reading as mediating action: The act of > >> reading can be > >> transformational. In reading about an > >> talking about a > >> character's actions, a reader might > >> reconsider a value > >> system, become more sympathetic to real > >> people who > >> resemble oppressed characters, etc. In > >> other words, > >> reading a text may serve a mediational > >> process in which > >> textual ideas and exemplars enable a > >> reader to think > >> differently. > >> > >> *From:*Andy Blunden > >> [mailto:ablunden@mira.net > >> ] > >> *Sent:* Saturday, January 7, 2017 6:28 AM > >> *To:* Peter Smagorinsky >> >; eXtended Mind, > >> Culture, Activity >> > > >> *Subject:* Re: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year > >> and Perezhivanie! > >> > >> Can you explain in a paragraph or two,. > >> Peter, rather than > >> asking us all to read 10,000 words to > >> extract an answer? > >> > >> Andy > >> > >> ------------------------------ > >> ------------------------------ > >> > >> Andy Blunden > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy > >> > >> > >> http://www.brill.com/products/ > >> book/origins-collective-decision-making > >> >> decision-making> > >> > >> > >> On 7/01/2017 11:23 PM, Peter Smagorinsky > >> wrote: > >> > >> Andy and others, I tried to work out > >> the mediated/mediating question > >> > >> in the area of reading....see if this helps. > >> > >> Smagorinsky, P., & O'Donnell-Allen, > >> C. (1998). Reading as mediated > >> > >> and mediating action: Composing meaning for > >> literature through multimedia > >> interpretive texts. Reading Research > >> Quarterly, 33, 198-226. Available > >> athttp://www.petersmagorinsky.net/About/PDF/RRQ/RRQ1998.pdf > >> > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> > >> From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > >> > >> >> .ucsd.edu > >> > > >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ > >> > >> > >> mailman.ucsd.edu ] On > >> Behalf Of Andy Blunden > >> > >> Sent: Friday, January 6, 2017 7:12 PM > >> > >> To:xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu > >> > >> >> > > >> > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year > >> and Perezhivanie! > >> > >> I have never understood this supposed > >> distinction, Alfredo, between > >> > >> "mediated activity" and "mediating activity" > >> given that all activity is > >> mediated and all activity mediates. > >> > >> Also, could you spell out what you > >> mean by the "tension" > >> > >> between perezhivanie as meaning and > >> perezhivanie as struggle. > >> > >> Andy > >> > >> ------------------------------ > >> ------------------------------ > >> > >> Andy Blunden > >> > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy > >> > >> > >> > >> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective- > >> > > >> > >> decision-making > >> > >> On 5/01/2017 6:26 PM, Alfredo Jornet > >> Gil wrote: > >> > >> Thanks Marc for your careful > >> response. > >> > >> I am familiar to Vygotsky's > >> notion of cultural mediation and I > >> > >> am aware and acknowledge that it was > >> elaborated as a means to overcome > >> dualism, and that it is not analog to a > >> computational approach. > >> > >> When I brought the computing > >> analogy, I did so with regard not > >> > >> to the concept of cultural mediation in > >> general, but to the way it can be > >> (and is) deployed analytically. I react to > >> what it seems to me a dichotomy > >> between a "meaning" as something that is > >> static (thereby a form of > >> "representation" or reflection of the relation > >> with the environment instead > >> of?refraction)?? and the > >> experiencing-as-struggling, which is described > >> as?transformation or change. If so, mediation > >> here would seem to be part of > >> a methodological device that first dissects "a > >> type of meaning" from "a > >> type of activity" (or a given state from the > >> process that changes that > >> state), and then unites it by adding the term > >> "mediation." And this may be > >> my misreading, but in that (mis)reading (which > >> perhaps is mostly due to the > >> fact that in your empirical illustration only > >> the initial and end product, > >> i.e., perezhivanie, are described, but not the > >> experiencing-as-struggle, > >> that is, the moving between the two), > >> mediation here seems to do as > >> analytical concept precisely what you were > >> afraid our monism was doing: > >> explaining nothing. Only the end products but > >> not the process of producing > >> perezhivanie are revealed. This may be > >> problematic if one attends to what > >> Veresov argues in the paper I shared > >> yesterday, where he defends the notion > >> of mediation but also specifies that Vygotsky > >> speaks of *mediating > >> activity* (as opposed to *mediated* activity). > >> That is, not mediation by > >> signs as products, but mediating activity as > >> the activity of producing > >> signs (which again is an activity of producing > >> social relations, perhaps > >> what you refer as "holistic meanings"?). What > >> do you think? > >> > >> I did not think you were trying > >> to deny the influence of > >> > >> Spinoza, and I do not think we ever said that > >> Perezhivanie was primarily a > >> move from Cartesian Dualism to Monism, as you > >> suggest in your post. I copy > >> and paste from my prior post: "The fact is > >> that Vygotsky was building a > >> theory on the unity of the affect and the > >> intellect that was to be grounded > >> on Spinoza, and what we try to do is to > >> explore how perezhivanie, as a > >> concept being developed during the same period > >> (but not finalised or > >> totally settled!), could be seen from the > >> perspective of the Spinozist > >> Vygotsky." > >> > >> I totally believe that bringing > >> the distinction between > >> > >> perezhivanie as meaning, and perezhivanie as > >> struggle, is totally relevant, > >> and Beth Ferholt's vignettes of Where the Wild > >> Things Are do indeed > >> illustrate this. We really need to address > >> this tension, which as Beth's > >> examples and as our own everyday experience > >> shows, is a tension that > >> matters not just to books and to theories but > >> to living persons (children, > >> teachers), a tension that moreover is present > >> and mentioned in all the > >> articles of the symposium. The papers offer > >> different proposals, and I > >> think is so great we have the chance to > >> discuss them! I too, as you, am > >> very interesting in hearing others about the > >> questions you had concerning > >> sense and meaning. > >> > >> Alfredo > >> > >> From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > >> > >> >> .ucsd.edu > >> > > >> > >> >> > > >> >> .ucsd.edu > >> > > >> on behalf of Marc > >> > >> Clara > >> > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> > >> Sent: 04 January 2017 22:31 > >> > >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > >> > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New > >> Year and Perezhivanie! > >> > >> Thank you very much, Alfredo, for > >> sharing this excellent paper by > >> > >> Veresov, and thanks also for your > >> responses, which really helped > >> > >> me to > >> > >> better understand your points. My > >> main doubt about your proposal > >> > >> was/is caused by the statement > >> that the idea of cultural > >> > >> mediation/mediator implies a > >> cartesian dualism. This shocks me > >> > >> because, to me, the idea of > >> cultural mediation is absolutely > >> > >> crucial > >> > >> (in fact, the keystone) for the > >> construction of a monist (and > >> > >> scientific) psychology that does > >> not forget mind -that is, a > >> > >> cultural > >> > >> psychology. From your response, > >> however, I realized that we may > >> > >> be > >> > >> approaching the idea of mediation > >> in different ways. I talk of > >> > >> mediation and mediators in a > >> quite restricted way. The starting > >> > >> point > >> > >> of my understanding of mediation > >> is a dialectical relationship > >> > >> (organic, transactional) between > >> the subject and the world > >> > >> (Vygotsky departs from the scheme > >> stimulus-response, from reflexology). > >> > >> This relationship, that Vygotsky > >> calls primitive psychological > >> > >> functions, would be basically > >> biological. However, in human > >> > >> beings > >> > >> this relationship is mediated by > >> cultural means: signs and > >> > >> tools; or > >> > >> primary, secondary and terciary > >> artifacts. These cultural means > >> > >> reorganize the primitive > >> functions (dialectic S-O relationship), > >> > >> which > >> > >> become then higher psychological > >> functions (S-M-O) (see for > >> > >> example, > >> > >> The problem of the cultural > >> development of the child, in The > >> > >> Vygotsky > >> > >> Reader). Now, the subject, the > >> cultural mediators, and the > >> > >> object form > >> > >> an inseparable dialectical unit, > >> so that the subject acts on > >> > >> (transforms) the object through > >> the prism of the cultural > >> > >> mediators, > >> > >> the object acts on (transforms) > >> the subject also through the > >> > >> prism of > >> > >> the cultural mediators, and the > >> cultural means are themselves > >> > >> also > >> > >> transformed as a consequence of > >> their mediation in this > >> > >> continuous > >> > >> dynamic dialectical tension. > >> Here, for me, it is important the > >> > >> idea > >> > >> that the cultural means are as > >> material (if we assume a > >> > >> materialist > >> > >> monism) as all the rest of the > >> world; in fact, are parts of the > >> > >> material world which become signs > >> or tools (and can be therefore > >> > >> socially distributed). This > >> permits the introduction of the > >> > >> scientific > >> > >> study of mind-consciousness (as > >> mediating systems of signs), > >> > >> because > >> > >> mind is not anymore something > >> immaterial and unobservable, but > >> > >> it is > >> > >> as material and observable as the > >> rest of the natural world. It > >> > >> is > >> > >> from this view that, for me, the > >> idea of cultural mediation is > >> > >> the > >> > >> keystone of a monist psychology > >> that includes mind. Thus, when I > >> > >> speak > >> > >> of mediators, I refer to the > >> cultural means which mediate in the > >> > >> S-O > >> > >> dialectics; I am especially > >> interested in signs/secondary > >> > >> artifacts. > >> > >> Here, it is perhaps necessary to > >> insist that when I talk of > >> > >> studying > >> > >> mediators (and their semantic > >> structure), this doesn't mean that > >> > >> they > >> > >> are taken out from the activity > >> (the flux of live) in which they > >> > >> mediate (since out of activity > >> they are not signs anymore); > >> > >> here, I > >> > >> think Vygotsky tries again to > >> overcome another old dichotomy, the > >> > >> functionalism-structuralism one. > >> I hope that all this makes also > >> > >> clear the difference between this view and > >> that of computational > >> psychologies (which in general are profoundly > >> and explicitly dualist and > >> not dialectic). > >> > >> Back to perezhivanie, I'm not > >> obviously trying to deny the > >> > >> influence > >> > >> of Spinoza on Vygotsky's thinking > >> (this is explicit in Vygotsky's > >> > >> writings, especially in "The > >> teaching about emotions", in the > >> > >> Vol.6 of > >> > >> the Collected Works). But I have > >> doubts that Vygotsky's > >> > >> introduction > >> > >> of the concept of perezhivanie is > >> to be regarded primarily as a > >> > >> movement towards monism (from a > >> previous cartesian dualism), and > >> > >> that > >> > >> this movement questions the > >> concept of cultural mediation. > >> > >> Instead, > >> > >> and I think that this is in line > >> with some of Gonzalez-Rey > >> > >> observations in his paper, my > >> impression is that the > >> > >> introduction of > >> > >> the concept of perezhivanie > >> responds more to a movement (a > >> > >> further > >> > >> step) towards holism (something > >> that, in my understanding, can > >> > >> also be > >> > >> found in Spinoza). Thus, I think > >> that the word meaning is still > >> > >> the > >> > >> unit of analysis in the last > >> Vygotsky -and therefore, the idea of > >> > >> cultural mediation is still > >> crucial (in fact, in The problem of > >> > >> the > >> > >> environment, he connects the > >> concept of perezhivanie, which has > >> > >> just > >> > >> introduced, to the development of > >> word meaning [p.345-346, also > >> > >> cited > >> > >> in my paper]). However, in my > >> view, in the last Vygotsky the > >> > >> focus is > >> > >> not anymore primarily on the > >> word-meaning as formed for things > >> > >> (or > >> > >> collections of things, as in the > >> ontogenetic research with > >> > >> Sakharov), but the focus is now in the > >> formation of meaning for holistic > >> situations. > >> > >> Best regards, > >> > >> Marc. > >> > >> 2017-01-03 19:16 GMT+01:00 > >> Alfredo Jornet Gil< > >> > >> a.j.gil@iped.uio.no > >> > > >> >> >: > >> > >> Hi Marc, all, > >> > >> thanks for joining and for > >> your interesting work, which I > >> > >> follow > >> > >> since I became aware of it. I > >> appreciate the way in your > >> > >> paper you > >> > >> show careful and honest > >> attention to the texts of the authors > >> > >> involved, but perhaps most of > >> all I appreciate that the > >> > >> paper makes > >> > >> the transformational > >> dimension related to struggle and change > >> > >> salient, a dimension all > >> papers deemed central to > >> > >> perezhivanie. And I > >> > >> have learned more about > >> Vasilyuk by reading your paper. But > >> > >> I also > >> > >> see that we have approached > >> the question of perezhivanie > >> > >> differently > >> > >> and I think that addressing > >> the questions that you raise > >> > >> concerning > >> > >> our article may be a good way > >> to both respond and discuss > >> > >> your paper. > >> > >> I am aware that our use of > >> the term monism may be > >> > >> problematic to > >> > >> some, and N. Veresov, who has > >> recently written about this > >> > >> (see > >> > >> attached article), warns > >> against the dangers of simply > >> > >> moving from > >> > >> dualism into an > >> undifferentiating monism that relativizes > >> > >> everything, > >> > >> making development > >> un-studiable. This seems to be the way in > >> > >> which > >> > >> you have understood our > >> argument, and of course this is not > >> > >> what we are or want to be doing. > >> > >> Probably many will think that > >> *dialectical materialism* > >> > >> rather than > >> > >> monism is the proper term, > >> and I could agree with them; we > >> > >> do in fact > >> > >> use dialectical materialism > >> there and elsewhere. Yet, we > >> > >> wanted to > >> > >> emphasise the Spinozist > >> influence (an influence that also > >> > >> runs > >> > >> through Marx) and so we found > >> it appropriate to use the term > >> > >> monism, > >> > >> a term that Vygotsky uses > >> before arguing that Spinoza > >> > >> "develops an essentially materialistic view" > >> > >> (Collected Works, Vol. 6, p. > >> 124). For us, the aim is > >> > >> working out > >> > >> ways to empirically examine > >> and formulate problems in ways > >> > >> that do > >> > >> not reify a mind-body dualism. > >> > >> Although overcoming dualism > >> is foundational to the CHAT > >> > >> paradigm, I > >> > >> would however not say that > >> Vygotsky did get to solve all of > >> > >> the > >> > >> problems that Cartesian > >> dualism had created for psychology, > >> > >> even > >> > >> though he recognised those > >> problems brilliantly as early as > >> > >> in the > >> > >> "Crisis". It should suffice > >> to cite Vygotsky's own remarks, > >> > >> which we quote in the paper (and which A.N. > >> > >> Leont'ev mentions in the > >> introduction to the collected > >> > >> works), where > >> > >> Vygotsky explicitly critiques > >> some of his own prior ideas > >> > >> for failing > >> > >> to overcome dualism. We agree > >> with those who, like F. G. > >> > >> Rey, see > >> > >> Vygotsky's project as a > >> developing rather than as a > >> > >> finalised one. > >> > >> The fact is that Vygotsky was > >> building a theory on the unity > >> > >> of the > >> > >> affect and the intellect that > >> was to be grounded on Spinoza, > >> > >> and what > >> > >> we try to do is to explore > >> how perezhivanie, as a concept > >> > >> being > >> > >> developed during the same > >> period (but not finalised or > >> > >> totally > >> > >> settled!), could be seen from > >> the perspective of the > >> > >> Spinozist Vygotsky. > >> > >> As you note, in our article > >> we argue that, if one takes the > >> > >> Spinozist > >> > >> one-substance approach, > >> classical concepts used in > >> > >> non-classical > >> > >> psychology, at least in the > >> way they are commonly used in > >> > >> the current > >> > >> literature, should be > >> revised. One such concept is > >> > >> mediation. And I > >> > >> personally do not have much > >> of a problem when mediation is > >> > >> used to > >> > >> denote the fundamental fact > >> that every thing exists always > >> > >> through > >> > >> *another*, never in and of > >> itself. But I do think that it is > >> > >> problematic to identify > >> MEDIATORS, such as "a meaning", as a > >> > >> means to > >> > >> account for or explain > >> developmental processes and learning > >> > >> events, > >> > >> precisely because it is > >> there, at least in my view, that > >> > >> dualism creeps in. > >> > >> For example, I find it > >> paradoxical that you are concerned > >> > >> that our > >> > >> monist approach risks turning > >> perezhivanie into a useless > >> > >> category > >> > >> because it may be used to > >> explain everything and nothing, > >> > >> and yet you > >> > >> do not seem to have a problem > >> using the term mediation to > >> > >> account for > >> > >> the transformation of > >> perezhivanie without clearly > >> > >> elaborating on how > >> > >> mediation does change > >> anything or what it looks like as a > >> > >> real > >> > >> process. How is it different > >> saying that a perezhivanie > >> > >> mediates the > >> > >> experiencing-as-struggle from > >> simply saying that it > >> > >> "affects" or > >> > >> "determines" it? Indeed, if > >> perezhivanie mediates > >> > >> experiencing-as-struggle, > >> does not experiencing-as-struglgle > >> > >> too > >> > >> mediate perezhivanie? And do > >> not both may be said to mediate > >> > >> development, or development mediate them? Is > >> not this explaining everything > >> and nothing? > >> > >> I do believe you can argue > >> that there is a difference between > >> > >> mediation and classical > >> psychology's cause-effect relations, > >> > >> but to > >> > >> show this you need to dig > >> into the dialectical underpinnings > >> > >> of the > >> > >> theory. In your paper, you > >> offer a nice analysis of a lovely > >> > >> case of > >> > >> a teacher who, in dealing > >> with a challenge with one of her > >> > >> students, > >> > >> changes her perezhivanie. I > >> think you can rightly argue that > >> > >> there is > >> > >> a semiotic transformation, > >> and I fully support your > >> > >> statement that by > >> > >> studying discourse we can > >> empirically approach questions of > >> > >> psychological development. > >> The contradictions you show as > >> > >> being > >> > >> involved and resolved > >> resonate really well with what I > >> > >> experience as > >> > >> a parent or as a teacher in > >> the classroom. Yet, without > >> > >> unpacking > >> > >> what this "mediation" taking > >> place between one perezhivanie > >> > >> and the > >> > >> next one means as a concrete > >> and real, the same analysis > >> > >> could be done taking an information processing > >> approach: > >> > >> there is an situation that is > >> processed (represented?) in > >> > >> one way, > >> > >> which then leads to a > >> (cognitive) dissonance, and then there > >> > >> is a > >> > >> cognitive resolution by means > >> of which the situation is > >> > >> presented > >> > >> differently in consciousness > >> (indeed, when seen in this way, > >> > >> the term > >> > >> perezhivanie and the term > >> "representation" become almost > >> > >> indistinguishable). How is > >> mediation, as an analytical > >> > >> concept, > >> > >> helping here? And most > >> importantly to the question of > >> > >> perezhivanie, > >> > >> how is this analysis going to > >> show the internal connection > >> > >> between > >> > >> intellect and affect that > >> Vygotsky formulates as > >> > >> constitutive of the notion of perezhivanie? > >> > >> I believe that the key lies > >> in understanding what Vygotsky > >> > >> means when > >> > >> he says that perezhivanie is > >> a unit of analysis. I will not > >> > >> repeat > >> > >> here what already is written > >> in at least a couple of the > >> > >> articles in > >> > >> the special issue (Blunden, > >> ours), that is the difference > >> > >> between > >> > >> analysis by elements and unit > >> analysis (Vygotsky 1987). A > >> > >> unit > >> > >> analysis approach is > >> consistent with Spinoza, for whom > >> > >> cause-effect > >> > >> explanations were not > >> adequate, requiring instead an > >> > >> understanding of > >> > >> self-development, > >> perezhivanie as a kernel cell for the > >> > >> development > >> > >> of personality. And I think > >> you may be after this in your > >> > >> article in > > > > > From ablunden@mira.net Fri Jan 13 01:34:56 2017 From: ablunden@mira.net (Andy Blunden) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2017 20:34:56 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Fate of a Man Message-ID: "Fate of a Man" is a 1959 Soviet film adaptation of the novel by Mikhail Sholokhov. It is 97 minutes and you can watch the full movie on line, as I just did ... my eyes have just cleared enough to be able to send this message. What about it if people who have contributed to this discussion on /perezhivanie /could watch the movie and tell us if the movie illustrates some of the ideas they have about the meaning of /perezhi//vanie/? It certainly tells of some experiences that Russians have undergone. andy -- ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making From bferholt@gmail.com Fri Jan 13 07:21:05 2017 From: bferholt@gmail.com (Beth Ferholt) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2017 10:21:05 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Fate of a Man In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thank you for taking us to a shared example. I think that having a shared example, and maybe one in art not in life, is key for discussions on this topic to work -- which is so interesting! I will see it as soon as possible: http://sovietmoviesonline.com/en/drama/36-sudba-cheloveka.html is where I see it in English, but did you see one with subtitles? Thanks, Beth On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 4:34 AM, Andy Blunden wrote: > "Fate of a Man" is a 1959 Soviet film adaptation of the novel by Mikhail > Sholokhov. It is 97 minutes and you can watch the full movie on line, as I > just did ... my eyes have just cleared enough to be able to send this > message. > > What about it if people who have contributed to this discussion on > /perezhivanie /could watch the movie and tell us if the movie illustrates > some of the ideas they have about the meaning of /perezhi//vanie/? It > certainly tells of some experiences that Russians have undergone. > > andy > > > -- > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Andy Blunden > http://home.mira.net/~andy > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > -- Beth Ferholt Assistant Professor Department of Early Childhood and Art Education Brooklyn College, City University of New York 2900 Bedford Avenue Brooklyn, NY 11210-2889 Email: bferholt@brooklyn.cuny.edu Phone: (718) 951-5205 Fax: (718) 951-4816 From ulvi.icil@gmail.com Fri Jan 13 07:29:24 2017 From: ulvi.icil@gmail.com (=?UTF-8?B?VWx2aSDEsMOnaWw=?=) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2017 17:29:24 +0200 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Fate of a Man In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: At the bottom of the link on that page below after donate ad etc there is a remark about the film with subtitles. Ulvi 13 Oca 2017 18:24 tarihinde "Beth Ferholt" yazd?: > Thank you for taking us to a shared example. I think that having a shared > example, and maybe one in art not in life, is key for discussions on this > topic to work -- which is so interesting! I will see it as soon as > possible: http://sovietmoviesonline.com/en/drama/36-sudba-cheloveka.html > is > where I see it in English, but did you see one with subtitles? Thanks, Beth > > On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 4:34 AM, Andy Blunden wrote: > > > "Fate of a Man" is a 1959 Soviet film adaptation of the novel by Mikhail > > Sholokhov. It is 97 minutes and you can watch the full movie on line, as > I > > just did ... my eyes have just cleared enough to be able to send this > > message. > > > > What about it if people who have contributed to this discussion on > > /perezhivanie /could watch the movie and tell us if the movie illustrates > > some of the ideas they have about the meaning of /perezhi//vanie/? It > > certainly tells of some experiences that Russians have undergone. > > > > andy > > > > > > -- > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > Andy Blunden > > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > > > > > -- > Beth Ferholt > Assistant Professor > Department of Early Childhood and Art Education > Brooklyn College, City University of New York > 2900 Bedford Avenue > Brooklyn, NY 11210-2889 > > Email: bferholt@brooklyn.cuny.edu > Phone: (718) 951-5205 > Fax: (718) 951-4816 > From bferholt@gmail.com Fri Jan 13 07:35:47 2017 From: bferholt@gmail.com (Beth Ferholt) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2017 10:35:47 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Fate of a Man In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thanks! Beth On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 10:29 AM, Ulvi ??il wrote: > At the bottom of the link on that page below after donate ad etc there is a > remark about the film with subtitles. > > Ulvi > > 13 Oca 2017 18:24 tarihinde "Beth Ferholt" yazd?: > > > Thank you for taking us to a shared example. I think that having a > shared > > example, and maybe one in art not in life, is key for discussions on this > > topic to work -- which is so interesting! I will see it as soon as > > possible: http://sovietmoviesonline.com/en/drama/36-sudba-cheloveka.html > > is > > where I see it in English, but did you see one with subtitles? Thanks, > Beth > > > > On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 4:34 AM, Andy Blunden wrote: > > > > > "Fate of a Man" is a 1959 Soviet film adaptation of the novel by > Mikhail > > > Sholokhov. It is 97 minutes and you can watch the full movie on line, > as > > I > > > just did ... my eyes have just cleared enough to be able to send this > > > message. > > > > > > What about it if people who have contributed to this discussion on > > > /perezhivanie /could watch the movie and tell us if the movie > illustrates > > > some of the ideas they have about the meaning of /perezhi//vanie/? It > > > certainly tells of some experiences that Russians have undergone. > > > > > > andy > > > > > > > > > -- > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > Andy Blunden > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Beth Ferholt > > Assistant Professor > > Department of Early Childhood and Art Education > > Brooklyn College, City University of New York > > 2900 Bedford Avenue > > Brooklyn, NY 11210-2889 > > > > Email: bferholt@brooklyn.cuny.edu > > Phone: (718) 951-5205 > > Fax: (718) 951-4816 > > > -- Beth Ferholt Assistant Professor Department of Early Childhood and Art Education Brooklyn College, City University of New York 2900 Bedford Avenue Brooklyn, NY 11210-2889 Email: bferholt@brooklyn.cuny.edu Phone: (718) 951-5205 Fax: (718) 951-4816 From lpscholar2@gmail.com Fri Jan 13 10:29:08 2017 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2017 10:29:08 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! In-Reply-To: <1484256089562.1752@iped.uio.no> References: <1484256089562.1752@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <58791c9d.4a35630a.1111d.ed74@mx.google.com> Alfredo, Marc, and Fernando Thanks for sharing this 3 way conversation. I want to highlight another word meaning that is in play (imagination) as expressed in Fernando?s article?: The Concept of Perazhivanie in the Psychology of art. Fernando says Vygotsky differentiated emotion from perezhivanie and offers this quotation from Vygotsky?: By its nature, artistic ?perezhivanie? remains incomprehensible AND CLOSED to the subject in its COURSE and ESSENCE. We never know why we like or dislike a work of art. Everything we LATER invent to explain its influence is thought to be a complete RATIONALIZATION of unconscious processes. The very essence of perezhivanie remains A MYSTERY to us. Fernando further adds that one of the strong points RAISED (LP -highlighted or picked out or comprehended) by Vygotsky in (The Psychology of Art) was to recognize the value of emotions AS HUMAN REALITY, which OVERCAME the logical and intellectual REDUCTIONISM that has characterized psychology until today. Fernando then offers this quotation to prove this Strong position?: ... all our fantastic (and unreal) perezhivaniya, take place on a completely REAL emotional basis. We see, therefore that emotion and imagination are NOT two separate processes; on the contrary, they are the SAME PROCESS. We can rightly can regard A FANTASY AS the central expression of an emotional reaction. Fernando is circling around what he sees as a STRONG point here. Marc views it as a particular type of perezhivanie. I question if this fantasy ?element? or this imaginal ?element actually PERvades all the 4 types of perezhivanie. However, i would also make distinct that fantasy meaning ?unreal? is not the same as ?imaginal? that is ?real?. I would therefore re-place the word (fantasy) with (imaginal) in Vygotsky?s quote above. A complex topic, butmy turn is up. Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Alfredo Jornet Gil Sent: January 12, 2017 1:22 PM To: Andy Blunden; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! Marc, at the beginning of the discussion you raised the following question: >From Marc: <> I am here forwarding Fernando G. Rey's response to your question concerning sense and meaning. I have not edited any of his notes but have copied and pasted them as he wrote them. Fernando is positively recovering from a medical intervention, but has been kind enough to follow up the discussion and is willing to take up specific questions if these rise. >From Fernando: <> ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil Sent: 12 January 2017 21:41 To: Andy Blunden; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! David, I admire much of what you write in your first three examples in your prior post. But I am reacting to your latter post on Chess. It is the second or third time that you bring the CHESS example to bear in xmca, and I always feel uneasy about it. I see the point that there are different developmental stages and that these can be best categorised according to the type of generalisation that the child can engage into. Obviously, treating a piece of marble "as if" it was a piece in the game of chess involves a different type of generalization than treating the same piece of marble as if it was a piece in the game of "let's put the black pieces in black squares and white pieces in white squares". But I do not think that my 20 months daughter will put black pieces on black squares in any systematic manner simply because she can PERCEIVE and act upon the difference between black and white; and indeed I do not think that my 7 years old first daughter will do any of these things with the chess pieces, considering she has never learned to play chess. Indeed, why would any child do that? I do strongly believe that to get any of my daughters to arrange the pieces by color, there would have first to be a TEACHING/LEARNING situation, which itself would involve establishing a semantic field, a field that perhaps out of my ignorance I would call semiotic (sign). In my view, in both cases there are rules and therefore imagination, if we listen to Vygotsky's writings on play, and perhaps, as Vygotsky notes, there may be a difference in the "moral attitude", but I would be cautious by gross divisions between perceptual and semantic structures. Yes,there are different levels, types, or stages in the way semantic fields are organised, and that playing the chess pieces as pieces of the CHESS game involves a qualitative leap compared to playing them as pieces in the game of putting them together by shape or color; but there is a game going on in both cases, and therefore a perceptual as much as a semiotic structure being at play. These are different semiotic contexts, as you say at the end of your e-mail, but I do think that your assertion that in playing with the chess pieces by color "the structure would be visual but not semiotic" can be problematic and may lead to what I consider an incorrect view of the relation between higher and lower functions in development. Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of David Kellogg Sent: 11 January 2017 04:50 To: Andy Blunden; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! Vygotsky's got a terrific metaphor for how "perezhivanie" is internalized: it is like internalizing the rules of the game of chess. The child who doesn't know how to play chess simply plays WITH the pieces instead of playing them. She or he might try to create a piece-board structure by putting black pieces on black squares and white pieces on white squares, but the structure is a visual one and not a semiotic one; it's about color and not about meaning. The child who DOES know how to play chess plays the pieces instead of playing with them. She or he too creates "structures" but this time they are semiotic ones: a black knight in a completely different column and a completely different row, can capture a white pawn. The board is the same and so are the kids; the children may have very similar biological and very similar cultural endowments, but they do not have the same semiotic context at all. Hence different perezhivanie and different personalities. David Kellogg Macquarie University On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 11:54 AM, Andy Blunden wrote: > How to understand the personality? ... i.e., the *development* of the > personality? > > The subject's inheritance, and The subject's experiences (/perezhivaniya/) > > ... just think of how you'd go about writing a good biography or > Bildungsroman. > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Andy Blunden > http://home.mira.net/~andy > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > On 11/01/2017 10:24 AM, David Kellogg wrote: > >> Andy: >> >> A good paradox! Word meaning is a unit, but the spoken word itself is >> just an element--a thing. We can see that this is, on the face of it, >> impossible: within a single holistic analysis, an element can be a part of >> a unit, but a unit can never be a part of an element. So what you are >> referring to when you say that the word is a thing is the "sonic" or >> "phasal" quality of the word: its "acoustic" properties, its "phonetics". >> >> But not its phonology. The word that Vygotsky uses for "phoneme" refers >> to the 1929 work of the Prague Circle, originally the Moscow Circle. He is >> a LITTLE coy about this, because the founders, Jakobson and Trubetskoy, >> were not very popular with the authorities and Vygotsky already had plenty >> of heterodox acquaintances to worry about. Nevertheless, whenever Vygotsky >> says "phoneme", we know he really means what Jakobson and Trubetskoy called >> "morphophonemes". We know this because the examples he actually >> gives--Russian case endings--are morpho-phonemes and not simply phonemes: >> so for example in English the sound /s/ is a simple phoneme when I say the >> word "self" but if I say "Andy's" the sound /s/ is a morpho-phoneme: a >> difference in sounding that makes a difference in meaning. The system (that >> is, the paradigmatic menu) of these differences in soundings are what the >> Moscow and Prague Circles called "phonology" (as OPPOSED to phonetics), and >> this is the kind of "phoneme" that Vygotsky is really talking about. >> >> Still, you can see that it is not what he is talking about when he says >> word meaning, because these units are still nowhere near big enough to >> describe the kinds of changes which must occur when verbal thinking >> develops. I feel the same way about a lot of the examples offered of >> "perezhivanie", including Marc's. If MacDuff's grief or Carla's epiphany >> about the misbehavior of her kids being due to "outside influences" really >> is the unit of personality and experience that Vygotsky wants us to use >> when we analyse the ontogenesis of personality, then it is no more >> appropriate than using the morpho-phoneme to analyse the whole of verbal >> thinking. Just as evolution (of species) requires very different units from >> history (of classes), development, whether we are talking about verbal >> thinking or the personality as a whole, is going to require very different >> units from learning, whether we are talking about MacDuff or Carla. The >> units must be able to develop; that is, the relationship of the elements >> within them must be susceptible to many changes over time. >> >> Let me give three examples of how this happens in different >> "perezhivanie". They are not mine; they are Vygotsky's, and they are all >> from the Pedological Lectures. >> >> First, the Crisis at One. Neither the biological nor the social endowment >> of the child greatly changes in the acquisition of speech; nevertheless, >> the relationship between the personality and the environment, of which both >> personality moments and environmental ones are constituent elements, is >> entirely transformed. Here we are not talking about phonemes, or even >> morpho-phonemes: we are talking about "wordings"--whole utterances. In >> Melbourne I presented some data that demonstrated this beautifully--a >> child's first word is actually an attempt to imitate a whole conversation. >> >> Second, the Crisis at Three. Vygotsky spends a lot of time discussing the >> "Seven Stars"--the symptoms of the "Terrible Twos" and "Threenagehood" >> noted by harried parents everywhere. But by the end of his analysis it's >> clear that what really happens is a new relationship between wish and will: >> in extreme cases, the child actually wishes for one thing (e.g. compromise) >> and wills the opposite (the everlasting "No!"). Again, neither the >> personality moments as such nor the environmental ones change, but there is >> a separation and a sorting which allows the subordination of wish to will >> that we see in play. This isn't the kind of "aha" moment that Marc is >> offering us at all: Vygotsky actually calls it the "antipode" of future >> will, because instead of enabling will it actually paralyzes it. But it is >> indubitably a key moment in the development of the relation of personality >> to environmental moments that we see in "perizhivanie". >> >> Thirdly, the Crisis at Seven. I think Gonzalez Rey makes a total hash of >> this, and I get very cross when I read his article. It is not true that the >> essence of perizhivanie remained a mystery to Vygotsky simply because he no >> longer subscribes to "the aesthetic reaction" and "catharsis" and other >> notions that he toyed with in Psych of Art (he's no longer doing >> experiments on changes in breathing rate when people read the works of >> Bunin either!). It might be true that he never offered a system of facts >> and methodological procedures for perezivanie, but that was only because >> one already existed, for example in the work of Wallon and Stern and >> others. It is demonstrably not true that when Vygotsky says that the speech >> environment of those around him does not change when the child learns to >> talk at one, he is not "profoundly contradictory with the concept of >> sense": when you read the quotation in context, it is very clear that what >> he is referring to are the kinds of absolute indicators used by Zalkind: >> how often the parents read the newspapers, the dialect they speak, and >> their educational background. These do not change, and if the child wants >> to make sense, these are the factors the child will have to relate to. >> >> Vygotsky gives the example of a child who is severely retarded. The child >> wants to play with other children and is rejected. The child walks down the >> street and the other children follow, laughing. The child is shrieked at, >> insulted, but as soon as the humiliation stops, the child is perfectly >> happy with himself. Vygotsky points out that the child is not able to >> "co-generalize" the "perizhivanie" of the humiliations: each is unpleasant, >> but they are entirely separate and cannot be connected with any internal >> sense of inferiority. A normal child, however, is able to "internalize" >> these humiliations and consequently develops a sense of inferiority. We can >> see that what has happened is the insertion of what Vygotsky calls an >> "intellectual" moment: an inner layer, which is what distinguishes later >> Chaplin movies from earlier ones (again, Vygotsky's example, not mine!) and >> what brings about the "loss of directness and naivete" that we see in >> pre-schoolers. >> >> I think that the reason people find "perizhivanie" so hard to work with >> is the same reason that they find "word meaning" hard to work with: it >> develops. The feeling of drinking milk as the infant drinks it is >> perizhivanie, and the thought of being humiliated when you are mulling it >> over and contemplating revenge is also perizhivanie, and only a profound >> analysis which includes ontogenetic development and not just learning will >> show the inner link between them. It's for that reason that I think that >> "activity" is not a useful unit of analysis and I am much more inclined to >> use your word "project", so long as it can include what Vygotsky calls >> "inner activeness". >> >> Vygotsky says: >> >> >> ????? ? ?????????, ?????????? ? ?. ?., ? ???? ???? ? ?????????? >> ???????????, ??? ?????????? ???????????? ??????????????? ????????? >> ??????????????? ?? ??????? ? ??????? ?????????????. ??? ??? ????? ????? >> ?????????? ?????????? ? ???????? ???????? ??????????? ? ???, ???, ? ?? >> ????? ??? ? ?????????? ???????? ??? ?????????? ???????????? ???????????? >> ???????????????? ????? ? ?????????, ??????? ???????????, ? ???????? >> ???????? ?? ????? ???????????? ?????????????? ???????????, ???????????? >> ??????????? ?????????? ?????????? ?? ????????? ? ??????? ????????????. ??? >> ??? ???????, ??????? ????? ??????????, ? ?? ????? ????? ?? ?????? ??? ????? >> ???-??????, ???, ? ???????? ????????? ?????????????? ??????? ? ?????????? >> ????????????. >> >> When I think, remember, etc. I am dealing withinner activeness; this >> psychological process of inner activity is not directly linked to any >> external activity. The new form of inner activeness in the School Age >> consists of this: that while during the preschool years these inner >> activities demonstrated an immediate link with action, with external >> activeness, in the school years we have a relative autonomy which emerges, >> inner activeness which is relatively independent of external activities. >> Here is already a child who can think, at the same time when he is doing or >> seeing something, one in whom has emerged a differentiation of inner and >> outer activities. >> >> David Kellogg >> Macquarie University >> >> >> >> On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 10:07 AM, Andy Blunden > ablunden@mira.net>> wrote: >> >> David: "Are words really units?" >> >> Well, firstly, "units" is a *relative* term. That is, >> the question is: are words units of something, some >> complex process subject to analysis. And which? >> >> Secondly, according to Vygotsky, "no." The concept >> Vygotsky proposes as a unit is "word meaning" which he >> says is a unity of sound and meaning. The sound is an >> artefact, which, detached from its meaningful >> utterance in a transactional context is just a thing, >> viz., a word. Whereas "word meaning" is an >> arrtefact-mediated action, a unit of human social >> activity. >> >> It is true that words can be countable or mass >> according to context, but I wasn't talking about words >> was I? I was talking about word meaning. >> >> Andy >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------ >> Andy Blunden >> http://home.mira.net/~andy >> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making >> > decision-making> >> >> On 8/01/2017 7:59 AM, David Kellogg wrote: >> >> Are words really units? When we look at their >> ideational meaning (that is, >> their logical and experiential content--their >> capacity for representing and >> linking together human experiences) they seem to >> fall into two very >> different categories: lexical words like >> "perezhivanie" or "sense" or >> "personality" of "individual" and grammatical >> words like "of", or "might", >> or "is". The lexical words seem to behave like >> units--they are bounded, >> discrete, and, as Andy would say, "countable" (the >> problem is that almost >> all nouns are both countable and uncountable >> depending on the context you >> put them in, so this distinction is really not as >> essential as Andy seems >> to assume). But the more grammatical words seem to >> be elements of some >> larger unit, which we can call wording. >> >> Veresov and Fleer come up against this problem >> with "edintsvo" and >> "edintsa". Of course, as they say, the two words >> are distinct. But this >> doesn't necessarily mean that the former always >> corresponds to "unity" in >> English and the latter is always "unit". If you >> look at the paragraph they >> translate on 330, you can see that Vygotsky starts >> with an idea that is >> quite "synoptic" and is well expressed by "unit". >> But in the last sentence >> there is a sense that "perezhivanie" is a >> meta-stable unit--one that >> remains self-similar only through a process of >> thorough change, like a >> bicycle whose every part is replaced--and in >> English is it is better to >> express this idea with "unity". The problem is >> that the differences between >> "edintsvo" and "edintsva" in Russian is a matter >> of gender (I think) and >> not simply abstractness, and as a result the >> English version, which cannot >> use the resource of gender,has to rely on >> abstractness, so the words >> "unity" and "unit" are somewhat more distinct and >> less linked than >> "edintsvo" and "edintsva". >> >> There are other problems that are similar. When >> Gonzalez Rey uses the word >> "final moment" to refer to the final period of >> Vygotsky's thinking, he >> leaves the anglophone reader the impression that >> he is referring to >> Vygotsky's deathbed thoughts. On the other hand, >> when Veresov and Fleer use >> "factor" to translate the same Russian word that >> Gonzalez Rey is using, >> they are giving us something more quantitative >> than Vygotsky intended, and >> their translation of "dalee nerazloshim'im >> chastyami etava edinstva" >> into "vital and further indivisible part of the >> whole" is quite opaque in >> English (notice that here Veresov and Fleer use >> "whole" to translate >> "edinstva" rather than "unit"!) At some point you >> have to accept that you >> can change Russian words into English words as if >> you were exchanging >> rubles for dollars, but you still won't be able to >> buy a samovar at Walmart. >> >> David Kellogg >> Macquarie University >> >> >> >> On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 5:21 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >> > >> wrote: >> >> Larry, all, >> >> our arguments in the 2014 address a science >> education literature in which >> the constructivist perspective is the leading >> perspective; We note that the >> assertion that people learn from experience is >> everywhere taken for granted >> but nowhere accounted for. We resort to >> pragmatist and phenomenological >> literature along with Vygotsky's insights to >> point out the need to account >> for learning as something that cannot be the >> result of an individual's >> construction; in experience there is always >> something in excess of what you >> intended, and this is a basic feature of >> doing, of performing. I take that >> to be your "trans" in the trans/zhivanie word, >> Larry, which already is >> denoted in the word PERezhivanie. >> >> But I do not wish to move our discussion too >> far away from Marc's paper >> and the Perezhivanie special issue. We also >> risk disengaging many that have >> not have the privilege we've had to have the >> time to read so many articles >> in just few days into the new year. I think we >> are a point in the >> discussion where a pretty clear point of >> agreement/disagreement, and >> therefore of possibility for growth, has been >> reached with regard to the >> view of perezhivanie as "an experience" and as >> the "working over it". I >> think that to allow as many as possible to >> follow, and hopefully also >> engage, I think it will be helpful to bring >> the diverse perspectives and >> theoretical accounts to matter in accounting >> for some actual material. And >> there are a number of cases described in the >> articles, including Marc's >> case of a teacher, as well as everyday facts, >> such as those brought by >> Beth, and in Beth's article... >> >> I take the task for myself too, but Saturday >> morning need to attend to >> other things! >> A >> >> >> >> ________________________________________ >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> >> > > >> on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com >> >> > > >> Sent: 07 January 2017 18:26 >> To: Andy Blunden; Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended >> Mind, Culture, Activity; >> Larry Purss >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and >> Perezhivanie! >> >> Andy, Peter, i hope the intention to move >> beyond politeness to struggle >> with this topic materializes. >> In this vein i want to introduce exploration >> of the 'excess' of actual >> over intended meaning as he sketched his >> introduction to 'experience'. >> >> Citing Dewey, Alfredo says that this excess of >> actual learning over >> intended learning INCLUDES what Dewey refers >> to as 'attitudes' and these >> 'attitudes' are FUNDAMENTALLY what count in >> the future. >> Alfredo and Roth then add this summary >> statement : >> >> There is therefore, a need to theorize >> experience in terms that do not >> assume control and rationality as the sine qua >> non of learning. It also >> implies a need to develop analytical accounts >> that retain the 'uncertainty' >> that is an 'integral part' of human experience. >> >> Where are Alfredo and Roth leading us with >> this sketch of experience? To >> highlight 'attitudes' that occur in the excess >> of actual over intended >> learning? The word 'attitudes' generates >> images of (atmosphere) and (moods) >> that 'flow' like cascading waterfalls that can >> be imaged as (force) or as >> (receptive). Attitudes that flow to places >> where they are received within a >> certain attitude of care and concern. Not as >> forceful an image as moving >> only with control and rationality. Describing >> 'weaker' thought that >> remains uncertain but that also opens us to >> the other's peril and plight. >> Possibly a post-analytic motion that exceeds >> the intended by living-through >> the actual that develops 'attitudes' that are >> fundamentally what count for >> the future. >> >> >> Sent from my Windows 10 phone >> >> From: Andy Blunden >> Sent: January 7, 2017 5:00 AM >> To: Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, >> Activity >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and >> Perezhivanie! >> >> OK Peter, what you say is all very true I am >> sure, but it >> entails conflating activity and action (as >> mass nouns) and >> context and mediation, and makes the required >> distinction >> much like one could find multiple meanings for >> the word >> "and" by listing the different phrases and >> clauses which can >> be linked by "and." >> >> Andy >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------ >> Andy Blunden >> http://home.mira.net/~andy >> >> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decisi >> on-making >> > decision-making> >> >> On 7/01/2017 11:42 PM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: >> >> Let me try to illustrate. >> >> Reading as mediated action: The >> cultural-historical >> context of reading mediates how one's >> attention and >> response are channeled in socially >> constructed ways. So, >> in one setting, say at home or reading in >> the company of >> friends, a novel might bring a reader to >> tears, or invite >> readers to share personal stories that >> parallel those of >> the plot lines, or laugh out loud. But >> another setting, a >> formal school or university class, would >> have historical >> values and practices that mute emotional >> and personal >> responses, and promote a more sober, >> analytic way of >> reading and talking that fits with >> specific historical >> critical conventions and genres, and >> discourages others. >> >> Reading as mediating action: The act of >> reading can be >> transformational. In reading about an >> talking about a >> character's actions, a reader might >> reconsider a value >> system, become more sympathetic to real >> people who >> resemble oppressed characters, etc. In >> other words, >> reading a text may serve a mediational >> process in which >> textual ideas and exemplars enable a >> reader to think >> differently. >> >> *From:*Andy Blunden >> [mailto:ablunden@mira.net >> ] >> *Sent:* Saturday, January 7, 2017 6:28 AM >> *To:* Peter Smagorinsky > >; eXtended Mind, >> Culture, Activity > > >> *Subject:* Re: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year >> and Perezhivanie! >> >> Can you explain in a paragraph or two,. >> Peter, rather than >> asking us all to read 10,000 words to >> extract an answer? >> >> Andy >> >> ------------------------------ >> ------------------------------ >> >> Andy Blunden >> http://home.mira.net/~andy >> >> >> http://www.brill.com/products/ >> book/origins-collective-decision-making >> > decision-making> >> >> >> On 7/01/2017 11:23 PM, Peter Smagorinsky >> wrote: >> >> Andy and others, I tried to work out >> the mediated/mediating question >> >> in the area of reading....see if this helps. >> >> Smagorinsky, P., & O'Donnell-Allen, >> C. (1998). Reading as mediated >> >> and mediating action: Composing meaning for >> literature through multimedia >> interpretive texts. Reading Research >> Quarterly, 33, 198-226. Available >> athttp://www.petersmagorinsky.net/About/PDF/RRQ/RRQ1998.pdf >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >> From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> >> > .ucsd.edu >> > >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ >> >> >> mailman.ucsd.edu ] On >> Behalf Of Andy Blunden >> >> Sent: Friday, January 6, 2017 7:12 PM >> >> To:xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu >> >> > > >> >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year >> and Perezhivanie! >> >> I have never understood this supposed >> distinction, Alfredo, between >> >> "mediated activity" and "mediating activity" >> given that all activity is >> mediated and all activity mediates. >> >> Also, could you spell out what you >> mean by the "tension" >> >> between perezhivanie as meaning and >> perezhivanie as struggle. >> >> Andy >> >> ------------------------------ >> ------------------------------ >> >> Andy Blunden >> >> http://home.mira.net/~andy >> >> >> >> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective- >> >> >> decision-making >> >> On 5/01/2017 6:26 PM, Alfredo Jornet >> Gil wrote: >> >> Thanks Marc for your careful >> response. >> >> I am familiar to Vygotsky's >> notion of cultural mediation and I >> >> am aware and acknowledge that it was >> elaborated as a means to overcome >> dualism, and that it is not analog to a >> computational approach. >> >> When I brought the computing >> analogy, I did so with regard not >> >> to the concept of cultural mediation in >> general, but to the way it can be >> (and is) deployed analytically. I react to >> what it seems to me a dichotomy >> between a "meaning" as something that is >> static (thereby a form of >> "representation" or reflection of the relation >> with the environment instead >> of?refraction)?? and the >> experiencing-as-struggling, which is described >> as?transformation or change. If so, mediation >> here would seem to be part of >> a methodological device that first dissects "a >> type of meaning" from "a >> type of activity" (or a given state from the >> process that changes that >> state), and then unites it by adding the term >> "mediation." And this may be >> my misreading, but in that (mis)reading (which >> perhaps is mostly due to the >> fact that in your empirical illustration only >> the initial and end product, >> i.e., perezhivanie, are described, but not the >> experiencing-as-struggle, >> that is, the moving between the two), >> mediation here seems to do as >> analytical concept precisely what you were >> afraid our monism was doing: >> explaining nothing. Only the end products but >> not the process of producing >> perezhivanie are revealed. This may be >> problematic if one attends to what >> Veresov argues in the paper I shared >> yesterday, where he defends the notion >> of mediation but also specifies that Vygotsky >> speaks of *mediating >> activity* (as opposed to *mediated* activity). >> That is, not mediation by >> signs as products, but mediating activity as >> the activity of producing >> signs (which again is an activity of producing >> social relations, perhaps >> what you refer as "holistic meanings"?). What >> do you think? >> >> I did not think you were trying >> to deny the influence of >> >> Spinoza, and I do not think we ever said that >> Perezhivanie was primarily a >> move from Cartesian Dualism to Monism, as you >> suggest in your post. I copy >> and paste from my prior post: "The fact is >> that Vygotsky was building a >> theory on the unity of the affect and the >> intellect that was to be grounded >> on Spinoza, and what we try to do is to >> explore how perezhivanie, as a >> concept being developed during the same period >> (but not finalised or >> totally settled!), could be seen from the >> perspective of the Spinozist >> Vygotsky." >> >> I totally believe that bringing >> the distinction between >> >> perezhivanie as meaning, and perezhivanie as >> struggle, is totally relevant, >> and Beth Ferholt's vignettes of Where the Wild >> Things Are do indeed >> illustrate this. We really need to address >> this tension, which as Beth's >> examples and as our own everyday experience >> shows, is a tension that >> matters not just to books and to theories but >> to living persons (children, >> teachers), a tension that moreover is present >> and mentioned in all the >> articles of the symposium. The papers offer >> different proposals, and I >> think is so great we have the chance to >> discuss them! I too, as you, am >> very interesting in hearing others about the >> questions you had concerning >> sense and meaning. >> >> Alfredo >> >> From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> >> > .ucsd.edu >> > >> >> > > >> > .ucsd.edu >> > >> on behalf of Marc >> >> Clara >> >> > > >> > > >> >> Sent: 04 January 2017 22:31 >> >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New >> Year and Perezhivanie! >> >> Thank you very much, Alfredo, for >> sharing this excellent paper by >> >> Veresov, and thanks also for your >> responses, which really helped >> >> me to >> >> better understand your points. My >> main doubt about your proposal >> >> was/is caused by the statement >> that the idea of cultural >> >> mediation/mediator implies a >> cartesian dualism. This shocks me >> >> because, to me, the idea of >> cultural mediation is absolutely >> >> crucial >> >> (in fact, the keystone) for the >> construction of a monist (and >> >> scientific) psychology that does >> not forget mind -that is, a >> >> cultural >> >> psychology. From your response, >> however, I realized that we may >> >> be >> >> approaching the idea of mediation >> in different ways. I talk of >> >> mediation and mediators in a >> quite restricted way. The starting >> >> point >> >> of my understanding of mediation >> is a dialectical relationship >> >> (organic, transactional) between >> the subject and the world >> >> (Vygotsky departs from the scheme >> stimulus-response, from reflexology). >> >> This relationship, that Vygotsky >> calls primitive psychological >> >> functions, would be basically >> biological. However, in human >> >> beings >> >> this relationship is mediated by >> cultural means: signs and >> >> tools; or >> >> primary, secondary and terciary >> artifacts. These cultural means >> >> reorganize the primitive >> functions (dialectic S-O relationship), >> >> which >> >> become then higher psychological >> functions (S-M-O) (see for >> >> example, >> >> The problem of the cultural >> development of the child, in The >> >> Vygotsky >> >> Reader). Now, the subject, the >> cultural mediators, and the >> >> object form >> >> an inseparable dialectical unit, >> so that the subject acts on >> >> (transforms) the object through >> the prism of the cultural >> >> mediators, >> >> the object acts on (transforms) >> the subject also through the >> >> prism of >> >> the cultural mediators, and the >> cultural means are themselves >> >> also >> >> transformed as a consequence of >> their mediation in this >> >> continuous >> >> dynamic dialectical tension. >> Here, for me, it is important the >> >> idea >> >> that the cultural means are as >> material (if we assume a >> >> materialist >> >> monism) as all the rest of the >> world; in fact, are parts of the >> >> material world which become signs >> or tools (and can be therefore >> >> socially distributed). This >> permits the introduction of the >> >> scientific >> >> study of mind-consciousness (as >> mediating systems of signs), >> >> because >> >> mind is not anymore something >> immaterial and unobservable, but >> >> it is >> >> as material and observable as the >> rest of the natural world. It >> >> is >> >> from this view that, for me, the >> idea of cultural mediation is >> >> the >> >> keystone of a monist psychology >> that includes mind. Thus, when I >> >> speak >> >> of mediators, I refer to the >> cultural means which mediate in the >> >> S-O >> >> dialectics; I am especially >> interested in signs/secondary >> >> artifacts. >> >> Here, it is perhaps necessary to >> insist that when I talk of >> >> studying >> >> mediators (and their semantic >> structure), this doesn't mean that >> >> they >> >> are taken out from the activity >> (the flux of live) in which they >> >> mediate (since out of activity >> they are not signs anymore); >> >> here, I >> >> think Vygotsky tries again to >> overcome another old dichotomy, the >> >> functionalism-structuralism one. >> I hope that all this makes also >> >> clear the difference between this view and >> that of computational >> psychologies (which in general are profoundly >> and explicitly dualist and >> not dialectic). >> >> Back to perezhivanie, I'm not >> obviously trying to deny the >> >> influence >> >> of Spinoza on Vygotsky's thinking >> (this is explicit in Vygotsky's >> >> writings, especially in "The >> teaching about emotions", in the >> >> Vol.6 of >> >> the Collected Works). But I have >> doubts that Vygotsky's >> >> introduction >> >> of the concept of perezhivanie is >> to be regarded primarily as a >> >> movement towards monism (from a >> previous cartesian dualism), and >> >> that >> >> this movement questions the >> concept of cultural mediation. >> >> Instead, >> >> and I think that this is in line >> with some of Gonzalez-Rey >> >> observations in his paper, my >> impression is that the >> >> introduction of >> >> the concept of perezhivanie >> responds more to a movement (a >> >> further >> >> step) towards holism (something >> that, in my understanding, can >> >> also be >> >> found in Spinoza). Thus, I think >> that the word meaning is still >> >> the >> >> unit of analysis in the last >> Vygotsky -and therefore, the idea of >> >> cultural mediation is still >> crucial (in fact, in The problem of >> >> the >> >> environment, he connects the >> concept of perezhivanie, which has >> >> just >> >> introduced, to the development of >> word meaning [p.345-346, also >> >> cited >> >> in my paper]). However, in my >> view, in the last Vygotsky the >> >> focus is >> >> not anymore primarily on the >> word-meaning as formed for things >> >> (or >> >> collections of things, as in the >> ontogenetic research with >> >> Sakharov), but the focus is now in the >> formation of meaning for holistic >> situations. >> >> Best regards, >> >> Marc. >> >> 2017-01-03 19:16 GMT+01:00 >> Alfredo Jornet Gil< >> >> a.j.gil@iped.uio.no >> > >> > >: >> >> Hi Marc, all, >> >> thanks for joining and for >> your interesting work, which I >> >> follow >> >> since I became aware of it. I >> appreciate the way in your >> >> paper you >> >> show careful and honest >> attention to the texts of the authors >> >> involved, but perhaps most of >> all I appreciate that the >> >> paper makes >> >> the transformational >> dimension related to struggle and change >> >> salient, a dimension all >> papers deemed central to >> >> perezhivanie. And I >> >> have learned more about >> Vasilyuk by reading your paper. But >> >> I also >> >> see that we have approached >> the question of perezhivanie >> >> differently >> >> and I think that addressing >> the questions that you raise >> >> concerning >> >> our article may be a good way >> to both respond and discuss >> >> your paper. >> >> I am aware that our use of >> the term monism may be >> >> problematic to >> >> some, and N. Veresov, who has >> recently written about this >> >> (see >> >> attached article), warns >> against the dangers of simply >> >> moving from >> >> dualism into an >> undifferentiating monism that relativizes >> >> everything, >> >> making development >> un-studiable. This seems to be the way in >> >> which >> >> you have understood our >> argument, and of course this is not >> >> what we are or want to be doing. >> >> Probably many will think that >> *dialectical materialism* >> >> rather than >> >> monism is the proper term, >> and I could agree with them; we >> >> do in fact >> >> use dialectical materialism >> there and elsewhere. Yet, we >> >> wanted to >> >> emphasise the Spinozist >> influence (an influence that also >> >> runs >> >> through Marx) and so we found >> it appropriate to use the term >> >> monism, >> >> a term that Vygotsky uses >> before arguing that Spinoza >> >> "develops an essentially materialistic view" >> >> (Collected Works, Vol. 6, p. >> 124). For us, the aim is >> >> working out >> >> ways to empirically examine >> and formulate problems in ways >> >> that do >> >> not reify a mind-body dualism. >> >> Although overcoming dualism >> is foundational to the CHAT >> >> paradigm, I >> >> would however not say that >> Vygotsky did get to solve all of >> >> the >> >> problems that Cartesian >> dualism had created for psychology, >> >> even >> >> though he recognised those >> problems brilliantly as early as >> >> in the >> >> "Crisis". It should suffice >> to cite Vygotsky's own remarks, >> >> which we quote in the paper (and which A.N. >> >> Leont'ev mentions in the >> introduction to the collected >> >> works), where >> >> Vygotsky explicitly critiques >> some of his own prior ideas >> >> for failing >> >> to overcome dualism. We agree >> with those who, like F. G. >> >> Rey, see >> >> Vygotsky's project as a >> developing rather than as a >> >> finalised one. >> >> The fact is that Vygotsky was >> building a theory on the unity >> >> of the >> >> affect and the intellect that >> was to be grounded on Spinoza, >> >> and what >> >> we try to do is to explore >> how perezhivanie, as a concept >> >> being >> >> developed during the same >> period (but not finalised or >> >> totally >> >> settled!), could be seen from >> the perspective of the >> >> Spinozist Vygotsky. >> >> As you note, in our article >> we argue that, if one takes the >> >> Spinozist >> >> one-substance approach, >> classical concepts used in >> >> non-classical >> >> psychology, at least in the >> way they are commonly used in >> >> the current >> >> literature, should be >> revised. One such concept is >> >> mediation. And I >> >> personally do not have much >> of a problem when mediation is >> >> used to >> >> denote the fundamental fact >> that every thing exists always >> >> through >> >> *another*, never in and of >> itself. But I do think that it is >> >> problematic to identify >> MEDIATORS, such as "a meaning", as a >> >> means to >> >> account for or explain >> developmental processes and learning >> >> events, >> >> precisely because it is >> there, at least in my view, that >> >> dualism creeps in. >> >> For example, I find it >> paradoxical that you are concerned >> >> that our >> >> monist approach risks turning >> perezhivanie into a useless >> >> category >> >> because it may be used to >> explain everything and nothing, >> >> and yet you >> >> do not seem to have a problem >> using the term mediation to >> >> account for >> >> the transformation of >> perezhivanie without clearly >> >> elaborating on how >> >> mediation does change >> anything or what it looks like as a >> >> real >> >> process. How is it different >> saying that a perezhivanie >> >> mediates the >> >> experiencing-as-struggle from >> simply saying that it >> >> "affects" or >> >> "determines" it? Indeed, if >> perezhivanie mediates >> >> experiencing-as-struggle, >> does not experiencing-as-struglgle >> >> too >> >> mediate perezhivanie? And do >> not both may be said to mediate >> >> development, or development mediate them? Is >> not this explaining everything >> and nothing? >> >> I do believe you can argue >> that there is a difference between >> >> mediation and classical >> psychology's cause-effect relations, >> >> but to >> >> show this you need to dig >> into the dialectical underpinnings >> >> of the >> >> theory. In your paper, you >> offer a nice analysis of a lovely >> >> case of >> >> a teacher who, in dealing >> with a challenge with one of her >> >> students, >> >> changes her perezhivanie. I >> think you can rightly argue that >> >> there is >> >> a semiotic transformation, >> and I fully support your >> >> statement that by >> >> studying discourse we can >> empirically approach questions of >> >> psychological development. >> The contradictions you show as >> >> being >> >> involved and resolved >> resonate really well with what I >> >> experience as >> >> a parent or as a teacher in >> the classroom. Yet, without >> >> unpacking >> >> what this "mediation" taking >> place between one perezhivanie >> >> and the >> >> next one means as a concrete >> and real, the same analysis >> >> could be done taking an information processing >> approach: >> >> there is an situation that is >> processed (represented?) in >> >> one way, >> >> which then leads to a >> (cognitive) dissonance, and then there >> >> is a >> >> cognitive resolution by means >> of which the situation is >> >> presented >> >> differently in consciousness >> (indeed, when seen in this way, >> >> the term >> >> perezhivanie and the term >> "representation" become almost >> >> indistinguishable). How is >> mediation, as an analytical >> >> concept, >> >> helping here? And most >> importantly to the question of >> >> perezhivanie, >> >> how is this analysis going to >> show the internal connection >> >> between >> >> intellect and affect that >> Vygotsky formulates as >> >> constitutive of the notion of perezhivanie? >> >> I believe that the key lies >> in understanding what Vygotsky >> >> means when >> >> he says that perezhivanie is >> a unit of analysis. I will not >> >> repeat >> >> here what already is written >> in at least a couple of the >> >> articles in >> >> the special issue (Blunden, >> ours), that is the difference >> >> between >> >> analysis by elements and unit >> analysis (Vygotsky 1987). A >> >> unit >> >> analysis approach is >> consistent with Spinoza, for whom >> >> cause-effect >> >> explanations were not >> adequate, requiring instead an >> >> understanding of >> >> self-development, >> perezhivanie as a kernel cell for the >> >> development >> >> of personality. And I think >> you may be after this in your >> >> article in > > From schuckcschuck@gmail.com Fri Jan 13 10:44:54 2017 From: schuckcschuck@gmail.com (Christopher Schuck) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2017 13:44:54 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Fate of a Man In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thank you, great idea. Perhaps we can even eventually juxtapose this shared example with another example of something that might appear to be, but is *not*, perezhivanie? (as I was recently considering re. Manchester and the Sea). So we will have both ways of approaching the concept. Chris On Friday, January 13, 2017, Beth Ferholt wrote: > Thank you for taking us to a shared example. I think that having a shared > example, and maybe one in art not in life, is key for discussions on this > topic to work -- which is so interesting! I will see it as soon as > possible: http://sovietmoviesonline.com/en/drama/36-sudba-cheloveka.html > is > where I see it in English, but did you see one with subtitles? Thanks, Beth > > On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 4:34 AM, Andy Blunden > wrote: > > > "Fate of a Man" is a 1959 Soviet film adaptation of the novel by Mikhail > > Sholokhov. It is 97 minutes and you can watch the full movie on line, as > I > > just did ... my eyes have just cleared enough to be able to send this > > message. > > > > What about it if people who have contributed to this discussion on > > /perezhivanie /could watch the movie and tell us if the movie illustrates > > some of the ideas they have about the meaning of /perezhi//vanie/? It > > certainly tells of some experiences that Russians have undergone. > > > > andy > > > > > > -- > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > Andy Blunden > > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > > > > > -- > Beth Ferholt > Assistant Professor > Department of Early Childhood and Art Education > Brooklyn College, City University of New York > 2900 Bedford Avenue > Brooklyn, NY 11210-2889 > > Email: bferholt@brooklyn.cuny.edu > Phone: (718) 951-5205 > Fax: (718) 951-4816 > From ablunden@mira.net Fri Jan 13 16:15:48 2017 From: ablunden@mira.net (Andy Blunden) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2017 11:15:48 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Fate of a Man In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <048522a2-cca0-3e56-cae2-f2142b9fbd5a@mira.net> I watched it in two parts with subtitles: http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x16w7fg_destiny-of-a-man-1959-pt-1_creation http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x16wat4_destiny-of-a-man-1959-pt-2_creation Andy ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making On 14/01/2017 2:35 AM, Beth Ferholt wrote: > > >Thank you for taking us to a shared example. I think that having a From carolmacdon@gmail.com Sat Jan 14 05:04:27 2017 From: carolmacdon@gmail.com (Carol Macdonald) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2017 15:04:27 +0200 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Fate of a Man In-Reply-To: <048522a2-cca0-3e56-cae2-f2142b9fbd5a@mira.net> References: <048522a2-cca0-3e56-cae2-f2142b9fbd5a@mira.net> Message-ID: Fellow XMCa-ers I have watched it through now, thank you Andy, but right now only empirical psychological categories come to mind. I will watch it again and in the meanwhile let my fellows with more recent experience of /perezhivanie/ take the discussion further. It is a kind of timeless story, and modern film techniques would perhaps be more explicit. At the least I would say it has for me a Russian understanding of suffering, perhaps because of their unique experience of it. But having said that, WWII must have generated other similar experiences, apart from the first part about Andrei's family dying in the famine. Carol On 14 January 2017 at 02:15, Andy Blunden wrote: > I watched it in two parts with subtitles: > > http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x16w7fg_destiny-of-a-man- > 1959-pt-1_creation > http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x16wat4_destiny-of-a-man- > 1959-pt-2_creation > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Andy Blunden > http://home.mira.net/~andy > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > On 14/01/2017 2:35 AM, Beth Ferholt wrote: > >> > >Thank you for taking us to a shared example. I think that having a >> > > -- Carol A Macdonald Ph.D (Edin) Cultural Historical Activity Theory Honorary Research Fellow: Department of Linguistics, Unisa alternative email address: tmacdoca@unisa.ac.za From dkellogg60@gmail.com Sat Jan 14 12:08:38 2017 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2017 05:08:38 +0900 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Fate of a Man In-Reply-To: References: <048522a2-cca0-3e56-cae2-f2142b9fbd5a@mira.net> Message-ID: I think there's a good reason why Andy started a new thread on this: he's a very tidy thinker (quite unlike yours truly) and he knows that one reason why xmca threads are seldom cumulative is that they digress to related problems without solving the immmediate ones. Yes, of course, a film allows us to consider an example of "perezhivanie", but it is a designed perezhivanie rather than an evolved one; it doesn't explicitly display the various stages of emergence required for a genetic analysis, unless we analyze it not as a complete and finished work of art but instead for clues as to the stages of its creation (the way that, for example, "Quietly Flows the Don" was analyzed to determine its authenticity). I remember that In the original short story, the schnapps drinking scene seemed like pure sleight of hand: an artistically gratuitous example of what eventually gave Soviet social realism such a bad name. David Kellogg Macquarie University On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 10:04 PM, Carol Macdonald wrote: > Fellow XMCa-ers > > I have watched it through now, thank you Andy, but right now only empirical > psychological categories come to mind. I will watch it again and in the > meanwhile let my fellows with more recent experience of /perezhivanie/ take > the discussion further. > > It is a kind of timeless story, and modern film techniques would perhaps be > more explicit. At the least I would say it has for me a Russian > understanding of suffering, perhaps because of their unique experience of > it. But having said that, WWII must have generated other similar > experiences, apart from the first part about Andrei's family dying in the > famine. > > Carol > > On 14 January 2017 at 02:15, Andy Blunden wrote: > > > I watched it in two parts with subtitles: > > > > http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x16w7fg_destiny-of-a-man- > > 1959-pt-1_creation > > http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x16wat4_destiny-of-a-man- > > 1959-pt-2_creation > > > > Andy > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > Andy Blunden > > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > On 14/01/2017 2:35 AM, Beth Ferholt wrote: > > > >> > >Thank you for taking us to a shared example. I think that having a > >> > > > > > > > -- > Carol A Macdonald Ph.D (Edin) > Cultural Historical Activity Theory > Honorary Research Fellow: Department of Linguistics, Unisa > alternative email address: tmacdoca@unisa.ac.za > From dkellogg60@gmail.com Sat Jan 14 12:34:03 2017 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2017 05:34:03 +0900 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! In-Reply-To: <58791c9d.4a35630a.1111d.ed74@mx.google.com> References: <1484256089562.1752@iped.uio.no> <58791c9d.4a35630a.1111d.ed74@mx.google.com> Message-ID: Ruqaiya Hasan had three criticisms of "word meaning" as a unit of analysis for consciousness. She said that there was no theory of language use behind it, that it was a finished product which obscured the interpersonal-cum-sociocultural origins of verbal meaning, and that Vygotsky used it in a way that was socially undifferentiated, as if the word meanings in a classs society were homogeneous and shared. For many years, I tried to satisfy these criticisms with a bit of retranslation: "znachenie slova" is not "word meaning" but "verbal meaning", "slovo" is not "word" but "parole", and "znachenie" is not "znachenie" but actually "smysl", etc. But it now seems to me that the real way to satisfy Hasan is to admit that so long as "word meaning" refers only to ideational, representational, "znachenie" Hasan is right. But consciousness is not the same thing as the development of personality. As soon as we say that the real unit of analysis for the development of personality is not word meaning but perezhivanie, it seems to me that it becomes possible to answer Ruqaiya's criticisms of Vygotsky in a satisfying way. A unit of personal and environmental moments has a theory of language use (sense convergence, not znachenie), it develops interpersonally from the feeling of drinking milk as you are being nursed and socioculturally to the transexperiencing of a life as you lie on your deathbed and of course it must by that very fact include the code orientations of class origins. Diachronically, Ruqaiya considered the semantics to be the ensemble of relations between context on the one hand and the production of text on the other. But synchronically, it was the way in which a single unified act of meaning is differentiated into the three different elements that create the clause: the figure of experience, the quantum of interaction, the informational message. So now it seems to me that a "perezhivanie" is a unit of the semantics, a unit of personality and environmental moments corresponding, in most life stories, to a grammatical clause. David Kellogg Macquarie University On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 3:29 AM, wrote: > Alfredo, Marc, and Fernando > > Thanks for sharing this 3 way conversation. I want to highlight another > word meaning that is in play (imagination) as expressed in Fernando?s > article : > The Concept of Perazhivanie in the Psychology of art. > > Fernando says Vygotsky differentiated emotion from perezhivanie and offers > this quotation from Vygotsky : > > By its nature, artistic ?perezhivanie? remains incomprehensible AND CLOSED > to the subject in its COURSE and ESSENCE. We never know why we like or > dislike a work of art. Everything we LATER invent to explain its influence > is thought to be a complete RATIONALIZATION of unconscious processes. The > very essence of perezhivanie remains A MYSTERY to us. > > Fernando further adds that one of the strong points RAISED (LP > -highlighted or picked out or comprehended) by Vygotsky in (The Psychology > of Art) was to recognize the value of emotions AS HUMAN REALITY, which > OVERCAME the logical and intellectual REDUCTIONISM that has characterized > psychology until today. Fernando then offers this quotation to prove this > Strong position : > > ... all our fantastic (and unreal) perezhivaniya, take place on a > completely REAL emotional basis. We see, therefore that emotion and > imagination are NOT two separate processes; on the contrary, they are the > SAME PROCESS. We can rightly can regard A FANTASY AS the central expression > of an emotional reaction. > > Fernando is circling around what he sees as a STRONG point here. Marc > views it as a particular type of perezhivanie. > > I question if this fantasy ?element? or this imaginal ?element actually > PERvades all the 4 types of perezhivanie. However, i would also make > distinct that fantasy meaning ?unreal? is not the same as ?imaginal? that > is ?real?. I would therefore re-place the word (fantasy) with (imaginal) in > Vygotsky?s quote above. > > A complex topic, butmy turn is up. > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > From: Alfredo Jornet Gil > Sent: January 12, 2017 1:22 PM > To: Andy Blunden; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > Marc, > > at the beginning of the discussion you raised the following question: > > >From Marc: > < them for possible discussion. The first one was raised by Gonz?lez-Rey, > when he introduces, in connection with perezhivanie, the concepts of > personality, and especially, of sense. So, which is the conceptual (and-or > phenomenal) relation between perezhivanie and sense? Gonz?lez-Rey suggests > that both concepts are somewhat similar (and overcome by the concept of > ?subjective sense?); my opinion, partly expressed in my commentary, is that > perezhivanie is a type of meaning, which includes different levels of > depth, and that sense corresponds to the deepest level of meaning (which > can be characterized as a system of semic oppositions). Therefore, sense > wouldn't be in opposition to meaning (as ?a microcosm of human > consciousness?, as Kozulin remembers in his commentary), although it would > be in opposition to manifested meaning (the surface level of meaning).>> > > I am here forwarding Fernando G. Rey's response to your question > concerning sense and meaning. I have not edited any of his notes but have > copied and pasted them as he wrote them. Fernando is positively recovering > from a medical intervention, but has been kind enough to follow up the > discussion and is willing to take up specific questions if these rise. > > >From Fernando: > < the importance given by Vygotsky to emotions at that final moment of his > work. In ??On the Questions of the Psychology of the Creative Artist? he > wrote: ?In the process of societal life . . . emotions come into a new > relationship with the other elements of psychical life, news systems > appear, new blendings of psychical functions; units of a higher order > emerge, governed by special laws, mutual dependencies, and special forms of > connections and motion. (Vygotsky, 1984, p. 328) . In that comment he > attributed a generative character to emotions; emotions come in relation to > other elements of the psychic life and are treated as equivalent to them . > From this relations new systems appear. It is possible to ask, to which > systems Vygotsky is referred in that statement?. We don?t know , but it was > a strong interest of Vygotsky in that time; to define new psychological > systems on the basis of the units he was tried to advance with concepts > like sense and perezhivanie. In ?Thought and world? that Thinking was > divorced from the full vitality of life, from the motives, interests and > inclinations of the thinking individual.(Vygotsky, 1987b, p. 50). This > position is fully consistent with that expressed before by Vygotsky . Both > positions reveal his comprehension of emotions as inseparable from other > functions and elements of psychical life, as part of the ontological nature > of psychological phenomena. Subjective senses embody the idea of the full > vitality of life referred by Vygotsky in relation to thinking. For my > viewpoint that ?full vitality of life ? have to be defined by the way of in > which the constellation of symbolic social constructions within which > human experience takes place, emerge as singular subjective senses that > organizing themselves in subjective configurations becoming self-generative > subjective systems. Subjective senses and configurations express how social > symbolical realities as, norms, institutionalized o > rders, myth, race, gender and many others simultaneously appear as > subjective production. The own Vygotsky explicitly defended that meaning > was only one zone of sense. Unlike Vygotsky?s definition of sense, as > word?s sense, subjective senses and configurations are integrative units of > symbolical processes and emotions through which the social and cultural > realities appear as they are lived by individual, groups and social > instances. From my point of view, there is no doubt that Vygotsky at the > end of his life was looking for a new kind of units to advance a new > definition of consciousness ( at his time identified as the more complex > psychological system). He clearly considered meaning as the unit of > consciousness for a little period of time. His references to the > personality both in the definition of the sense and the perezhivanie, lead > to think that the attempted to articulate those concepts with psychic > systems. He only explicitly wrote on perezhivanie as unit of consciousness, > but he did no advanced forward this idea>> > > > > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil > Sent: 12 January 2017 21:41 > To: Andy Blunden; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > David, I admire much of what you write in your first three examples in > your prior post. But I am reacting to your latter post on Chess. It is the > second or third time that you bring the CHESS example to bear in xmca, and > I always feel uneasy about it. > > I see the point that there are different developmental stages and that > these can be best categorised according to the type of generalisation that > the child can engage into. Obviously, treating a piece of marble "as if" it > was a piece in the game of chess involves a different type of > generalization than treating the same piece of marble as if it was a piece > in the game of "let's put the black pieces in black squares and white > pieces in white squares". But I do not think that my 20 months daughter > will put black pieces on black squares in any systematic manner simply > because she can PERCEIVE and act upon the difference between black and > white; and indeed I do not think that my 7 years old first daughter will do > any of these things with the chess pieces, considering she has never > learned to play chess. Indeed, why would any child do that? I do strongly > believe that to get any of my daughters to arrange the pieces by color, > there would have first to be a TEACHING/LEARNING situation, which itself > would involve establishing a semantic field, a field that perhaps out of my > ignorance I would call semiotic (sign). > > In my view, in both cases there are rules and therefore imagination, if > we listen to Vygotsky's writings on play, and perhaps, as Vygotsky notes, > there may be a difference in the "moral attitude", but I would be cautious > by gross divisions between perceptual and semantic structures. Yes,there > are different levels, types, or stages in the way semantic fields are > organised, and that playing the chess pieces as pieces of the CHESS game > involves a qualitative leap compared to playing them as pieces in the game > of putting them together by shape or color; but there is a game going on in > both cases, and therefore a perceptual as much as a semiotic structure > being at play. These are different semiotic contexts, as you say at the end > of your e-mail, but I do think that your assertion that in playing with the > chess pieces by color "the structure would be visual but not semiotic" can > be problematic and may lead to what I consider an incorrect view of the > relation between higher and lower functions in development. > > Alfredo > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of David Kellogg > Sent: 11 January 2017 04:50 > To: Andy Blunden; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > Vygotsky's got a terrific metaphor for how "perezhivanie" is internalized: > it is like internalizing the rules of the game of chess. > > The child who doesn't know how to play chess simply plays WITH the pieces > instead of playing them. She or he might try to create a piece-board > structure by putting black pieces on black squares and white pieces on > white squares, but the structure is a visual one and not a semiotic one; > it's about color and not about meaning. The child who DOES know how to play > chess plays the pieces instead of playing with them. She or he too creates > "structures" but this time they are semiotic ones: a black knight in a > completely different column and a completely different row, can capture a > white pawn. > > The board is the same and so are the kids; the children may have very > similar biological and very similar cultural endowments, but they do not > have the same semiotic context at all. Hence different perezhivanie and > different personalities. > > David Kellogg > Macquarie University > > > > On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 11:54 AM, Andy Blunden wrote: > > > How to understand the personality? ... i.e., the *development* of the > > personality? > > > > The subject's inheritance, and The subject's experiences > (/perezhivaniya/) > > > > ... just think of how you'd go about writing a good biography or > > Bildungsroman. > > > > Andy > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > Andy Blunden > > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > On 11/01/2017 10:24 AM, David Kellogg wrote: > > > >> Andy: > >> > >> A good paradox! Word meaning is a unit, but the spoken word itself is > >> just an element--a thing. We can see that this is, on the face of it, > >> impossible: within a single holistic analysis, an element can be a part > of > >> a unit, but a unit can never be a part of an element. So what you are > >> referring to when you say that the word is a thing is the "sonic" or > >> "phasal" quality of the word: its "acoustic" properties, its > "phonetics". > >> > >> But not its phonology. The word that Vygotsky uses for "phoneme" refers > >> to the 1929 work of the Prague Circle, originally the Moscow Circle. He > is > >> a LITTLE coy about this, because the founders, Jakobson and Trubetskoy, > >> were not very popular with the authorities and Vygotsky already had > plenty > >> of heterodox acquaintances to worry about. Nevertheless, whenever > Vygotsky > >> says "phoneme", we know he really means what Jakobson and Trubetskoy > called > >> "morphophonemes". We know this because the examples he actually > >> gives--Russian case endings--are morpho-phonemes and not simply > phonemes: > >> so for example in English the sound /s/ is a simple phoneme when I say > the > >> word "self" but if I say "Andy's" the sound /s/ is a morpho-phoneme: a > >> difference in sounding that makes a difference in meaning. The system > (that > >> is, the paradigmatic menu) of these differences in soundings are what > the > >> Moscow and Prague Circles called "phonology" (as OPPOSED to phonetics), > and > >> this is the kind of "phoneme" that Vygotsky is really talking about. > >> > >> Still, you can see that it is not what he is talking about when he says > >> word meaning, because these units are still nowhere near big enough to > >> describe the kinds of changes which must occur when verbal thinking > >> develops. I feel the same way about a lot of the examples offered of > >> "perezhivanie", including Marc's. If MacDuff's grief or Carla's epiphany > >> about the misbehavior of her kids being due to "outside influences" > really > >> is the unit of personality and experience that Vygotsky wants us to use > >> when we analyse the ontogenesis of personality, then it is no more > >> appropriate than using the morpho-phoneme to analyse the whole of verbal > >> thinking. Just as evolution (of species) requires very different units > from > >> history (of classes), development, whether we are talking about verbal > >> thinking or the personality as a whole, is going to require very > different > >> units from learning, whether we are talking about MacDuff or Carla. The > >> units must be able to develop; that is, the relationship of the elements > >> within them must be susceptible to many changes over time. > >> > >> Let me give three examples of how this happens in different > >> "perezhivanie". They are not mine; they are Vygotsky's, and they are all > >> from the Pedological Lectures. > >> > >> First, the Crisis at One. Neither the biological nor the social > endowment > >> of the child greatly changes in the acquisition of speech; nevertheless, > >> the relationship between the personality and the environment, of which > both > >> personality moments and environmental ones are constituent elements, is > >> entirely transformed. Here we are not talking about phonemes, or even > >> morpho-phonemes: we are talking about "wordings"--whole utterances. In > >> Melbourne I presented some data that demonstrated this beautifully--a > >> child's first word is actually an attempt to imitate a whole > conversation. > >> > >> Second, the Crisis at Three. Vygotsky spends a lot of time discussing > the > >> "Seven Stars"--the symptoms of the "Terrible Twos" and "Threenagehood" > >> noted by harried parents everywhere. But by the end of his analysis it's > >> clear that what really happens is a new relationship between wish and > will: > >> in extreme cases, the child actually wishes for one thing (e.g. > compromise) > >> and wills the opposite (the everlasting "No!"). Again, neither the > >> personality moments as such nor the environmental ones change, but > there is > >> a separation and a sorting which allows the subordination of wish to > will > >> that we see in play. This isn't the kind of "aha" moment that Marc is > >> offering us at all: Vygotsky actually calls it the "antipode" of future > >> will, because instead of enabling will it actually paralyzes it. But it > is > >> indubitably a key moment in the development of the relation of > personality > >> to environmental moments that we see in "perizhivanie". > >> > >> Thirdly, the Crisis at Seven. I think Gonzalez Rey makes a total hash of > >> this, and I get very cross when I read his article. It is not true that > the > >> essence of perizhivanie remained a mystery to Vygotsky simply because > he no > >> longer subscribes to "the aesthetic reaction" and "catharsis" and other > >> notions that he toyed with in Psych of Art (he's no longer doing > >> experiments on changes in breathing rate when people read the works of > >> Bunin either!). It might be true that he never offered a system of facts > >> and methodological procedures for perezivanie, but that was only because > >> one already existed, for example in the work of Wallon and Stern and > >> others. It is demonstrably not true that when Vygotsky says that the > speech > >> environment of those around him does not change when the child learns to > >> talk at one, he is not "profoundly contradictory with the concept of > >> sense": when you read the quotation in context, it is very clear that > what > >> he is referring to are the kinds of absolute indicators used by Zalkind: > >> how often the parents read the newspapers, the dialect they speak, and > >> their educational background. These do not change, and if the child > wants > >> to make sense, these are the factors the child will have to relate to. > >> > >> Vygotsky gives the example of a child who is severely retarded. The > child > >> wants to play with other children and is rejected. The child walks down > the > >> street and the other children follow, laughing. The child is shrieked > at, > >> insulted, but as soon as the humiliation stops, the child is perfectly > >> happy with himself. Vygotsky points out that the child is not able to > >> "co-generalize" the "perizhivanie" of the humiliations: each is > unpleasant, > >> but they are entirely separate and cannot be connected with any internal > >> sense of inferiority. A normal child, however, is able to "internalize" > >> these humiliations and consequently develops a sense of inferiority. We > can > >> see that what has happened is the insertion of what Vygotsky calls an > >> "intellectual" moment: an inner layer, which is what distinguishes later > >> Chaplin movies from earlier ones (again, Vygotsky's example, not mine!) > and > >> what brings about the "loss of directness and naivete" that we see in > >> pre-schoolers. > >> > >> I think that the reason people find "perizhivanie" so hard to work with > >> is the same reason that they find "word meaning" hard to work with: it > >> develops. The feeling of drinking milk as the infant drinks it is > >> perizhivanie, and the thought of being humiliated when you are mulling > it > >> over and contemplating revenge is also perizhivanie, and only a profound > >> analysis which includes ontogenetic development and not just learning > will > >> show the inner link between them. It's for that reason that I think that > >> "activity" is not a useful unit of analysis and I am much more inclined > to > >> use your word "project", so long as it can include what Vygotsky calls > >> "inner activeness". > >> > >> Vygotsky says: > >> > >> > >> ????? ? ?????????, ?????????? ? ?. ?., ? ???? ???? ? ?????????? > >> ???????????, ??? ?????????? ???????????? ??????????????? ????????? > >> ??????????????? ?? ??????? ? ??????? ?????????????. ??? ??? ????? ????? > >> ?????????? ?????????? ? ???????? ???????? ??????????? ? ???, ???, ? ?? > >> ????? ??? ? ?????????? ???????? ??? ?????????? ???????????? ???????????? > >> ???????????????? ????? ? ?????????, ??????? ???????????, ? ???????? > >> ???????? ?? ????? ???????????? ?????????????? ???????????, ???????????? > >> ??????????? ?????????? ?????????? ?? ????????? ? ??????? ????????????. > ??? > >> ??? ???????, ??????? ????? ??????????, ? ?? ????? ????? ?? ?????? ??? > ????? > >> ???-??????, ???, ? ???????? ????????? ?????????????? ??????? ? > ?????????? > >> ????????????. > >> > >> When I think, remember, etc. I am dealing withinner activeness; this > >> psychological process of inner activity is not directly linked to any > >> external activity. The new form of inner activeness in the School Age > >> consists of this: that while during the preschool years these inner > >> activities demonstrated an immediate link with action, with external > >> activeness, in the school years we have a relative autonomy which > emerges, > >> inner activeness which is relatively independent of external activities. > >> Here is already a child who can think, at the same time when he is > doing or > >> seeing something, one in whom has emerged a differentiation of inner and > >> outer activities. > >> > >> David Kellogg > >> Macquarie University > >> > >> > >> > >> On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 10:07 AM, Andy Blunden >> ablunden@mira.net>> wrote: > >> > >> David: "Are words really units?" > >> > >> Well, firstly, "units" is a *relative* term. That is, > >> the question is: are words units of something, some > >> complex process subject to analysis. And which? > >> > >> Secondly, according to Vygotsky, "no." The concept > >> Vygotsky proposes as a unit is "word meaning" which he > >> says is a unity of sound and meaning. The sound is an > >> artefact, which, detached from its meaningful > >> utterance in a transactional context is just a thing, > >> viz., a word. Whereas "word meaning" is an > >> arrtefact-mediated action, a unit of human social > >> activity. > >> > >> It is true that words can be countable or mass > >> according to context, but I wasn't talking about words > >> was I? I was talking about word meaning. > >> > >> Andy > >> > >> ------------------------------------------------------------ > >> Andy Blunden > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy > >> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective- > decision-making > >> >> decision-making> > >> > >> On 8/01/2017 7:59 AM, David Kellogg wrote: > >> > >> Are words really units? When we look at their > >> ideational meaning (that is, > >> their logical and experiential content--their > >> capacity for representing and > >> linking together human experiences) they seem to > >> fall into two very > >> different categories: lexical words like > >> "perezhivanie" or "sense" or > >> "personality" of "individual" and grammatical > >> words like "of", or "might", > >> or "is". The lexical words seem to behave like > >> units--they are bounded, > >> discrete, and, as Andy would say, "countable" (the > >> problem is that almost > >> all nouns are both countable and uncountable > >> depending on the context you > >> put them in, so this distinction is really not as > >> essential as Andy seems > >> to assume). But the more grammatical words seem to > >> be elements of some > >> larger unit, which we can call wording. > >> > >> Veresov and Fleer come up against this problem > >> with "edintsvo" and > >> "edintsa". Of course, as they say, the two words > >> are distinct. But this > >> doesn't necessarily mean that the former always > >> corresponds to "unity" in > >> English and the latter is always "unit". If you > >> look at the paragraph they > >> translate on 330, you can see that Vygotsky starts > >> with an idea that is > >> quite "synoptic" and is well expressed by "unit". > >> But in the last sentence > >> there is a sense that "perezhivanie" is a > >> meta-stable unit--one that > >> remains self-similar only through a process of > >> thorough change, like a > >> bicycle whose every part is replaced--and in > >> English is it is better to > >> express this idea with "unity". The problem is > >> that the differences between > >> "edintsvo" and "edintsva" in Russian is a matter > >> of gender (I think) and > >> not simply abstractness, and as a result the > >> English version, which cannot > >> use the resource of gender,has to rely on > >> abstractness, so the words > >> "unity" and "unit" are somewhat more distinct and > >> less linked than > >> "edintsvo" and "edintsva". > >> > >> There are other problems that are similar. When > >> Gonzalez Rey uses the word > >> "final moment" to refer to the final period of > >> Vygotsky's thinking, he > >> leaves the anglophone reader the impression that > >> he is referring to > >> Vygotsky's deathbed thoughts. On the other hand, > >> when Veresov and Fleer use > >> "factor" to translate the same Russian word that > >> Gonzalez Rey is using, > >> they are giving us something more quantitative > >> than Vygotsky intended, and > >> their translation of "dalee nerazloshim'im > >> chastyami etava edinstva" > >> into "vital and further indivisible part of the > >> whole" is quite opaque in > >> English (notice that here Veresov and Fleer use > >> "whole" to translate > >> "edinstva" rather than "unit"!) At some point you > >> have to accept that you > >> can change Russian words into English words as if > >> you were exchanging > >> rubles for dollars, but you still won't be able to > >> buy a samovar at Walmart. > >> > >> David Kellogg > >> Macquarie University > >> > >> > >> > >> On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 5:21 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > >> > > >> wrote: > >> > >> Larry, all, > >> > >> our arguments in the 2014 address a science > >> education literature in which > >> the constructivist perspective is the leading > >> perspective; We note that the > >> assertion that people learn from experience is > >> everywhere taken for granted > >> but nowhere accounted for. We resort to > >> pragmatist and phenomenological > >> literature along with Vygotsky's insights to > >> point out the need to account > >> for learning as something that cannot be the > >> result of an individual's > >> construction; in experience there is always > >> something in excess of what you > >> intended, and this is a basic feature of > >> doing, of performing. I take that > >> to be your "trans" in the trans/zhivanie word, > >> Larry, which already is > >> denoted in the word PERezhivanie. > >> > >> But I do not wish to move our discussion too > >> far away from Marc's paper > >> and the Perezhivanie special issue. We also > >> risk disengaging many that have > >> not have the privilege we've had to have the > >> time to read so many articles > >> in just few days into the new year. I think we > >> are a point in the > >> discussion where a pretty clear point of > >> agreement/disagreement, and > >> therefore of possibility for growth, has been > >> reached with regard to the > >> view of perezhivanie as "an experience" and as > >> the "working over it". I > >> think that to allow as many as possible to > >> follow, and hopefully also > >> engage, I think it will be helpful to bring > >> the diverse perspectives and > >> theoretical accounts to matter in accounting > >> for some actual material. And > >> there are a number of cases described in the > >> articles, including Marc's > >> case of a teacher, as well as everyday facts, > >> such as those brought by > >> Beth, and in Beth's article... > >> > >> I take the task for myself too, but Saturday > >> morning need to attend to > >> other things! > >> A > >> > >> > >> > >> ________________________________________ > >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > >> > >> >> > > >> on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com > >> > >> >> > > >> Sent: 07 January 2017 18:26 > >> To: Andy Blunden; Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended > >> Mind, Culture, Activity; > >> Larry Purss > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and > >> Perezhivanie! > >> > >> Andy, Peter, i hope the intention to move > >> beyond politeness to struggle > >> with this topic materializes. > >> In this vein i want to introduce exploration > >> of the 'excess' of actual > >> over intended meaning as he sketched his > >> introduction to 'experience'. > >> > >> Citing Dewey, Alfredo says that this excess of > >> actual learning over > >> intended learning INCLUDES what Dewey refers > >> to as 'attitudes' and these > >> 'attitudes' are FUNDAMENTALLY what count in > >> the future. > >> Alfredo and Roth then add this summary > >> statement : > >> > >> There is therefore, a need to theorize > >> experience in terms that do not > >> assume control and rationality as the sine qua > >> non of learning. It also > >> implies a need to develop analytical accounts > >> that retain the 'uncertainty' > >> that is an 'integral part' of human experience. > >> > >> Where are Alfredo and Roth leading us with > >> this sketch of experience? To > >> highlight 'attitudes' that occur in the excess > >> of actual over intended > >> learning? The word 'attitudes' generates > >> images of (atmosphere) and (moods) > >> that 'flow' like cascading waterfalls that can > >> be imaged as (force) or as > >> (receptive). Attitudes that flow to places > >> where they are received within a > >> certain attitude of care and concern. Not as > >> forceful an image as moving > >> only with control and rationality. Describing > >> 'weaker' thought that > >> remains uncertain but that also opens us to > >> the other's peril and plight. > >> Possibly a post-analytic motion that exceeds > >> the intended by living-through > >> the actual that develops 'attitudes' that are > >> fundamentally what count for > >> the future. > >> > >> > >> Sent from my Windows 10 phone > >> > >> From: Andy Blunden > >> Sent: January 7, 2017 5:00 AM > >> To: Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, > >> Activity > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and > >> Perezhivanie! > >> > >> OK Peter, what you say is all very true I am > >> sure, but it > >> entails conflating activity and action (as > >> mass nouns) and > >> context and mediation, and makes the required > >> distinction > >> much like one could find multiple meanings for > >> the word > >> "and" by listing the different phrases and > >> clauses which can > >> be linked by "and." > >> > >> Andy > >> > >> ------------------------------ > ------------------------------ > >> Andy Blunden > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy > >> > >> http://www.brill.com/products/ > book/origins-collective-decisi > >> on-making > >> >> decision-making> > >> > >> On 7/01/2017 11:42 PM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > >> > >> Let me try to illustrate. > >> > >> Reading as mediated action: The > >> cultural-historical > >> context of reading mediates how one's > >> attention and > >> response are channeled in socially > >> constructed ways. So, > >> in one setting, say at home or reading in > >> the company of > >> friends, a novel might bring a reader to > >> tears, or invite > >> readers to share personal stories that > >> parallel those of > >> the plot lines, or laugh out loud. But > >> another setting, a > >> formal school or university class, would > >> have historical > >> values and practices that mute emotional > >> and personal > >> responses, and promote a more sober, > >> analytic way of > >> reading and talking that fits with > >> specific historical > >> critical conventions and genres, and > >> discourages others. > >> > >> Reading as mediating action: The act of > >> reading can be > >> transformational. In reading about an > >> talking about a > >> character's actions, a reader might > >> reconsider a value > >> system, become more sympathetic to real > >> people who > >> resemble oppressed characters, etc. In > >> other words, > >> reading a text may serve a mediational > >> process in which > >> textual ideas and exemplars enable a > >> reader to think > >> differently. > >> > >> *From:*Andy Blunden > >> [mailto:ablunden@mira.net > >> ] > >> *Sent:* Saturday, January 7, 2017 6:28 AM > >> *To:* Peter Smagorinsky >> >; eXtended Mind, > >> Culture, Activity >> > > >> *Subject:* Re: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year > >> and Perezhivanie! > >> > >> Can you explain in a paragraph or two,. > >> Peter, rather than > >> asking us all to read 10,000 words to > >> extract an answer? > >> > >> Andy > >> > >> ------------------------------ > >> ------------------------------ > >> > >> Andy Blunden > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy > >> > >> > >> http://www.brill.com/products/ > >> book/origins-collective-decision-making > >> >> decision-making> > >> > >> > >> On 7/01/2017 11:23 PM, Peter Smagorinsky > >> wrote: > >> > >> Andy and others, I tried to work out > >> the mediated/mediating question > >> > >> in the area of reading....see if this helps. > >> > >> Smagorinsky, P., & O'Donnell-Allen, > >> C. (1998). Reading as mediated > >> > >> and mediating action: Composing meaning for > >> literature through multimedia > >> interpretive texts. Reading Research > >> Quarterly, 33, 198-226. Available > >> athttp://www.petersmagorinsky.net/About/PDF/RRQ/RRQ1998.pdf > >> > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> > >> From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > >> > >> >> .ucsd.edu > >> > > >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ > >> > >> > >> mailman.ucsd.edu ] On > >> Behalf Of Andy Blunden > >> > >> Sent: Friday, January 6, 2017 7:12 PM > >> > >> To:xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu > >> > >> >> > > >> > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year > >> and Perezhivanie! > >> > >> I have never understood this supposed > >> distinction, Alfredo, between > >> > >> "mediated activity" and "mediating activity" > >> given that all activity is > >> mediated and all activity mediates. > >> > >> Also, could you spell out what you > >> mean by the "tension" > >> > >> between perezhivanie as meaning and > >> perezhivanie as struggle. > >> > >> Andy > >> > >> ------------------------------ > >> ------------------------------ > >> > >> Andy Blunden > >> > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy > >> > >> > >> > >> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective- > >> > > >> > >> decision-making > >> > >> On 5/01/2017 6:26 PM, Alfredo Jornet > >> Gil wrote: > >> > >> Thanks Marc for your careful > >> response. > >> > >> I am familiar to Vygotsky's > >> notion of cultural mediation and I > >> > >> am aware and acknowledge that it was > >> elaborated as a means to overcome > >> dualism, and that it is not analog to a > >> computational approach. > >> > >> When I brought the computing > >> analogy, I did so with regard not > >> > >> to the concept of cultural mediation in > >> general, but to the way it can be > >> (and is) deployed analytically. I react to > >> what it seems to me a dichotomy > >> between a "meaning" as something that is > >> static (thereby a form of > >> "representation" or reflection of the relation > >> with the environment instead > >> of?refraction)?? and the > >> experiencing-as-struggling, which is described > >> as?transformation or change. If so, mediation > >> here would seem to be part of > >> a methodological device that first dissects "a > >> type of meaning" from "a > >> type of activity" (or a given state from the > >> process that changes that > >> state), and then unites it by adding the term > >> "mediation." And this may be > >> my misreading, but in that (mis)reading (which > >> perhaps is mostly due to the > >> fact that in your empirical illustration only > >> the initial and end product, > >> i.e., perezhivanie, are described, but not the > >> experiencing-as-struggle, > >> that is, the moving between the two), > >> mediation here seems to do as > >> analytical concept precisely what you were > >> afraid our monism was doing: > >> explaining nothing. Only the end products but > >> not the process of producing > >> perezhivanie are revealed. This may be > >> problematic if one attends to what > >> Veresov argues in the paper I shared > >> yesterday, where he defends the notion > >> of mediation but also specifies that Vygotsky > >> speaks of *mediating > >> activity* (as opposed to *mediated* activity). > >> That is, not mediation by > >> signs as products, but mediating activity as > >> the activity of producing > >> signs (which again is an activity of producing > >> social relations, perhaps > >> what you refer as "holistic meanings"?). What > >> do you think? > >> > >> I did not think you were trying > >> to deny the influence of > >> > >> Spinoza, and I do not think we ever said that > >> Perezhivanie was primarily a > >> move from Cartesian Dualism to Monism, as you > >> suggest in your post. I copy > >> and paste from my prior post: "The fact is > >> that Vygotsky was building a > >> theory on the unity of the affect and the > >> intellect that was to be grounded > >> on Spinoza, and what we try to do is to > >> explore how perezhivanie, as a > >> concept being developed during the same period > >> (but not finalised or > >> totally settled!), could be seen from the > >> perspective of the Spinozist > >> Vygotsky." > >> > >> I totally believe that bringing > >> the distinction between > >> > >> perezhivanie as meaning, and perezhivanie as > >> struggle, is totally relevant, > >> and Beth Ferholt's vignettes of Where the Wild > >> Things Are do indeed > >> illustrate this. We really need to address > >> this tension, which as Beth's > >> examples and as our own everyday experience > >> shows, is a tension that > >> matters not just to books and to theories but > >> to living persons (children, > >> teachers), a tension that moreover is present > >> and mentioned in all the > >> articles of the symposium. The papers offer > >> different proposals, and I > >> think is so great we have the chance to > >> discuss them! I too, as you, am > >> very interesting in hearing others about the > >> questions you had concerning > >> sense and meaning. > >> > >> Alfredo > >> > >> From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > >> > >> >> .ucsd.edu > >> > > >> > >> >> > > >> >> .ucsd.edu > >> > > >> on behalf of Marc > >> > >> Clara > >> > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> > >> Sent: 04 January 2017 22:31 > >> > >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > >> > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New > >> Year and Perezhivanie! > >> > >> Thank you very much, Alfredo, for > >> sharing this excellent paper by > >> > >> Veresov, and thanks also for your > >> responses, which really helped > >> > >> me to > >> > >> better understand your points. My > >> main doubt about your proposal > >> > >> was/is caused by the statement > >> that the idea of cultural > >> > >> mediation/mediator implies a > >> cartesian dualism. This shocks me > >> > >> because, to me, the idea of > >> cultural mediation is absolutely > >> > >> crucial > >> > >> (in fact, the keystone) for the > >> construction of a monist (and > >> > >> scientific) psychology that does > >> not forget mind -that is, a > >> > >> cultural > >> > >> psychology. From your response, > >> however, I realized that we may > >> > >> be > >> > >> approaching the idea of mediation > >> in different ways. I talk of > >> > >> mediation and mediators in a > >> quite restricted way. The starting > >> > >> point > >> > >> of my understanding of mediation > >> is a dialectical relationship > >> > >> (organic, transactional) between > >> the subject and the world > >> > >> (Vygotsky departs from the scheme > >> stimulus-response, from reflexology). > >> > >> This relationship, that Vygotsky > >> calls primitive psychological > >> > >> functions, would be basically > >> biological. However, in human > >> > >> beings > >> > >> this relationship is mediated by > >> cultural means: signs and > >> > >> tools; or > >> > >> primary, secondary and terciary > >> artifacts. These cultural means > >> > >> reorganize the primitive > >> functions (dialectic S-O relationship), > >> > >> which > >> > >> become then higher psychological > >> functions (S-M-O) (see for > >> > >> example, > >> > >> The problem of the cultural > >> development of the child, in The > >> > >> Vygotsky > >> > >> Reader). Now, the subject, the > >> cultural mediators, and the > >> > >> object form > >> > >> an inseparable dialectical unit, > >> so that the subject acts on > >> > >> (transforms) the object through > >> the prism of the cultural > >> > >> mediators, > >> > >> the object acts on (transforms) > >> the subject also through the > >> > >> prism of > >> > >> the cultural mediators, and the > >> cultural means are themselves > >> > >> also > >> > >> transformed as a consequence of > >> their mediation in this > >> > >> continuous > >> > >> dynamic dialectical tension. > >> Here, for me, it is important the > >> > >> idea > >> > >> that the cultural means are as > >> material (if we assume a > >> > >> materialist > >> > >> monism) as all the rest of the > >> world; in fact, are parts of the > >> > >> material world which become signs > >> or tools (and can be therefore > >> > >> socially distributed). This > >> permits the introduction of the > >> > >> scientific > >> > >> study of mind-consciousness (as > >> mediating systems of signs), > >> > >> because > >> > >> mind is not anymore something > >> immaterial and unobservable, but > >> > >> it is > >> > >> as material and observable as the > >> rest of the natural world. It > >> > >> is > >> > >> from this view that, for me, the > >> idea of cultural mediation is > >> > >> the > >> > >> keystone of a monist psychology > >> that includes mind. Thus, when I > >> > >> speak > >> > >> of mediators, I refer to the > >> cultural means which mediate in the > >> > >> S-O > >> > >> dialectics; I am especially > >> interested in signs/secondary > >> > >> artifacts. > >> > >> Here, it is perhaps necessary to > >> insist that when I talk of > >> > >> studying > >> > >> mediators (and their semantic > >> structure), this doesn't mean that > >> > >> they > >> > >> are taken out from the activity > >> (the flux of live) in which they > >> > >> mediate (since out of activity > >> they are not signs anymore); > >> > >> here, I > >> > >> think Vygotsky tries again to > >> overcome another old dichotomy, the > >> > >> functionalism-structuralism one. > >> I hope that all this makes also > >> > >> clear the difference between this view and > >> that of computational > >> psychologies (which in general are profoundly > >> and explicitly dualist and > >> not dialectic). > >> > >> Back to perezhivanie, I'm not > >> obviously trying to deny the > >> > >> influence > >> > >> of Spinoza on Vygotsky's thinking > >> (this is explicit in Vygotsky's > >> > >> writings, especially in "The > >> teaching about emotions", in the > >> > >> Vol.6 of > >> > >> the Collected Works). But I have > >> doubts that Vygotsky's > >> > >> introduction > >> > >> of the concept of perezhivanie is > >> to be regarded primarily as a > >> > >> movement towards monism (from a > >> previous cartesian dualism), and > >> > >> that > >> > >> this movement questions the > >> concept of cultural mediation. > >> > >> Instead, > >> > >> and I think that this is in line > >> with some of Gonzalez-Rey > >> > >> observations in his paper, my > >> impression is that the > >> > >> introduction of > >> > >> the concept of perezhivanie > >> responds more to a movement (a > >> > >> further > >> > >> step) towards holism (something > >> that, in my understanding, can > >> > >> also be > >> > >> found in Spinoza). Thus, I think > >> that the word meaning is still > >> > >> the > >> > >> unit of analysis in the last > >> Vygotsky -and therefore, the idea of > >> > >> cultural mediation is still > >> crucial (in fact, in The problem of > >> > >> the > >> > >> environment, he connects the > >> concept of perezhivanie, which has > >> > >> just > >> > >> introduced, to the development of > >> word meaning [p.345-346, also > >> > >> cited > >> > >> in my paper]). However, in my > >> view, in the last Vygotsky the > >> > >> focus is > >> > >> not anymore primarily on the > >> word-meaning as formed for things > >> > >> (or > >> > >> collections of things, as in the > >> ontogenetic research with > >> > >> Sakharov), but the focus is now in the > >> formation of meaning for holistic > >> situations. > >> > >> Best regards, > >> > >> Marc. > >> > >> 2017-01-03 19:16 GMT+01:00 > >> Alfredo Jornet Gil< > >> > >> a.j.gil@iped.uio.no > >> > > >> >> >: > >> > >> Hi Marc, all, > >> > >> thanks for joining and for > >> your interesting work, which I > >> > >> follow > >> > >> since I became aware of it. I > >> appreciate the way in your > >> > >> paper you > >> > >> show careful and honest > >> attention to the texts of the authors > >> > >> involved, but perhaps most of > >> all I appreciate that the > >> > >> paper makes > >> > >> the transformational > >> dimension related to struggle and change > >> > >> salient, a dimension all > >> papers deemed central to > >> > >> perezhivanie. And I > >> > >> have learned more about > >> Vasilyuk by reading your paper. But > >> > >> I also > >> > >> see that we have approached > >> the question of perezhivanie > >> > >> differently > >> > >> and I think that addressing > >> the questions that you raise > >> > >> concerning > >> > >> our article may be a good way > >> to both respond and discuss > >> > >> your paper. > >> > >> I am aware that our use of > >> the term monism may be > >> > >> problematic to > >> > >> some, and N. Veresov, who has > >> recently written about this > >> > >> (see > >> > >> attached article), warns > >> against the dangers of simply > >> > >> moving from > >> > >> dualism into an > >> undifferentiating monism that relativizes > >> > >> everything, > >> > >> making development > >> un-studiable. This seems to be the way in > >> > >> which > >> > >> you have understood our > >> argument, and of course this is not > >> > >> what we are or want to be doing. > >> > >> Probably many will think that > >> *dialectical materialism* > >> > >> rather than > >> > >> monism is the proper term, > >> and I could agree with them; we > >> > >> do in fact > >> > >> use dialectical materialism > >> there and elsewhere. Yet, we > >> > >> wanted to > >> > >> emphasise the Spinozist > >> influence (an influence that also > >> > >> runs > >> > >> through Marx) and so we found > >> it appropriate to use the term > >> > >> monism, > >> > >> a term that Vygotsky uses > >> before arguing that Spinoza > >> > >> "develops an essentially materialistic view" > >> > >> (Collected Works, Vol. 6, p. > >> 124). For us, the aim is > >> > >> working out > >> > >> ways to empirically examine > >> and formulate problems in ways > >> > >> that do > >> > >> not reify a mind-body dualism. > >> > >> Although overcoming dualism > >> is foundational to the CHAT > >> > >> paradigm, I > >> > >> would however not say that > >> Vygotsky did get to solve all of > >> > >> the > >> > >> problems that Cartesian > >> dualism had created for psychology, > >> > >> even > >> > >> though he recognised those > >> problems brilliantly as early as > >> > >> in the > >> > >> "Crisis". It should suffice > >> to cite Vygotsky's own remarks, > >> > >> which we quote in the paper (and which A.N. > >> > >> Leont'ev mentions in the > >> introduction to the collected > >> > >> works), where > >> > >> Vygotsky explicitly critiques > >> some of his own prior ideas > >> > >> for failing > >> > >> to overcome dualism. We agree > >> with those who, like F. G. > >> > >> Rey, see > >> > >> Vygotsky's project as a > >> developing rather than as a > >> > >> finalised one. > >> > >> The fact is that Vygotsky was > >> building a theory on the unity > >> > >> of the > >> > >> affect and the intellect that > >> was to be grounded on Spinoza, > >> > >> and what > >> > >> we try to do is to explore > >> how perezhivanie, as a concept > >> > >> being > >> > >> developed during the same > >> period (but not finalised or > >> > >> totally > >> > >> settled!), could be seen from > >> the perspective of the > >> > >> Spinozist Vygotsky. > >> > >> As you note, in our article > >> we argue that, if one takes the > >> > >> Spinozist > >> > >> one-substance approach, > >> classical concepts used in > >> > >> non-classical > >> > >> psychology, at least in the > >> way they are commonly used in > >> > >> the current > >> > >> literature, should be > >> revised. One such concept is > >> > >> mediation. And I > >> > >> personally do not have much > >> of a problem when mediation is > >> > >> used to > >> > >> denote the fundamental fact > >> that every thing exists always > >> > >> through > >> > >> *another*, never in and of > >> itself. But I do think that it is > >> > >> problematic to identify > >> MEDIATORS, such as "a meaning", as a > >> > >> means to > >> > >> account for or explain > >> developmental processes and learning > >> > >> events, > >> > >> precisely because it is > >> there, at least in my view, that > >> > >> dualism creeps in. > >> > >> For example, I find it > >> paradoxical that you are concerned > >> > >> that our > >> > >> monist approach risks turning > >> perezhivanie into a useless > >> > >> category > >> > >> because it may be used to > >> explain everything and nothing, > >> > >> and yet you > >> > >> do not seem to have a problem > >> using the term mediation to > >> > >> account for > >> > >> the transformation of > >> perezhivanie without clearly > >> > >> elaborating on how > >> > >> mediation does change > >> anything or what it looks like as a > >> > >> real > >> > >> process. How is it different > >> saying that a perezhivanie > >> > >> mediates the > >> > >> experiencing-as-struggle from > >> simply saying that it > >> > >> "affects" or > >> > >> "determines" it? Indeed, if > >> perezhivanie mediates > >> > >> experiencing-as-struggle, > >> does not experiencing-as-struglgle > >> > >> too > >> > >> mediate perezhivanie? And do > >> not both may be said to mediate > >> > >> development, or development mediate them? Is > >> not this explaining everything > >> and nothing? > >> > >> I do believe you can argue > >> that there is a difference between > >> > >> mediation and classical > >> psychology's cause-effect relations, > >> > >> but to > >> > >> show this you need to dig > >> into the dialectical underpinnings > >> > >> of the > >> > >> theory. In your paper, you > >> offer a nice analysis of a lovely > >> > >> case of > >> > >> a teacher who, in dealing > >> with a challenge with one of her > >> > >> students, > >> > >> changes her perezhivanie. I > >> think you can rightly argue that > >> > >> there is > >> > >> a semiotic transformation, > >> and I fully support your > >> > >> statement that by > >> > >> studying discourse we can > >> empirically approach questions of > >> > >> psychological development. > >> The contradictions you show as > >> > >> being > >> > >> involved and resolved > >> resonate really well with what I > >> > >> experience as > >> > >> a parent or as a teacher in > >> the classroom. Yet, without > >> > >> unpacking > >> > >> what this "mediation" taking > >> place between one perezhivanie > >> > >> and the > >> > >> next one means as a concrete > >> and real, the same analysis > >> > >> could be done taking an information processing > >> approach: > >> > >> there is an situation that is > >> processed (represented?) in > >> > >> one way, > >> > >> which then leads to a > >> (cognitive) dissonance, and then there > >> > >> is a > >> > >> cognitive resolution by means > >> of which the situation is > >> > >> presented > >> > >> differently in consciousness > >> (indeed, when seen in this way, > >> > >> the term > >> > >> perezhivanie and the term > >> "representation" become almost > >> > >> indistinguishable). How is > >> mediation, as an analytical > >> > >> concept, > >> > >> helping here? And most > >> importantly to the question of > >> > >> perezhivanie, > >> > >> how is this analysis going to > >> show the internal connection > >> > >> between > >> > >> intellect and affect that > >> Vygotsky formulates as > >> > >> constitutive of the notion of perezhivanie? > >> > >> I believe that the key lies > >> in understanding what Vygotsky > >> > >> means when > >> > >> he says that perezhivanie is > >> a unit of analysis. I will not > >> > >> repeat > >> > >> here what already is written > >> in at least a couple of the > >> > >> articles in > >> > >> the special issue (Blunden, > >> ours), that is the difference > >> > >> between > >> > >> analysis by elements and unit > >> analysis (Vygotsky 1987). A > >> > >> unit > >> > >> analysis approach is > >> consistent with Spinoza, for whom > >> > >> cause-effect > >> > >> explanations were not > >> adequate, requiring instead an > >> > >> understanding of > >> > >> self-development, > >> perezhivanie as a kernel cell for the > >> > >> development > >> > >> of personality. And I think > >> you may be after this in your > >> > >> article in > > > > > > > From schuckcschuck@gmail.com Sat Jan 14 12:43:39 2017 From: schuckcschuck@gmail.com (Christopher Schuck) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2017 15:43:39 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Fate of a Man In-Reply-To: References: <048522a2-cca0-3e56-cae2-f2142b9fbd5a@mira.net> Message-ID: But that's both the limitation and strength of art or fictional narrative as opposed to real life, isn't it? That art focuses our attention and highlights certain features in a way that is idealized and artificially "designed" to convey something more clearly and purely (but less organically and authentically) than it would be conveyed in the course of living it, or observing someone else living it? One way to get around this would be, as David says, to analyze the film in terms of clues as to the stages of emergence. But maybe another way to use the film would be to view it not so much as a complete, self-sufficient "example" of perezhivanie, as a *tool *for pivoting back and forth between the concept of perezhivanie as imaginatively constructed (through fiction), and the concept of perezhivanie as imaginatively constructed (through our real living experience and observation of it). So, it would be the *pivoting* between these two manifestations of the concept (designed vs. evolved, as David put it) that reveals new insights about perezhivanie, rather than understanding the concept from the film per se. On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 3:08 PM, David Kellogg wrote: > I think there's a good reason why Andy started a new thread on this: he's a > very tidy thinker (quite unlike yours truly) and he knows that one reason > why xmca threads are seldom cumulative is that they digress to related > problems without solving the immmediate ones. > > Yes, of course, a film allows us to consider an example of "perezhivanie", > but it is a designed perezhivanie rather than an evolved one; it doesn't > explicitly display the various stages of emergence required for a genetic > analysis, unless we analyze it not as a complete and finished work of art > but instead for clues as to the stages of its creation (the way that, for > example, "Quietly Flows the Don" was analyzed to determine its > authenticity). > > I remember that In the original short story, the schnapps drinking > scene seemed like pure sleight of hand: an artistically gratuitous example > of what eventually gave Soviet social realism such a bad name. > > David Kellogg > Macquarie University > > On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 10:04 PM, Carol Macdonald > wrote: > > > Fellow XMCa-ers > > > > I have watched it through now, thank you Andy, but right now only > empirical > > psychological categories come to mind. I will watch it again and in the > > meanwhile let my fellows with more recent experience of /perezhivanie/ > take > > the discussion further. > > > > It is a kind of timeless story, and modern film techniques would perhaps > be > > more explicit. At the least I would say it has for me a Russian > > understanding of suffering, perhaps because of their unique experience of > > it. But having said that, WWII must have generated other similar > > experiences, apart from the first part about Andrei's family dying in the > > famine. > > > > Carol > > > > On 14 January 2017 at 02:15, Andy Blunden wrote: > > > > > I watched it in two parts with subtitles: > > > > > > http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x16w7fg_destiny-of-a-man- > > > 1959-pt-1_creation > > > http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x16wat4_destiny-of-a-man- > > > 1959-pt-2_creation > > > > > > Andy > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > Andy Blunden > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > > On 14/01/2017 2:35 AM, Beth Ferholt wrote: > > > > > >> > >Thank you for taking us to a shared example. I think that having a > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Carol A Macdonald Ph.D (Edin) > > Cultural Historical Activity Theory > > Honorary Research Fellow: Department of Linguistics, Unisa > > alternative email address: tmacdoca@unisa.ac.za > > > From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Sat Jan 14 13:06:40 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2017 21:06:40 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Fate of a Man In-Reply-To: References: <048522a2-cca0-3e56-cae2-f2142b9fbd5a@mira.net> , Message-ID: <1484427999407.2877@iped.uio.no> Chris, all, your post is totally relevant to Beth's and Monica's article in the special issue. They write about film and perezhivanie (quoting Sobchack) the following: The reason that film allows us to glimpse the future is that there is a connection between filmic time and ?real? time: ?The images of a film exist in the world as a temporal flow, within finitude and situation. Indeed, the fascination of the film is that it does not transcend our lived-experience of temporality, but rather that it seems to partake of it, to share it? (1992, p. 60). And later "Specifically, the way that the flow of time becomes multidirectional is that ?rehearsals make it necessary to think of the future in such a way as to create a past? (1985, p. 39). As Schechner ex-plains: ?In a very real way the future ? the project coming into existence through the process of rehearsal ? determines the past: what will be kept from earlier rehearsals or from the ?source ma-terials? (1985, p. 39)." Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Christopher Schuck Sent: 14 January 2017 21:43 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Fate of a Man But that's both the limitation and strength of art or fictional narrative as opposed to real life, isn't it? That art focuses our attention and highlights certain features in a way that is idealized and artificially "designed" to convey something more clearly and purely (but less organically and authentically) than it would be conveyed in the course of living it, or observing someone else living it? One way to get around this would be, as David says, to analyze the film in terms of clues as to the stages of emergence. But maybe another way to use the film would be to view it not so much as a complete, self-sufficient "example" of perezhivanie, as a *tool *for pivoting back and forth between the concept of perezhivanie as imaginatively constructed (through fiction), and the concept of perezhivanie as imaginatively constructed (through our real living experience and observation of it). So, it would be the *pivoting* between these two manifestations of the concept (designed vs. evolved, as David put it) that reveals new insights about perezhivanie, rather than understanding the concept from the film per se. On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 3:08 PM, David Kellogg wrote: > I think there's a good reason why Andy started a new thread on this: he's a > very tidy thinker (quite unlike yours truly) and he knows that one reason > why xmca threads are seldom cumulative is that they digress to related > problems without solving the immmediate ones. > > Yes, of course, a film allows us to consider an example of "perezhivanie", > but it is a designed perezhivanie rather than an evolved one; it doesn't > explicitly display the various stages of emergence required for a genetic > analysis, unless we analyze it not as a complete and finished work of art > but instead for clues as to the stages of its creation (the way that, for > example, "Quietly Flows the Don" was analyzed to determine its > authenticity). > > I remember that In the original short story, the schnapps drinking > scene seemed like pure sleight of hand: an artistically gratuitous example > of what eventually gave Soviet social realism such a bad name. > > David Kellogg > Macquarie University > > On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 10:04 PM, Carol Macdonald > wrote: > > > Fellow XMCa-ers > > > > I have watched it through now, thank you Andy, but right now only > empirical > > psychological categories come to mind. I will watch it again and in the > > meanwhile let my fellows with more recent experience of /perezhivanie/ > take > > the discussion further. > > > > It is a kind of timeless story, and modern film techniques would perhaps > be > > more explicit. At the least I would say it has for me a Russian > > understanding of suffering, perhaps because of their unique experience of > > it. But having said that, WWII must have generated other similar > > experiences, apart from the first part about Andrei's family dying in the > > famine. > > > > Carol > > > > On 14 January 2017 at 02:15, Andy Blunden wrote: > > > > > I watched it in two parts with subtitles: > > > > > > http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x16w7fg_destiny-of-a-man- > > > 1959-pt-1_creation > > > http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x16wat4_destiny-of-a-man- > > > 1959-pt-2_creation > > > > > > Andy > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > Andy Blunden > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > > On 14/01/2017 2:35 AM, Beth Ferholt wrote: > > > > > >> > >Thank you for taking us to a shared example. I think that having a > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Carol A Macdonald Ph.D (Edin) > > Cultural Historical Activity Theory > > Honorary Research Fellow: Department of Linguistics, Unisa > > alternative email address: tmacdoca@unisa.ac.za > > > From lpscholar2@gmail.com Sat Jan 14 13:55:35 2017 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2017 13:55:35 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Fate of a Man In-Reply-To: <1484427999407.2877@iped.uio.no> References: <048522a2-cca0-3e56-cae2-f2142b9fbd5a@mira.net> , <1484427999407.2877@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <587a9e5a.43a3620a.355a2.e828@mx.google.com> Alfredo, Chris, and all The key term I register here is ?re-hearsal? in both the dramatic film or the dramatic theater ?sense? AND exploring this ?sense? in relation to ?real life?. Here we re-turn to the notion of ?working-through? [intentional] and the notion of?living-through? [beyond the intentional] that occurs in the event of ?hovering above? the pain and suffering that is UNDERGONE. What I hear in Beth and Monica is that this re-hearsal? [what some call re-petition] when meaning leaves the world [experienced as be-ing closed down] must INCLUDE another in our living-through in order to re-turn to the world of living vitality. In other words, navigating through the suffering and existential emptiness is not a hero?s journey. Beth and Monica reference Schechner and through Schechner also Buber, Victor Turner, and Bateson.. Beth and Monica call for slowing down and pursuing EACH of this month?s separate perezhivanie threads and elaborating each PARTICULAR meaning of perezhivanie. It would seem to then require, as a next step, reading each particular thread relationally THROUGH the other in the same way I read your [Alfredo] reading Dewey through Vygotsky AND Vygotsky through Dewey, It seems this month?s special theme is only the 1st step within a see-change in our various ?pivots?. This post, as you say, is totally relevant to Beth and Monica?s article [and understanding of perezhivanie] in the special issue. In particular the way ?re-hearsals? are NECESSARY for the flow of time be-coming multidirectional vital flowing perezhivanie/experience. Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From: Alfredo Jornet Gil Sent: January 14, 2017 1:08 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Fate of a Man Chris, all, your post is totally relevant to Beth's and Monica's article in the special issue. They write about film and perezhivanie (quoting Sobchack) the following: The reason that film allows us to glimpse the future is that there is a connection between filmic time and ?real? time: ?The images of a film exist in the world as a temporal flow, within finitude and situation. Indeed, the fascination of the film is that it does not transcend our lived-experience of temporality, but rather that it seems to partake of it, to share it? (1992, p. 60). And later "Specifically, the way that the flow of time becomes multidirectional is that ?rehearsals make it necessary to think of the future in such a way as to create a past? (1985, p. 39). As Schechner ex-plains: ?In a very real way the future ? the project coming into existence through the process of rehearsal ? determines the past: what will be kept from earlier rehearsals or from the ?source ma-terials? (1985, p. 39)." Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Christopher Schuck Sent: 14 January 2017 21:43 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Fate of a Man But that's both the limitation and strength of art or fictional narrative as opposed to real life, isn't it? That art focuses our attention and highlights certain features in a way that is idealized and artificially "designed" to convey something more clearly and purely (but less organically and authentically) than it would be conveyed in the course of living it, or observing someone else living it? One way to get around this would be, as David says, to analyze the film in terms of clues as to the stages of emergence. But maybe another way to use the film would be to view it not so much as a complete, self-sufficient "example" of perezhivanie, as a *tool *for pivoting back and forth between the concept of perezhivanie as imaginatively constructed (through fiction), and the concept of perezhivanie as imaginatively constructed (through our real living experience and observation of it). So, it would be the *pivoting* between these two manifestations of the concept (designed vs. evolved, as David put it) that reveals new insights about perezhivanie, rather than understanding the concept from the film per se. On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 3:08 PM, David Kellogg wrote: > I think there's a good reason why Andy started a new thread on this: he's a > very tidy thinker (quite unlike yours truly) and he knows that one reason > why xmca threads are seldom cumulative is that they digress to related > problems without solving the immmediate ones. > > Yes, of course, a film allows us to consider an example of "perezhivanie", > but it is a designed perezhivanie rather than an evolved one; it doesn't > explicitly display the various stages of emergence required for a genetic > analysis, unless we analyze it not as a complete and finished work of art > but instead for clues as to the stages of its creation (the way that, for > example, "Quietly Flows the Don" was analyzed to determine its > authenticity). > > I remember that In the original short story, the schnapps drinking > scene seemed like pure sleight of hand: an artistically gratuitous example > of what eventually gave Soviet social realism such a bad name. > > David Kellogg > Macquarie University > > On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 10:04 PM, Carol Macdonald > wrote: > > > Fellow XMCa-ers > > > > I have watched it through now, thank you Andy, but right now only > empirical > > psychological categories come to mind. I will watch it again and in the > > meanwhile let my fellows with more recent experience of /perezhivanie/ > take > > the discussion further. > > > > It is a kind of timeless story, and modern film techniques would perhaps > be > > more explicit. At the least I would say it has for me a Russian > > understanding of suffering, perhaps because of their unique experience of > > it. But having said that, WWII must have generated other similar > > experiences, apart from the first part about Andrei's family dying in the > > famine. > > > > Carol > > > > On 14 January 2017 at 02:15, Andy Blunden wrote: > > > > > I watched it in two parts with subtitles: > > > > > > http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x16w7fg_destiny-of-a-man- > > > 1959-pt-1_creation > > > http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x16wat4_destiny-of-a-man- > > > 1959-pt-2_creation > > > > > > Andy > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > Andy Blunden > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > > On 14/01/2017 2:35 AM, Beth Ferholt wrote: > > > > > >> > >Thank you for taking us to a shared example. I think that having a > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Carol A Macdonald Ph.D (Edin) > > Cultural Historical Activity Theory > > Honorary Research Fellow: Department of Linguistics, Unisa > > alternative email address: tmacdoca@unisa.ac.za > > > From schuckcschuck@gmail.com Sat Jan 14 15:06:43 2017 From: schuckcschuck@gmail.com (Christopher Schuck) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2017 18:06:43 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Fate of a Man In-Reply-To: <1484427999407.2877@iped.uio.no> References: <048522a2-cca0-3e56-cae2-f2142b9fbd5a@mira.net> <1484427999407.2877@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: Yes, definitely that article! And specifically, when I used "pivoting" I couldn't help but think of Beth's earlier example about how a child will use a stick as a pivot for a horse. Perhaps a somewhat different application but related, no? On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 4:06 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > Chris, all, > > your post is totally relevant to Beth's and Monica's article in the > special issue. They write about film and perezhivanie (quoting Sobchack) > the following: > > The reason that film allows us to glimpse the future is that there is a > connection between filmic time and ?real? time: ?The images of a film exist > in the world as a temporal flow, within finitude and situation. Indeed, the > fascination of the film is that it does not transcend our lived-experience > of temporality, but rather that it seems to partake of it, to share it? > (1992, p. 60). > > And later > > "Specifically, the way that the flow of time becomes multidirectional is > that ?rehearsals make it necessary to think of the future in such a way as > to create a past? (1985, p. 39). As Schechner ex-plains: ?In a very real > way the future ? the project coming into existence through the process of > rehearsal ? determines the past: what will be kept from earlier rehearsals > or from the ?source ma-terials? (1985, p. 39)." > > Alfredo > > > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of Christopher Schuck > Sent: 14 January 2017 21:43 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Fate of a Man > > But that's both the limitation and strength of art or fictional narrative > as opposed to real life, isn't it? That art focuses our attention and > highlights certain features in a way that is idealized and artificially > "designed" to convey something more clearly and purely (but less > organically and authentically) than it would be conveyed in the course of > living it, or observing someone else living it? One way to get around this > would be, as David says, to analyze the film in terms of clues as to the > stages of emergence. But maybe another way to use the film would be to view > it not so much as a complete, self-sufficient "example" of perezhivanie, as > a *tool *for pivoting back and forth between the concept of perezhivanie as > imaginatively constructed (through fiction), and the concept of > perezhivanie as imaginatively constructed (through our real living > experience and observation of it). So, it would be the *pivoting* between > these two manifestations of the concept (designed vs. evolved, as David put > it) that reveals new insights about perezhivanie, rather than understanding > the concept from the film per se. > > On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 3:08 PM, David Kellogg > wrote: > > > I think there's a good reason why Andy started a new thread on this: > he's a > > very tidy thinker (quite unlike yours truly) and he knows that one reason > > why xmca threads are seldom cumulative is that they digress to related > > problems without solving the immmediate ones. > > > > Yes, of course, a film allows us to consider an example of > "perezhivanie", > > but it is a designed perezhivanie rather than an evolved one; it doesn't > > explicitly display the various stages of emergence required for a genetic > > analysis, unless we analyze it not as a complete and finished work of art > > but instead for clues as to the stages of its creation (the way that, for > > example, "Quietly Flows the Don" was analyzed to determine its > > authenticity). > > > > I remember that In the original short story, the schnapps drinking > > scene seemed like pure sleight of hand: an artistically gratuitous > example > > of what eventually gave Soviet social realism such a bad name. > > > > David Kellogg > > Macquarie University > > > > On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 10:04 PM, Carol Macdonald > > > wrote: > > > > > Fellow XMCa-ers > > > > > > I have watched it through now, thank you Andy, but right now only > > empirical > > > psychological categories come to mind. I will watch it again and in > the > > > meanwhile let my fellows with more recent experience of /perezhivanie/ > > take > > > the discussion further. > > > > > > It is a kind of timeless story, and modern film techniques would > perhaps > > be > > > more explicit. At the least I would say it has for me a Russian > > > understanding of suffering, perhaps because of their unique experience > of > > > it. But having said that, WWII must have generated other similar > > > experiences, apart from the first part about Andrei's family dying in > the > > > famine. > > > > > > Carol > > > > > > On 14 January 2017 at 02:15, Andy Blunden wrote: > > > > > > > I watched it in two parts with subtitles: > > > > > > > > http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x16w7fg_destiny-of-a-man- > > > > 1959-pt-1_creation > > > > http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x16wat4_destiny-of-a-man- > > > > 1959-pt-2_creation > > > > > > > > Andy > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > Andy Blunden > > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective- > decision-making > > > > On 14/01/2017 2:35 AM, Beth Ferholt wrote: > > > > > > > >> > >Thank you for taking us to a shared example. I think that > having a > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Carol A Macdonald Ph.D (Edin) > > > Cultural Historical Activity Theory > > > Honorary Research Fellow: Department of Linguistics, Unisa > > > alternative email address: tmacdoca@unisa.ac.za > > > > > > From ajrajala@gmail.com Sat Jan 14 15:22:00 2017 From: ajrajala@gmail.com (Antti Rajala) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2017 01:22:00 +0200 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! In-Reply-To: References: <1484256089562.1752@iped.uio.no> <58791c9d.4a35630a.1111d.ed74@mx.google.com> Message-ID: I am joining late. Over the week, I've been reading again the papers in the special issue and tried to make sense of the very stimulating but complex discussion. Apologize in advance for possibly confusing the discussion with some misunderstandings. Thinking about Marc's distinction between m-perezhivanie and experiencing as struggle, I wonder if in the latter case perezhivanie is in fact not a unit of analysis. Marc refers to Vasilyuk's book in which (if I remember it right) Vasilyuk builds on A.N Leontiev's theory of activity and defends it at some length. So isn't a proper unit of analysis for studying 'experiencing as struggle' then 'activity' and not 'perezhivanie'? After all, isn't activity a unit of analysis that also helps to overcome the dualism between person and environment? For A.N Leontiev (in his critique of Vygotsky's essay, 2005) perezhivanie is a helpful addition to activity theory but he states: "... can we view experiencing as an initial psychological fact specifically in the sense that experiencing determines the degree and nature of the influence of a given situation or, speaking in general terms, of a given object of reality on a subject? We assert that we cannot. After all, how a given object appears in experience is determined by the activity of the subject in relation to this object. Experience truly appears in each specific act of human activity, but it is neither the activity itself nor its cause, because before becoming a cause, activity itself is a result." A.N Leontiev developed the concept of personal sense that is very similar to perezhivanie. In ISCAR meeting in Sydney D. Leontiev made a remark that for ANL 'personal sense' is an elaboration of 'perezhivanie' and not of Vygotsky's 'sense' which is a different concept. Fernando Gonzales Rey discusses the difference between his theory of sense and Leontiev's in his essay Path to Subjectivity. A major issue seems to be if one talks about reflection or refraction. But is this really an issue for more recent scholars that have developed Leontiev's work further to account for subjectivity, agency, etc (e.g., Engestr?m, Stetsenko, Roth) What Marc seems to analyze in his nice paper are the changes in the meanings that the teacher makes of his situation; thus the unit of analysis appears to me to be m-perezhivanie. A bit in line with Alfredo's earlier remark, I also think that Marc is not really analyzing the teacher's experiencing as struggle but using the notion as an explanation of the changes in the meanings that are analyzed from the teacher's narratives. The activity that provokes these changes seems to be left for further studies. Andy also uses Vasilyuk in informing his definition of perezhivanie. I wondered that for Andy, in what way perezhivenie would be different as a unit of analysis as compared to activity (Andy - I have read your critique of Leontiev, so please feel free to substitute e.g., collaborative project for activity). I like in Andy's paper the idea that through perezhivanie not only the actor is changed but sometimes also the social circumstances (also the reference to Bildungsroman). Why only focus on ontogenesis and not also sociogenesis? In my own work, I am interested to study the relation between perezhivanie and agency. Regarding the units of analysis, I found Veresov and Fleer paper very helpful. It seems to me that perezhivanie as a unit of consciousness is indeed a helpful unit of analysis to understand ontogenesis. But they also say that perezhivanie can be a unit of personal and environmental characteristics. It would have been nice to see an example of this, since I did not understand how this would be studied. I also think that perezhivanie as a unit of personal and environmental characteristics is seems still a bit vague and undifferentiated as compared to the notion of activity. Perhaps Roth and Jornet paper comes closest to actually analyzing the dynamic unit comprising personal and environmental. Alfredo - could you clarify why do you think that perezhivanie as a unit of analysis is different in your case to activity or situated interaction. After all, the analysis built very much on the conventions of conversation analysis in which the unit of analysis is often something like situated interaction. Roth and Jornet in their earlier paper on the topic (Toward the theory of experience) make use of Leontiev's theory of activity to interpret the data. Alfredo, have you changed your mind on this topic? All the best, Antti "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 10:34 PM, David Kellogg wrote: > Ruqaiya Hasan had three criticisms of "word meaning" as a unit of analysis > for consciousness. She said that there was no theory of language use behind > it, that it was a finished product which obscured the > interpersonal-cum-sociocultural origins of verbal meaning, and that > Vygotsky used it in a way that was socially undifferentiated, as if the > word meanings in a classs society were homogeneous and shared. > > For many years, I tried to satisfy these criticisms with a bit of > retranslation: "znachenie slova" is not "word meaning" but "verbal > meaning", "slovo" is not "word" but "parole", and "znachenie" is not > "znachenie" but actually "smysl", etc. But it now seems to me that the real > way to satisfy Hasan is to admit that so long as "word meaning" refers only > to ideational, representational, "znachenie" Hasan is right. > > But consciousness is not the same thing as the development of personality. > As soon as we say that the real unit of analysis for the development of > personality is not word meaning but perezhivanie, it seems to me that it > becomes possible to answer Ruqaiya's criticisms of Vygotsky in a satisfying > way. A unit of personal and environmental moments has a theory of language > use (sense convergence, not znachenie), it develops interpersonally from > the feeling of drinking milk as you are being nursed and socioculturally to > the transexperiencing of a life as you lie on your deathbed and of course > it must by that very fact include the code orientations of class origins. > > Diachronically, Ruqaiya considered the semantics to be the ensemble of > relations between context on the one hand and the production of text on the > other. But synchronically, it was the way in which a single unified act of > meaning is differentiated into the three different elements that create the > clause: the figure of experience, the quantum of interaction, the > informational message. So now it seems to me that a "perezhivanie" is a > unit of the semantics, a unit of personality and environmental moments > corresponding, in most life stories, to a grammatical clause. > > David Kellogg > Macquarie University > > On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 3:29 AM, wrote: > > > Alfredo, Marc, and Fernando > > > > Thanks for sharing this 3 way conversation. I want to highlight another > > word meaning that is in play (imagination) as expressed in Fernando?s > > article : > > The Concept of Perazhivanie in the Psychology of art. > > > > Fernando says Vygotsky differentiated emotion from perezhivanie and > offers > > this quotation from Vygotsky : > > > > By its nature, artistic ?perezhivanie? remains incomprehensible AND > CLOSED > > to the subject in its COURSE and ESSENCE. We never know why we like or > > dislike a work of art. Everything we LATER invent to explain its > influence > > is thought to be a complete RATIONALIZATION of unconscious processes. The > > very essence of perezhivanie remains A MYSTERY to us. > > > > Fernando further adds that one of the strong points RAISED (LP > > -highlighted or picked out or comprehended) by Vygotsky in (The > Psychology > > of Art) was to recognize the value of emotions AS HUMAN REALITY, which > > OVERCAME the logical and intellectual REDUCTIONISM that has characterized > > psychology until today. Fernando then offers this quotation to prove this > > Strong position : > > > > ... all our fantastic (and unreal) perezhivaniya, take place on a > > completely REAL emotional basis. We see, therefore that emotion and > > imagination are NOT two separate processes; on the contrary, they are the > > SAME PROCESS. We can rightly can regard A FANTASY AS the central > expression > > of an emotional reaction. > > > > Fernando is circling around what he sees as a STRONG point here. Marc > > views it as a particular type of perezhivanie. > > > > I question if this fantasy ?element? or this imaginal ?element actually > > PERvades all the 4 types of perezhivanie. However, i would also make > > distinct that fantasy meaning ?unreal? is not the same as ?imaginal? that > > is ?real?. I would therefore re-place the word (fantasy) with (imaginal) > in > > Vygotsky?s quote above. > > > > A complex topic, butmy turn is up. > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > From: Alfredo Jornet Gil > > Sent: January 12, 2017 1:22 PM > > To: Andy Blunden; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > > > Marc, > > > > at the beginning of the discussion you raised the following question: > > > > >From Marc: > > < > them for possible discussion. The first one was raised by Gonz?lez-Rey, > > when he introduces, in connection with perezhivanie, the concepts of > > personality, and especially, of sense. So, which is the conceptual > (and-or > > phenomenal) relation between perezhivanie and sense? Gonz?lez-Rey > suggests > > that both concepts are somewhat similar (and overcome by the concept of > > ?subjective sense?); my opinion, partly expressed in my commentary, is > that > > perezhivanie is a type of meaning, which includes different levels of > > depth, and that sense corresponds to the deepest level of meaning (which > > can be characterized as a system of semic oppositions). Therefore, sense > > wouldn't be in opposition to meaning (as ?a microcosm of human > > consciousness?, as Kozulin remembers in his commentary), although it > would > > be in opposition to manifested meaning (the surface level of meaning).>> > > > > I am here forwarding Fernando G. Rey's response to your question > > concerning sense and meaning. I have not edited any of his notes but have > > copied and pasted them as he wrote them. Fernando is positively > recovering > > from a medical intervention, but has been kind enough to follow up the > > discussion and is willing to take up specific questions if these rise. > > > > >From Fernando: > > < account > > the importance given by Vygotsky to emotions at that final moment of his > > work. In ??On the Questions of the Psychology of the Creative Artist? he > > wrote: ?In the process of societal life . . . emotions come into a new > > relationship with the other elements of psychical life, news systems > > appear, new blendings of psychical functions; units of a higher order > > emerge, governed by special laws, mutual dependencies, and special forms > of > > connections and motion. (Vygotsky, 1984, p. 328) . In that comment he > > attributed a generative character to emotions; emotions come in relation > to > > other elements of the psychic life and are treated as equivalent to them > . > > From this relations new systems appear. It is possible to ask, to which > > systems Vygotsky is referred in that statement?. We don?t know , but it > was > > a strong interest of Vygotsky in that time; to define new psychological > > systems on the basis of the units he was tried to advance with concepts > > like sense and perezhivanie. In ?Thought and world? that Thinking was > > divorced from the full vitality of life, from the motives, interests and > > inclinations of the thinking individual.(Vygotsky, 1987b, p. 50). This > > position is fully consistent with that expressed before by Vygotsky . > Both > > positions reveal his comprehension of emotions as inseparable from other > > functions and elements of psychical life, as part of the ontological > nature > > of psychological phenomena. Subjective senses embody the idea of the full > > vitality of life referred by Vygotsky in relation to thinking. For my > > viewpoint that ?full vitality of life ? have to be defined by the way of > in > > which the constellation of symbolic social constructions within which > > human experience takes place, emerge as singular subjective senses that > > organizing themselves in subjective configurations becoming > self-generative > > subjective systems. Subjective senses and configurations express how > social > > symbolical realities as, norms, institutionalized o > > rders, myth, race, gender and many others simultaneously appear as > > subjective production. The own Vygotsky explicitly defended that meaning > > was only one zone of sense. Unlike Vygotsky?s definition of sense, as > > word?s sense, subjective senses and configurations are integrative units > of > > symbolical processes and emotions through which the social and cultural > > realities appear as they are lived by individual, groups and social > > instances. From my point of view, there is no doubt that Vygotsky at the > > end of his life was looking for a new kind of units to advance a new > > definition of consciousness ( at his time identified as the more complex > > psychological system). He clearly considered meaning as the unit of > > consciousness for a little period of time. His references to the > > personality both in the definition of the sense and the perezhivanie, > lead > > to think that the attempted to articulate those concepts with psychic > > systems. He only explicitly wrote on perezhivanie as unit of > consciousness, > > but he did no advanced forward this idea>> > > > > > > > > ________________________________________ > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil > > Sent: 12 January 2017 21:41 > > To: Andy Blunden; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > > > David, I admire much of what you write in your first three examples in > > your prior post. But I am reacting to your latter post on Chess. It is > the > > second or third time that you bring the CHESS example to bear in xmca, > and > > I always feel uneasy about it. > > > > I see the point that there are different developmental stages and that > > these can be best categorised according to the type of generalisation > that > > the child can engage into. Obviously, treating a piece of marble "as if" > it > > was a piece in the game of chess involves a different type of > > generalization than treating the same piece of marble as if it was a > piece > > in the game of "let's put the black pieces in black squares and white > > pieces in white squares". But I do not think that my 20 months daughter > > will put black pieces on black squares in any systematic manner simply > > because she can PERCEIVE and act upon the difference between black and > > white; and indeed I do not think that my 7 years old first daughter will > do > > any of these things with the chess pieces, considering she has never > > learned to play chess. Indeed, why would any child do that? I do strongly > > believe that to get any of my daughters to arrange the pieces by color, > > there would have first to be a TEACHING/LEARNING situation, which itself > > would involve establishing a semantic field, a field that perhaps out of > my > > ignorance I would call semiotic (sign). > > > > In my view, in both cases there are rules and therefore imagination, if > > we listen to Vygotsky's writings on play, and perhaps, as Vygotsky notes, > > there may be a difference in the "moral attitude", but I would be > cautious > > by gross divisions between perceptual and semantic structures. Yes,there > > are different levels, types, or stages in the way semantic fields are > > organised, and that playing the chess pieces as pieces of the CHESS game > > involves a qualitative leap compared to playing them as pieces in the > game > > of putting them together by shape or color; but there is a game going on > in > > both cases, and therefore a perceptual as much as a semiotic structure > > being at play. These are different semiotic contexts, as you say at the > end > > of your e-mail, but I do think that your assertion that in playing with > the > > chess pieces by color "the structure would be visual but not semiotic" > can > > be problematic and may lead to what I consider an incorrect view of the > > relation between higher and lower functions in development. > > > > Alfredo > > ________________________________________ > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > on behalf of David Kellogg > > Sent: 11 January 2017 04:50 > > To: Andy Blunden; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > > > Vygotsky's got a terrific metaphor for how "perezhivanie" is > internalized: > > it is like internalizing the rules of the game of chess. > > > > The child who doesn't know how to play chess simply plays WITH the pieces > > instead of playing them. She or he might try to create a piece-board > > structure by putting black pieces on black squares and white pieces on > > white squares, but the structure is a visual one and not a semiotic one; > > it's about color and not about meaning. The child who DOES know how to > play > > chess plays the pieces instead of playing with them. She or he too > creates > > "structures" but this time they are semiotic ones: a black knight in a > > completely different column and a completely different row, can capture a > > white pawn. > > > > The board is the same and so are the kids; the children may have very > > similar biological and very similar cultural endowments, but they do not > > have the same semiotic context at all. Hence different perezhivanie and > > different personalities. > > > > David Kellogg > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 11:54 AM, Andy Blunden > wrote: > > > > > How to understand the personality? ... i.e., the *development* of the > > > personality? > > > > > > The subject's inheritance, and The subject's experiences > > (/perezhivaniya/) > > > > > > ... just think of how you'd go about writing a good biography or > > > Bildungsroman. > > > > > > Andy > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > Andy Blunden > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > > On 11/01/2017 10:24 AM, David Kellogg wrote: > > > > > >> Andy: > > >> > > >> A good paradox! Word meaning is a unit, but the spoken word itself is > > >> just an element--a thing. We can see that this is, on the face of it, > > >> impossible: within a single holistic analysis, an element can be a > part > > of > > >> a unit, but a unit can never be a part of an element. So what you are > > >> referring to when you say that the word is a thing is the "sonic" or > > >> "phasal" quality of the word: its "acoustic" properties, its > > "phonetics". > > >> > > >> But not its phonology. The word that Vygotsky uses for "phoneme" > refers > > >> to the 1929 work of the Prague Circle, originally the Moscow Circle. > He > > is > > >> a LITTLE coy about this, because the founders, Jakobson and > Trubetskoy, > > >> were not very popular with the authorities and Vygotsky already had > > plenty > > >> of heterodox acquaintances to worry about. Nevertheless, whenever > > Vygotsky > > >> says "phoneme", we know he really means what Jakobson and Trubetskoy > > called > > >> "morphophonemes". We know this because the examples he actually > > >> gives--Russian case endings--are morpho-phonemes and not simply > > phonemes: > > >> so for example in English the sound /s/ is a simple phoneme when I say > > the > > >> word "self" but if I say "Andy's" the sound /s/ is a morpho-phoneme: a > > >> difference in sounding that makes a difference in meaning. The system > > (that > > >> is, the paradigmatic menu) of these differences in soundings are what > > the > > >> Moscow and Prague Circles called "phonology" (as OPPOSED to > phonetics), > > and > > >> this is the kind of "phoneme" that Vygotsky is really talking about. > > >> > > >> Still, you can see that it is not what he is talking about when he > says > > >> word meaning, because these units are still nowhere near big enough to > > >> describe the kinds of changes which must occur when verbal thinking > > >> develops. I feel the same way about a lot of the examples offered of > > >> "perezhivanie", including Marc's. If MacDuff's grief or Carla's > epiphany > > >> about the misbehavior of her kids being due to "outside influences" > > really > > >> is the unit of personality and experience that Vygotsky wants us to > use > > >> when we analyse the ontogenesis of personality, then it is no more > > >> appropriate than using the morpho-phoneme to analyse the whole of > verbal > > >> thinking. Just as evolution (of species) requires very different units > > from > > >> history (of classes), development, whether we are talking about verbal > > >> thinking or the personality as a whole, is going to require very > > different > > >> units from learning, whether we are talking about MacDuff or Carla. > The > > >> units must be able to develop; that is, the relationship of the > elements > > >> within them must be susceptible to many changes over time. > > >> > > >> Let me give three examples of how this happens in different > > >> "perezhivanie". They are not mine; they are Vygotsky's, and they are > all > > >> from the Pedological Lectures. > > >> > > >> First, the Crisis at One. Neither the biological nor the social > > endowment > > >> of the child greatly changes in the acquisition of speech; > nevertheless, > > >> the relationship between the personality and the environment, of which > > both > > >> personality moments and environmental ones are constituent elements, > is > > >> entirely transformed. Here we are not talking about phonemes, or even > > >> morpho-phonemes: we are talking about "wordings"--whole utterances. In > > >> Melbourne I presented some data that demonstrated this beautifully--a > > >> child's first word is actually an attempt to imitate a whole > > conversation. > > >> > > >> Second, the Crisis at Three. Vygotsky spends a lot of time discussing > > the > > >> "Seven Stars"--the symptoms of the "Terrible Twos" and "Threenagehood" > > >> noted by harried parents everywhere. But by the end of his analysis > it's > > >> clear that what really happens is a new relationship between wish and > > will: > > >> in extreme cases, the child actually wishes for one thing (e.g. > > compromise) > > >> and wills the opposite (the everlasting "No!"). Again, neither the > > >> personality moments as such nor the environmental ones change, but > > there is > > >> a separation and a sorting which allows the subordination of wish to > > will > > >> that we see in play. This isn't the kind of "aha" moment that Marc is > > >> offering us at all: Vygotsky actually calls it the "antipode" of > future > > >> will, because instead of enabling will it actually paralyzes it. But > it > > is > > >> indubitably a key moment in the development of the relation of > > personality > > >> to environmental moments that we see in "perizhivanie". > > >> > > >> Thirdly, the Crisis at Seven. I think Gonzalez Rey makes a total hash > of > > >> this, and I get very cross when I read his article. It is not true > that > > the > > >> essence of perizhivanie remained a mystery to Vygotsky simply because > > he no > > >> longer subscribes to "the aesthetic reaction" and "catharsis" and > other > > >> notions that he toyed with in Psych of Art (he's no longer doing > > >> experiments on changes in breathing rate when people read the works of > > >> Bunin either!). It might be true that he never offered a system of > facts > > >> and methodological procedures for perezivanie, but that was only > because > > >> one already existed, for example in the work of Wallon and Stern and > > >> others. It is demonstrably not true that when Vygotsky says that the > > speech > > >> environment of those around him does not change when the child learns > to > > >> talk at one, he is not "profoundly contradictory with the concept of > > >> sense": when you read the quotation in context, it is very clear that > > what > > >> he is referring to are the kinds of absolute indicators used by > Zalkind: > > >> how often the parents read the newspapers, the dialect they speak, and > > >> their educational background. These do not change, and if the child > > wants > > >> to make sense, these are the factors the child will have to relate to. > > >> > > >> Vygotsky gives the example of a child who is severely retarded. The > > child > > >> wants to play with other children and is rejected. The child walks > down > > the > > >> street and the other children follow, laughing. The child is shrieked > > at, > > >> insulted, but as soon as the humiliation stops, the child is perfectly > > >> happy with himself. Vygotsky points out that the child is not able to > > >> "co-generalize" the "perizhivanie" of the humiliations: each is > > unpleasant, > > >> but they are entirely separate and cannot be connected with any > internal > > >> sense of inferiority. A normal child, however, is able to > "internalize" > > >> these humiliations and consequently develops a sense of inferiority. > We > > can > > >> see that what has happened is the insertion of what Vygotsky calls an > > >> "intellectual" moment: an inner layer, which is what distinguishes > later > > >> Chaplin movies from earlier ones (again, Vygotsky's example, not > mine!) > > and > > >> what brings about the "loss of directness and naivete" that we see in > > >> pre-schoolers. > > >> > > >> I think that the reason people find "perizhivanie" so hard to work > with > > >> is the same reason that they find "word meaning" hard to work with: it > > >> develops. The feeling of drinking milk as the infant drinks it is > > >> perizhivanie, and the thought of being humiliated when you are mulling > > it > > >> over and contemplating revenge is also perizhivanie, and only a > profound > > >> analysis which includes ontogenetic development and not just learning > > will > > >> show the inner link between them. It's for that reason that I think > that > > >> "activity" is not a useful unit of analysis and I am much more > inclined > > to > > >> use your word "project", so long as it can include what Vygotsky calls > > >> "inner activeness". > > >> > > >> Vygotsky says: > > >> > > >> > > >> ????? ? ?????????, ?????????? ? ?. ?., ? ???? ???? ? ?????????? > > >> ???????????, ??? ?????????? ???????????? ??????????????? ????????? > > >> ??????????????? ?? ??????? ? ??????? ?????????????. ??? ??? ????? > ????? > > >> ?????????? ?????????? ? ???????? ???????? ??????????? ? ???, ???, ? ?? > > >> ????? ??? ? ?????????? ???????? ??? ?????????? ???????????? > ???????????? > > >> ???????????????? ????? ? ?????????, ??????? ???????????, ? ???????? > > >> ???????? ?? ????? ???????????? ?????????????? ???????????, > ???????????? > > >> ??????????? ?????????? ?????????? ?? ????????? ? ??????? ????????????. > > ??? > > >> ??? ???????, ??????? ????? ??????????, ? ?? ????? ????? ?? ?????? ??? > > ????? > > >> ???-??????, ???, ? ???????? ????????? ?????????????? ??????? ? > > ?????????? > > >> ????????????. > > >> > > >> When I think, remember, etc. I am dealing withinner activeness; this > > >> psychological process of inner activity is not directly linked to any > > >> external activity. The new form of inner activeness in the School Age > > >> consists of this: that while during the preschool years these inner > > >> activities demonstrated an immediate link with action, with external > > >> activeness, in the school years we have a relative autonomy which > > emerges, > > >> inner activeness which is relatively independent of external > activities. > > >> Here is already a child who can think, at the same time when he is > > doing or > > >> seeing something, one in whom has emerged a differentiation of inner > and > > >> outer activities. > > >> > > >> David Kellogg > > >> Macquarie University > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 10:07 AM, Andy Blunden > > >> ablunden@mira.net>> wrote: > > >> > > >> David: "Are words really units?" > > >> > > >> Well, firstly, "units" is a *relative* term. That is, > > >> the question is: are words units of something, some > > >> complex process subject to analysis. And which? > > >> > > >> Secondly, according to Vygotsky, "no." The concept > > >> Vygotsky proposes as a unit is "word meaning" which he > > >> says is a unity of sound and meaning. The sound is an > > >> artefact, which, detached from its meaningful > > >> utterance in a transactional context is just a thing, > > >> viz., a word. Whereas "word meaning" is an > > >> arrtefact-mediated action, a unit of human social > > >> activity. > > >> > > >> It is true that words can be countable or mass > > >> according to context, but I wasn't talking about words > > >> was I? I was talking about word meaning. > > >> > > >> Andy > > >> > > >> ------------------------------------------------------------ > > >> Andy Blunden > > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy > > >> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective- > > decision-making > > >> > >> decision-making> > > >> > > >> On 8/01/2017 7:59 AM, David Kellogg wrote: > > >> > > >> Are words really units? When we look at their > > >> ideational meaning (that is, > > >> their logical and experiential content--their > > >> capacity for representing and > > >> linking together human experiences) they seem to > > >> fall into two very > > >> different categories: lexical words like > > >> "perezhivanie" or "sense" or > > >> "personality" of "individual" and grammatical > > >> words like "of", or "might", > > >> or "is". The lexical words seem to behave like > > >> units--they are bounded, > > >> discrete, and, as Andy would say, "countable" (the > > >> problem is that almost > > >> all nouns are both countable and uncountable > > >> depending on the context you > > >> put them in, so this distinction is really not as > > >> essential as Andy seems > > >> to assume). But the more grammatical words seem to > > >> be elements of some > > >> larger unit, which we can call wording. > > >> > > >> Veresov and Fleer come up against this problem > > >> with "edintsvo" and > > >> "edintsa". Of course, as they say, the two words > > >> are distinct. But this > > >> doesn't necessarily mean that the former always > > >> corresponds to "unity" in > > >> English and the latter is always "unit". If you > > >> look at the paragraph they > > >> translate on 330, you can see that Vygotsky starts > > >> with an idea that is > > >> quite "synoptic" and is well expressed by "unit". > > >> But in the last sentence > > >> there is a sense that "perezhivanie" is a > > >> meta-stable unit--one that > > >> remains self-similar only through a process of > > >> thorough change, like a > > >> bicycle whose every part is replaced--and in > > >> English is it is better to > > >> express this idea with "unity". The problem is > > >> that the differences between > > >> "edintsvo" and "edintsva" in Russian is a matter > > >> of gender (I think) and > > >> not simply abstractness, and as a result the > > >> English version, which cannot > > >> use the resource of gender,has to rely on > > >> abstractness, so the words > > >> "unity" and "unit" are somewhat more distinct and > > >> less linked than > > >> "edintsvo" and "edintsva". > > >> > > >> There are other problems that are similar. When > > >> Gonzalez Rey uses the word > > >> "final moment" to refer to the final period of > > >> Vygotsky's thinking, he > > >> leaves the anglophone reader the impression that > > >> he is referring to > > >> Vygotsky's deathbed thoughts. On the other hand, > > >> when Veresov and Fleer use > > >> "factor" to translate the same Russian word that > > >> Gonzalez Rey is using, > > >> they are giving us something more quantitative > > >> than Vygotsky intended, and > > >> their translation of "dalee nerazloshim'im > > >> chastyami etava edinstva" > > >> into "vital and further indivisible part of the > > >> whole" is quite opaque in > > >> English (notice that here Veresov and Fleer use > > >> "whole" to translate > > >> "edinstva" rather than "unit"!) At some point you > > >> have to accept that you > > >> can change Russian words into English words as if > > >> you were exchanging > > >> rubles for dollars, but you still won't be able to > > >> buy a samovar at Walmart. > > >> > > >> David Kellogg > > >> Macquarie University > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 5:21 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > > >> > > > >> wrote: > > >> > > >> Larry, all, > > >> > > >> our arguments in the 2014 address a science > > >> education literature in which > > >> the constructivist perspective is the leading > > >> perspective; We note that the > > >> assertion that people learn from experience is > > >> everywhere taken for granted > > >> but nowhere accounted for. We resort to > > >> pragmatist and phenomenological > > >> literature along with Vygotsky's insights to > > >> point out the need to account > > >> for learning as something that cannot be the > > >> result of an individual's > > >> construction; in experience there is always > > >> something in excess of what you > > >> intended, and this is a basic feature of > > >> doing, of performing. I take that > > >> to be your "trans" in the trans/zhivanie word, > > >> Larry, which already is > > >> denoted in the word PERezhivanie. > > >> > > >> But I do not wish to move our discussion too > > >> far away from Marc's paper > > >> and the Perezhivanie special issue. We also > > >> risk disengaging many that have > > >> not have the privilege we've had to have the > > >> time to read so many articles > > >> in just few days into the new year. I think we > > >> are a point in the > > >> discussion where a pretty clear point of > > >> agreement/disagreement, and > > >> therefore of possibility for growth, has been > > >> reached with regard to the > > >> view of perezhivanie as "an experience" and as > > >> the "working over it". I > > >> think that to allow as many as possible to > > >> follow, and hopefully also > > >> engage, I think it will be helpful to bring > > >> the diverse perspectives and > > >> theoretical accounts to matter in accounting > > >> for some actual material. And > > >> there are a number of cases described in the > > >> articles, including Marc's > > >> case of a teacher, as well as everyday facts, > > >> such as those brought by > > >> Beth, and in Beth's article... > > >> > > >> I take the task for myself too, but Saturday > > >> morning need to attend to > > >> other things! > > >> A > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> ________________________________________ > > >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >> > > >> > >> > > > >> on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com > > >> > > >> > >> > > > >> Sent: 07 January 2017 18:26 > > >> To: Andy Blunden; Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended > > >> Mind, Culture, Activity; > > >> Larry Purss > > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and > > >> Perezhivanie! > > >> > > >> Andy, Peter, i hope the intention to move > > >> beyond politeness to struggle > > >> with this topic materializes. > > >> In this vein i want to introduce exploration > > >> of the 'excess' of actual > > >> over intended meaning as he sketched his > > >> introduction to 'experience'. > > >> > > >> Citing Dewey, Alfredo says that this excess of > > >> actual learning over > > >> intended learning INCLUDES what Dewey refers > > >> to as 'attitudes' and these > > >> 'attitudes' are FUNDAMENTALLY what count in > > >> the future. > > >> Alfredo and Roth then add this summary > > >> statement : > > >> > > >> There is therefore, a need to theorize > > >> experience in terms that do not > > >> assume control and rationality as the sine qua > > >> non of learning. It also > > >> implies a need to develop analytical accounts > > >> that retain the 'uncertainty' > > >> that is an 'integral part' of human experience. > > >> > > >> Where are Alfredo and Roth leading us with > > >> this sketch of experience? To > > >> highlight 'attitudes' that occur in the excess > > >> of actual over intended > > >> learning? The word 'attitudes' generates > > >> images of (atmosphere) and (moods) > > >> that 'flow' like cascading waterfalls that can > > >> be imaged as (force) or as > > >> (receptive). Attitudes that flow to places > > >> where they are received within a > > >> certain attitude of care and concern. Not as > > >> forceful an image as moving > > >> only with control and rationality. Describing > > >> 'weaker' thought that > > >> remains uncertain but that also opens us to > > >> the other's peril and plight. > > >> Possibly a post-analytic motion that exceeds > > >> the intended by living-through > > >> the actual that develops 'attitudes' that are > > >> fundamentally what count for > > >> the future. > > >> > > >> > > >> Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > >> > > >> From: Andy Blunden > > >> Sent: January 7, 2017 5:00 AM > > >> To: Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, > > >> Activity > > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and > > >> Perezhivanie! > > >> > > >> OK Peter, what you say is all very true I am > > >> sure, but it > > >> entails conflating activity and action (as > > >> mass nouns) and > > >> context and mediation, and makes the required > > >> distinction > > >> much like one could find multiple meanings for > > >> the word > > >> "and" by listing the different phrases and > > >> clauses which can > > >> be linked by "and." > > >> > > >> Andy > > >> > > >> ------------------------------ > > ------------------------------ > > >> Andy Blunden > > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy > > >> > > >> http://www.brill.com/products/ > > book/origins-collective-decisi > > >> on-making > > >> > >> decision-making> > > >> > > >> On 7/01/2017 11:42 PM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > > >> > > >> Let me try to illustrate. > > >> > > >> Reading as mediated action: The > > >> cultural-historical > > >> context of reading mediates how one's > > >> attention and > > >> response are channeled in socially > > >> constructed ways. So, > > >> in one setting, say at home or reading in > > >> the company of > > >> friends, a novel might bring a reader to > > >> tears, or invite > > >> readers to share personal stories that > > >> parallel those of > > >> the plot lines, or laugh out loud. But > > >> another setting, a > > >> formal school or university class, would > > >> have historical > > >> values and practices that mute emotional > > >> and personal > > >> responses, and promote a more sober, > > >> analytic way of > > >> reading and talking that fits with > > >> specific historical > > >> critical conventions and genres, and > > >> discourages others. > > >> > > >> Reading as mediating action: The act of > > >> reading can be > > >> transformational. In reading about an > > >> talking about a > > >> character's actions, a reader might > > >> reconsider a value > > >> system, become more sympathetic to real > > >> people who > > >> resemble oppressed characters, etc. In > > >> other words, > > >> reading a text may serve a mediational > > >> process in which > > >> textual ideas and exemplars enable a > > >> reader to think > > >> differently. > > >> > > >> *From:*Andy Blunden > > >> [mailto:ablunden@mira.net > > >> ] > > >> *Sent:* Saturday, January 7, 2017 6:28 AM > > >> *To:* Peter Smagorinsky > >> >; eXtended Mind, > > >> Culture, Activity > >> > > > >> *Subject:* Re: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year > > >> and Perezhivanie! > > >> > > >> Can you explain in a paragraph or two,. > > >> Peter, rather than > > >> asking us all to read 10,000 words to > > >> extract an answer? > > >> > > >> Andy > > >> > > >> ------------------------------ > > >> ------------------------------ > > >> > > >> Andy Blunden > > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy > > >> > > >> > > >> http://www.brill.com/products/ > > >> book/origins-collective-decision-making > > >> s/book/origins-collective- > > >> decision-making> > > >> > > >> > > >> On 7/01/2017 11:23 PM, Peter Smagorinsky > > >> wrote: > > >> > > >> Andy and others, I tried to work out > > >> the mediated/mediating question > > >> > > >> in the area of reading....see if this helps. > > >> > > >> Smagorinsky, P., & O'Donnell-Allen, > > >> C. (1998). Reading as mediated > > >> > > >> and mediating action: Composing meaning for > > >> literature through multimedia > > >> interpretive texts. Reading Research > > >> Quarterly, 33, 198-226. Available > > >> athttp://www.petersmagorinsky.net/About/ > PDF/RRQ/RRQ1998.pdf > > >> net/About/PDF/RRQ/RRQ1998.pdf> > > >> > > >> -----Original Message----- > > >> > > >> From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >> > > >> > >> .ucsd.edu > > >> > > > >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ > > >> > > >> > > >> mailman.ucsd.edu ] On > > >> Behalf Of Andy Blunden > > >> > > >> Sent: Friday, January 6, 2017 7:12 PM > > >> > > >> To:xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >> > > >> > >> > > > >> > > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year > > >> and Perezhivanie! > > >> > > >> I have never understood this supposed > > >> distinction, Alfredo, between > > >> > > >> "mediated activity" and "mediating activity" > > >> given that all activity is > > >> mediated and all activity mediates. > > >> > > >> Also, could you spell out what you > > >> mean by the "tension" > > >> > > >> between perezhivanie as meaning and > > >> perezhivanie as struggle. > > >> > > >> Andy > > >> > > >> ------------------------------ > > >> ------------------------------ > > >> > > >> Andy Blunden > > >> > > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins- > collective- > > >> s/book/origins-collective- > > > > > >> > > >> decision-making > > >> > > >> On 5/01/2017 6:26 PM, Alfredo Jornet > > >> Gil wrote: > > >> > > >> Thanks Marc for your careful > > >> response. > > >> > > >> I am familiar to Vygotsky's > > >> notion of cultural mediation and I > > >> > > >> am aware and acknowledge that it was > > >> elaborated as a means to overcome > > >> dualism, and that it is not analog to a > > >> computational approach. > > >> > > >> When I brought the computing > > >> analogy, I did so with regard not > > >> > > >> to the concept of cultural mediation in > > >> general, but to the way it can be > > >> (and is) deployed analytically. I react to > > >> what it seems to me a dichotomy > > >> between a "meaning" as something that is > > >> static (thereby a form of > > >> "representation" or reflection of the relation > > >> with the environment instead > > >> of?refraction)?? and the > > >> experiencing-as-struggling, which is described > > >> as?transformation or change. If so, mediation > > >> here would seem to be part of > > >> a methodological device that first dissects "a > > >> type of meaning" from "a > > >> type of activity" (or a given state from the > > >> process that changes that > > >> state), and then unites it by adding the term > > >> "mediation." And this may be > > >> my misreading, but in that (mis)reading (which > > >> perhaps is mostly due to the > > >> fact that in your empirical illustration only > > >> the initial and end product, > > >> i.e., perezhivanie, are described, but not the > > >> experiencing-as-struggle, > > >> that is, the moving between the two), > > >> mediation here seems to do as > > >> analytical concept precisely what you were > > >> afraid our monism was doing: > > >> explaining nothing. Only the end products but > > >> not the process of producing > > >> perezhivanie are revealed. This may be > > >> problematic if one attends to what > > >> Veresov argues in the paper I shared > > >> yesterday, where he defends the notion > > >> of mediation but also specifies that Vygotsky > > >> speaks of *mediating > > >> activity* (as opposed to *mediated* activity). > > >> That is, not mediation by > > >> signs as products, but mediating activity as > > >> the activity of producing > > >> signs (which again is an activity of producing > > >> social relations, perhaps > > >> what you refer as "holistic meanings"?). What > > >> do you think? > > >> > > >> I did not think you were trying > > >> to deny the influence of > > >> > > >> Spinoza, and I do not think we ever said that > > >> Perezhivanie was primarily a > > >> move from Cartesian Dualism to Monism, as you > > >> suggest in your post. I copy > > >> and paste from my prior post: "The fact is > > >> that Vygotsky was building a > > >> theory on the unity of the affect and the > > >> intellect that was to be grounded > > >> on Spinoza, and what we try to do is to > > >> explore how perezhivanie, as a > > >> concept being developed during the same period > > >> (but not finalised or > > >> totally settled!), could be seen from the > > >> perspective of the Spinozist > > >> Vygotsky." > > >> > > >> I totally believe that bringing > > >> the distinction between > > >> > > >> perezhivanie as meaning, and perezhivanie as > > >> struggle, is totally relevant, > > >> and Beth Ferholt's vignettes of Where the Wild > > >> Things Are do indeed > > >> illustrate this. We really need to address > > >> this tension, which as Beth's > > >> examples and as our own everyday experience > > >> shows, is a tension that > > >> matters not just to books and to theories but > > >> to living persons (children, > > >> teachers), a tension that moreover is present > > >> and mentioned in all the > > >> articles of the symposium. The papers offer > > >> different proposals, and I > > >> think is so great we have the chance to > > >> discuss them! I too, as you, am > > >> very interesting in hearing others about the > > >> questions you had concerning > > >> sense and meaning. > > >> > > >> Alfredo > > >> > > >> From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >> > > >> mailman > > >> .ucsd.edu > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> > > > >> mailman > > >> .ucsd.edu > > >> > > > >> on behalf of Marc > > >> > > >> Clara > > >> > > >> > >> > > > >> > >> > > > >> > > >> Sent: 04 January 2017 22:31 > > >> > > >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > >> > > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New > > >> Year and Perezhivanie! > > >> > > >> Thank you very much, Alfredo, for > > >> sharing this excellent paper by > > >> > > >> Veresov, and thanks also for your > > >> responses, which really helped > > >> > > >> me to > > >> > > >> better understand your points. My > > >> main doubt about your proposal > > >> > > >> was/is caused by the statement > > >> that the idea of cultural > > >> > > >> mediation/mediator implies a > > >> cartesian dualism. This shocks me > > >> > > >> because, to me, the idea of > > >> cultural mediation is absolutely > > >> > > >> crucial > > >> > > >> (in fact, the keystone) for the > > >> construction of a monist (and > > >> > > >> scientific) psychology that does > > >> not forget mind -that is, a > > >> > > >> cultural > > >> > > >> psychology. From your response, > > >> however, I realized that we may > > >> > > >> be > > >> > > >> approaching the idea of mediation > > >> in different ways. I talk of > > >> > > >> mediation and mediators in a > > >> quite restricted way. The starting > > >> > > >> point > > >> > > >> of my understanding of mediation > > >> is a dialectical relationship > > >> > > >> (organic, transactional) between > > >> the subject and the world > > >> > > >> (Vygotsky departs from the scheme > > >> stimulus-response, from reflexology). > > >> > > >> This relationship, that Vygotsky > > >> calls primitive psychological > > >> > > >> functions, would be basically > > >> biological. However, in human > > >> > > >> beings > > >> > > >> this relationship is mediated by > > >> cultural means: signs and > > >> > > >> tools; or > > >> > > >> primary, secondary and terciary > > >> artifacts. These cultural means > > >> > > >> reorganize the primitive > > >> functions (dialectic S-O relationship), > > >> > > >> which > > >> > > >> become then higher psychological > > >> functions (S-M-O) (see for > > >> > > >> example, > > >> > > >> The problem of the cultural > > >> development of the child, in The > > >> > > >> Vygotsky > > >> > > >> Reader). Now, the subject, the > > >> cultural mediators, and the > > >> > > >> object form > > >> > > >> an inseparable dialectical unit, > > >> so that the subject acts on > > >> > > >> (transforms) the object through > > >> the prism of the cultural > > >> > > >> mediators, > > >> > > >> the object acts on (transforms) > > >> the subject also through the > > >> > > >> prism of > > >> > > >> the cultural mediators, and the > > >> cultural means are themselves > > >> > > >> also > > >> > > >> transformed as a consequence of > > >> their mediation in this > > >> > > >> continuous > > >> > > >> dynamic dialectical tension. > > >> Here, for me, it is important the > > >> > > >> idea > > >> > > >> that the cultural means are as > > >> material (if we assume a > > >> > > >> materialist > > >> > > >> monism) as all the rest of the > > >> world; in fact, are parts of the > > >> > > >> material world which become signs > > >> or tools (and can be therefore > > >> > > >> socially distributed). This > > >> permits the introduction of the > > >> > > >> scientific > > >> > > >> study of mind-consciousness (as > > >> mediating systems of signs), > > >> > > >> because > > >> > > >> mind is not anymore something > > >> immaterial and unobservable, but > > >> > > >> it is > > >> > > >> as material and observable as the > > >> rest of the natural world. It > > >> > > >> is > > >> > > >> from this view that, for me, the > > >> idea of cultural mediation is > > >> > > >> the > > >> > > >> keystone of a monist psychology > > >> that includes mind. Thus, when I > > >> > > >> speak > > >> > > >> of mediators, I refer to the > > >> cultural means which mediate in the > > >> > > >> S-O > > >> > > >> dialectics; I am especially > > >> interested in signs/secondary > > >> > > >> artifacts. > > >> > > >> Here, it is perhaps necessary to > > >> insist that when I talk of > > >> > > >> studying > > >> > > >> mediators (and their semantic > > >> structure), this doesn't mean that > > >> > > >> they > > >> > > >> are taken out from the activity > > >> (the flux of live) in which they > > >> > > >> mediate (since out of activity > > >> they are not signs anymore); > > >> > > >> here, I > > >> > > >> think Vygotsky tries again to > > >> overcome another old dichotomy, the > > >> > > >> functionalism-structuralism one. > > >> I hope that all this makes also > > >> > > >> clear the difference between this view and > > >> that of computational > > >> psychologies (which in general are profoundly > > >> and explicitly dualist and > > >> not dialectic). > > >> > > >> Back to perezhivanie, I'm not > > >> obviously trying to deny the > > >> > > >> influence > > >> > > >> of Spinoza on Vygotsky's thinking > > >> (this is explicit in Vygotsky's > > >> > > >> writings, especially in "The > > >> teaching about emotions", in the > > >> > > >> Vol.6 of > > >> > > >> the Collected Works). But I have > > >> doubts that Vygotsky's > > >> > > >> introduction > > >> > > >> of the concept of perezhivanie is > > >> to be regarded primarily as a > > >> > > >> movement towards monism (from a > > >> previous cartesian dualism), and > > >> > > >> that > > >> > > >> this movement questions the > > >> concept of cultural mediation. > > >> > > >> Instead, > > >> > > >> and I think that this is in line > > >> with some of Gonzalez-Rey > > >> > > >> observations in his paper, my > > >> impression is that the > > >> > > >> introduction of > > >> > > >> the concept of perezhivanie > > >> responds more to a movement (a > > >> > > >> further > > >> > > >> step) towards holism (something > > >> that, in my understanding, can > > >> > > >> also be > > >> > > >> found in Spinoza). Thus, I think > > >> that the word meaning is still > > >> > > >> the > > >> > > >> unit of analysis in the last > > >> Vygotsky -and therefore, the idea of > > >> > > >> cultural mediation is still > > >> crucial (in fact, in The problem of > > >> > > >> the > > >> > > >> environment, he connects the > > >> concept of perezhivanie, which has > > >> > > >> just > > >> > > >> introduced, to the development of > > >> word meaning [p.345-346, also > > >> > > >> cited > > >> > > >> in my paper]). However, in my > > >> view, in the last Vygotsky the > > >> > > >> focus is > > >> > > >> not anymore primarily on the > > >> word-meaning as formed for things > > >> > > >> (or > > >> > > >> collections of things, as in the > > >> ontogenetic research with > > >> > > >> Sakharov), but the focus is now in the > > >> formation of meaning for holistic > > >> situations. > > >> > > >> Best regards, > > >> > > >> Marc. > > >> > > >> 2017-01-03 19:16 GMT+01:00 > > >> Alfredo Jornet Gil< > > >> > > >> a.j.gil@iped.uio.no > > >> > > > >> > >> >: > > >> > > >> Hi Marc, all, > > >> > > >> thanks for joining and for > > >> your interesting work, which I > > >> > > >> follow > > >> > > >> since I became aware of it. I > > >> appreciate the way in your > > >> > > >> paper you > > >> > > >> show careful and honest > > >> attention to the texts of the authors > > >> > > >> involved, but perhaps most of > > >> all I appreciate that the > > >> > > >> paper makes > > >> > > >> the transformational > > >> dimension related to struggle and change > > >> > > >> salient, a dimension all > > >> papers deemed central to > > >> > > >> perezhivanie. And I > > >> > > >> have learned more about > > >> Vasilyuk by reading your paper. But > > >> > > >> I also > > >> > > >> see that we have approached > > >> the question of perezhivanie > > >> > > >> differently > > >> > > >> and I think that addressing > > >> the questions that you raise > > >> > > >> concerning > > >> > > >> our article may be a good way > > >> to both respond and discuss > > >> > > >> your paper. > > >> > > >> I am aware that our use of > > >> the term monism may be > > >> > > >> problematic to > > >> > > >> some, and N. Veresov, who has > > >> recently written about this > > >> > > >> (see > > >> > > >> attached article), warns > > >> against the dangers of simply > > >> > > >> moving from > > >> > > >> dualism into an > > >> undifferentiating monism that relativizes > > >> > > >> everything, > > >> > > >> making development > > >> un-studiable. This seems to be the way in > > >> > > >> which > > >> > > >> you have understood our > > >> argument, and of course this is not > > >> > > >> what we are or want to be doing. > > >> > > >> Probably many will think that > > >> *dialectical materialism* > > >> > > >> rather than > > >> > > >> monism is the proper term, > > >> and I could agree with them; we > > >> > > >> do in fact > > >> > > >> use dialectical materialism > > >> there and elsewhere. Yet, we > > >> > > >> wanted to > > >> > > >> emphasise the Spinozist > > >> influence (an influence that also > > >> > > >> runs > > >> > > >> through Marx) and so we found > > >> it appropriate to use the term > > >> > > >> monism, > > >> > > >> a term that Vygotsky uses > > >> before arguing that Spinoza > > >> > > >> "develops an essentially materialistic view" > > >> > > >> (Collected Works, Vol. 6, p. > > >> 124). For us, the aim is > > >> > > >> working out > > >> > > >> ways to empirically examine > > >> and formulate problems in ways > > >> > > >> that do > > >> > > >> not reify a mind-body dualism. > > >> > > >> Although overcoming dualism > > >> is foundational to the CHAT > > >> > > >> paradigm, I > > >> > > >> would however not say that > > >> Vygotsky did get to solve all of > > >> > > >> the > > >> > > >> problems that Cartesian > > >> dualism had created for psychology, > > >> > > >> even > > >> > > >> though he recognised those > > >> problems brilliantly as early as > > >> > > >> in the > > >> > > >> "Crisis". It should suffice > > >> to cite Vygotsky's own remarks, > > >> > > >> which we quote in the paper (and which A.N. > > >> > > >> Leont'ev mentions in the > > >> introduction to the collected > > >> > > >> works), where > > >> > > >> Vygotsky explicitly critiques > > >> some of his own prior ideas > > >> > > >> for failing > > >> > > >> to overcome dualism. We agree > > >> with those who, like F. G. > > >> > > >> Rey, see > > >> > > >> Vygotsky's project as a > > >> developing rather than as a > > >> > > >> finalised one. > > >> > > >> The fact is that Vygotsky was > > >> building a theory on the unity > > >> > > >> of the > > >> > > >> affect and the intellect that > > >> was to be grounded on Spinoza, > > >> > > >> and what > > >> > > >> we try to do is to explore > > >> how perezhivanie, as a concept > > >> > > >> being > > >> > > >> developed during the same > > >> period (but not finalised or > > >> > > >> totally > > >> > > >> settled!), could be seen from > > >> the perspective of the > > >> > > >> Spinozist Vygotsky. > > >> > > >> As you note, in our article > > >> we argue that, if one takes the > > >> > > >> Spinozist > > >> > > >> one-substance approach, > > >> classical concepts used in > > >> > > >> non-classical > > >> > > >> psychology, at least in the > > >> way they are commonly used in > > >> > > >> the current > > >> > > >> literature, should be > > >> revised. One such concept is > > >> > > >> mediation. And I > > >> > > >> personally do not have much > > >> of a problem when mediation is > > >> > > >> used to > > >> > > >> denote the fundamental fact > > >> that every thing exists always > > >> > > >> through > > >> > > >> *another*, never in and of > > >> itself. But I do think that it is > > >> > > >> problematic to identify > > >> MEDIATORS, such as "a meaning", as a > > >> > > >> means to > > >> > > >> account for or explain > > >> developmental processes and learning > > >> > > >> events, > > >> > > >> precisely because it is > > >> there, at least in my view, that > > >> > > >> dualism creeps in. > > >> > > >> For example, I find it > > >> paradoxical that you are concerned > > >> > > >> that our > > >> > > >> monist approach risks turning > > >> perezhivanie into a useless > > >> > > >> category > > >> > > >> because it may be used to > > >> explain everything and nothing, > > >> > > >> and yet you > > >> > > >> do not seem to have a problem > > >> using the term mediation to > > >> > > >> account for > > >> > > >> the transformation of > > >> perezhivanie without clearly > > >> > > >> elaborating on how > > >> > > >> mediation does change > > >> anything or what it looks like as a > > >> > > >> real > > >> > > >> process. How is it different > > >> saying that a perezhivanie > > >> > > >> mediates the > > >> > > >> experiencing-as-struggle from > > >> simply saying that it > > >> > > >> "affects" or > > >> > > >> "determines" it? Indeed, if > > >> perezhivanie mediates > > >> > > >> experiencing-as-struggle, > > >> does not experiencing-as-struglgle > > >> > > >> too > > >> > > >> mediate perezhivanie? And do > > >> not both may be said to mediate > > >> > > >> development, or development mediate them? Is > > >> not this explaining everything > > >> and nothing? > > >> > > >> I do believe you can argue > > >> that there is a difference between > > >> > > >> mediation and classical > > >> psychology's cause-effect relations, > > >> > > >> but to > > >> > > >> show this you need to dig > > >> into the dialectical underpinnings > > >> > > >> of the > > >> > > >> theory. In your paper, you > > >> offer a nice analysis of a lovely > > >> > > >> case of > > >> > > >> a teacher who, in dealing > > >> with a challenge with one of her > > >> > > >> students, > > >> > > >> changes her perezhivanie. I > > >> think you can rightly argue that > > >> > > >> there is > > >> > > >> a semiotic transformation, > > >> and I fully support your > > >> > > >> statement that by > > >> > > >> studying discourse we can > > >> empirically approach questions of > > >> > > >> psychological development. > > >> The contradictions you show as > > >> > > >> being > > >> > > >> involved and resolved > > >> resonate really well with what I > > >> > > >> experience as > > >> > > >> a parent or as a teacher in > > >> the classroom. Yet, without > > >> > > >> unpacking > > >> > > >> what this "mediation" taking > > >> place between one perezhivanie > > >> > > >> and the > > >> > > >> next one means as a concrete > > >> and real, the same analysis > > >> > > >> could be done taking an information processing > > >> approach: > > >> > > >> there is an situation that is > > >> processed (represented?) in > > >> > > >> one way, > > >> > > >> which then leads to a > > >> (cognitive) dissonance, and then there > > >> > > >> is a > > >> > > >> cognitive resolution by means > > >> of which the situation is > > >> > > >> presented > > >> > > >> differently in consciousness > > >> (indeed, when seen in this way, > > >> > > >> the term > > >> > > >> perezhivanie and the term > > >> "representation" become almost > > >> > > >> indistinguishable). How is > > >> mediation, as an analytical > > >> > > >> concept, > > >> > > >> helping here? And most > > >> importantly to the question of > > >> > > >> perezhivanie, > > >> > > >> how is this analysis going to > > >> show the internal connection > > >> > > >> between > > >> > > >> intellect and affect that > > >> Vygotsky formulates as > > >> > > >> constitutive of the notion of perezhivanie? > > >> > > >> I believe that the key lies > > >> in understanding what Vygotsky > > >> > > >> means when > > >> > > >> he says that perezhivanie is > > >> a unit of analysis. I will not > > >> > > >> repeat > > >> > > >> here what already is written > > >> in at least a couple of the > > >> > > >> articles in > > >> > > >> the special issue (Blunden, > > >> ours), that is the difference > > >> > > >> between > > >> > > >> analysis by elements and unit > > >> analysis (Vygotsky 1987). A > > >> > > >> unit > > >> > > >> analysis approach is > > >> consistent with Spinoza, for whom > > >> > > >> cause-effect > > >> > > >> explanations were not > > >> adequate, requiring instead an > > >> > > >> understanding of > > >> > > >> self-development, > > >> perezhivanie as a kernel cell for the > > >> > > >> development > > >> > > >> of personality. And I think > > >> you may be after this in your > > >> > > >> article in > > > > > > > > > > > > > From ablunden@mira.net Sat Jan 14 20:21:55 2017 From: ablunden@mira.net (Andy Blunden) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2017 15:21:55 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! In-Reply-To: References: <1484256089562.1752@iped.uio.no> <58791c9d.4a35630a.1111d.ed74@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <5162f846-8bd9-3260-7d40-b343e4b6af4e@mira.net> /Perezhivanie/ is a type of activity, according Vasilyuk, as Alex Kozulin remarked some years ago, a "life-project." Andy ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making On 15/01/2017 10:22 AM, Antti Rajala wrote: > ... > > Andy also uses Vasilyuk in informing his definition of perezhivanie. I > wondered that for Andy, in what way perezhivenie would be different as a > unit of analysis as compared to activity (Andy - I have read your critique > of Leontiev, so please feel free to substitute e.g., collaborative project > for activity). I like in Andy's paper the idea that through perezhivanie > not only the actor is changed but sometimes also the social circumstances > (also the reference to Bildungsroman). Why only focus on ontogenesis and > not also sociogenesis? In my own work, I am interested to study the > relation between perezhivanie and agency. > > From marc.clara@gmail.com Sun Jan 15 08:27:14 2017 From: marc.clara@gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Marc_Clar=C3=A0?=) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2017 17:27:14 +0100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! In-Reply-To: <5162f846-8bd9-3260-7d40-b343e4b6af4e@mira.net> References: <1484256089562.1752@iped.uio.no> <58791c9d.4a35630a.1111d.ed74@mx.google.com> <5162f846-8bd9-3260-7d40-b343e4b6af4e@mira.net> Message-ID: Hi, all, I have the impression that part of this thread of the discussion echoes the old (and eternal) discussion between functionalism and structuralism. In our case, perhaps these two broad positions would seem to take the form of what could be called an ?activity approach? and a ?semiotic approach? respectively. Or in other terms, ?perezhivanie is activity-function? vs. ?perezhivanie is structure-counciousness-mind?. In my understanding, within the ?activity approach?, Alfredo's position seems to be more radical than Antti's. I see Alfredo's position somewhat closer, in some aspects, to ?participation? approaches (e.g. Rogoff's). If I understand him well, he seems to assume that in reality there is not anything but social interaction; that is, that not only there is a UNITY but also an IDENTITY between activity, social interaction, and meaning, and that therefore all is reducible to social interaction. Thus, in his article with Roth, they write: ?In the case of Sylvia?s categorizing her mystery object, we already see her as part of the social relation that is mathematical practice, a (social) practice that exists in the linking of an act of classification to its account. That practice is social in and as of the link; in the life of Sylvia, it first was a social relation. Thus, there is not something happening in the relation that then is transferred to the inside of the girl.? (p.321). Accordingly, Alfredo, in this conversation, says that ?a changing activity IS changing ?meaning? (where ?to be? is to be heard as an ?unity/identity? in the dialectical sense)?, and also that a ?SIGN is not a thing, but a relation between two persons. But the sign then is not something between things, or even between persons; it really and concretely is a relation between people that has to be accounted for empirically?. He adds that mediation is a ?particular class of activities in which sign relations are produced?. Reading Antti's questions and comments, I have the impression that his position assumes the UNITY, but not the IDENTITY, between activity, meaning and social interaction. But before going ahead, I have to stress that, as I have already mentioned in a previous e-mail, Alfredo's use of the concepts of SIGN and CULTURAL MEDIATION seems to me very different from the way I use these concepts, which I tried to make explicit in a previous e-mail. It would seem that this could be because, from Alfredo's view, the things and phenomena I call signs and cultural mediation don't really exist, so he uses these concepts to refer to phenomena that, in his view, do really exist (this also echoes Vytosky's ?historical meaning of the crisis in psychology?). I have the impression that others in this discussion (e.g., David, Andy, me), which take a more semiotic approach, departs from the assumption that these phenomena and things that, in my understanding, Vygotsky calls cultural mediation and signs, do exist, and that are the key to study mind-consciousness. It seems to me that Antti also would assume the existence of signs and cultural mediation (in Vygotsky's terms) but that he is concerned on whether we have to study a structure (that is, consciousness-mind, and therefore use as a unit the sign-meaning -a microcosm of consciousness) or we have to study a function (that is, activity). One of the many contributions I find interesting in Vygotsky is precisely that, in my understanding, he tries to conciliate these two positions -functionalism and structuralism. In my view, he departs from the idea that how the things are is strongly related to how the things function (Vygotsky's law of the unity of the structure and function in thinking). Vygotsky writes: ?It is becoming clear that functions depend on the structure of that which is thought. Any act of thought must somehow establish a connection between the various aspects of reality which are represented in consciousness. The way that this reality is represented in consciousness cannot be without some significance in determining the operations of thinking that will be possible. In other words, the various functions of thinking are inevitably dependent on that which functions, is moved, and is the foundation of this process. Stated yet more simply, the functions of thinking depend on the structure of thought itself.? (Vygotsky, collected works, v.1, p.237). I think that this can enable an approach which overcome what is often presented as a dichotomy between structure and function, without eliminating neither structure nor function. That is, the object of study can be mind-consciousness, and therefore the unit can be the sign-meaning; but the mind-consciousness must always be studied at work, that is, how the mind-consciousness works in psychological functions, i.e. within activity. In my view, this means studying how sign-meaning mediates in specific psychological functions. More specifically, in the study mentioned in my paper of MCA, it means studying how certain semiotic structures mediate in activities of experiencing-as-struggle. For example, from this study, it seems that certain semiotic structures, which I call modal contradictions (e.g., duty vs. incapability), in m-perezhivanie may be important in experiencing-as-struggle activities: their semiotic transformation seems to imply an emotional transformation, and seems to realize the psychological function of experiencing-as-struggle. Of course, I introduce my empirical study here just to exemplify my point and the general epistemological approach I am assuming; I don't claim that my methodological approach is unproblematic; in fact, I am struggling to deal with the many methodological problems that arise. Just to cite two of these many problems: first, the study is incomplete, in the sense that, as Antti mentions, the social relations which are also a crucial aspect of the activity of experiencing-as-struggle are beyond the scope of this study (I hope finding ways to being able to analyze this aspect in the future); second, although the study intents to be microgenetic, this is done retrospectively from one narrative, what is certainly problematic (the opposite problem is how to identify processes of experiencing-as-struggle in advance, in order to undertake a longitudinal study -this would also permit studying better all aspects of activity). But all this is at a methodological plane, which perhaps would deserve a new thread; I think that the discussion in this thread is more on the epistemological (and at times ontological) plane. Best regards, Marc. 2017-01-15 5:21 GMT+01:00 Andy Blunden : > /Perezhivanie/ is a type of activity, according Vasilyuk, as Alex Kozulin > remarked some years ago, a "life-project." > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Andy Blunden > http://home.mira.net/~andy > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > On 15/01/2017 10:22 AM, Antti Rajala wrote: > >> ... >> >> Andy also uses Vasilyuk in informing his definition of perezhivanie. I >> wondered that for Andy, in what way perezhivenie would be different as a >> unit of analysis as compared to activity (Andy - I have read your >> critique >> of Leontiev, so please feel free to substitute e.g., collaborative project >> for activity). I like in Andy's paper the idea that through perezhivanie >> not only the actor is changed but sometimes also the social circumstances >> (also the reference to Bildungsroman). Why only focus on ontogenesis and >> not also sociogenesis? In my own work, I am interested to study the >> relation between perezhivanie and agency. >> >> >> > From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Fri Jan 13 09:31:59 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2017 17:31:59 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! In-Reply-To: References: <1483344752182.40904@iped.uio.no> <1483467423798.57819@iped.uio.no> <1483601196884.31418@iped.uio.no> <5df5e870-3ef8-70d6-0c17-f8647ba17e62@mira.net> <587124d9.d957620a.4a5a8.bd56@mx.google.com> <1483820996800.91513@iped.uio.no> <1484253698990.7728@iped.uio.no>, Message-ID: <1484328718783.79382@iped.uio.no> Thanks, David, for such a beautiful and clarifying post. You have such a brilliant manner to language Vygotsky in Vygotsky's language! I think we agree much more than we disagree, and before I turn to Andy's very timely link to the "Fate of a Man", this may be a nice tutorial on terminology, at least for me. My only problem had been seeing what to me had looked like an all too empiricist treatment of the notion of perception in your prior post(s) (including some older posts on micro-genesis). But I think you still agree that part of what it takes to become an experienced chess player is being able to ATTEND (and *attention* may be a better term than perception) to the pieces and their position in the board in front of her in much closer detail than the child who merely plays "with" the pieces. Thus the "perception" in the expert may be said to be much more rich and *concrete* than what one "perceives" by merely attending to (abstracting) color and shape relations. But I keep thinking that perception is not the right word here, is it? Certainly not one "element" (I use your wording below) in the unit. But this may just be a wording problem. I really like your very important observation that chess produces life-long learners, whereas the child that merely plays "with" the chess pieces will soon find the game uninteresting. But again I don't think that the key here is an opposition between perceiving and semiosis, but perhaps between habit and conscious awareness (which at the end may be just different words for saying the same thing). As a habit, the task of grouping pieces by color involves a person-environment relation in which the *need* for consciousness (and thereby interest!) to awaken is lesser, thereby offering less possibilities for development. I think it is this that you would phrase as "the environment seems to dominate". The way habits are formed in chess, however, are such that they require of consciousness for the operation to continue (which you may phrase as "personality dominates more"). The relation between habit and awareness is transformed in the higher-order activity (or form of human consciousness) that is chess-playing. Same thing, different words? Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of David Kellogg Sent: 13 January 2017 01:02 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! Alfredo: Let's apply your reasoning to the distinction between non-language, proto-language, and language proper. Imagine a nursery in which there are three beds, one with a child who is only week old and who responds with pleasure to a nipple and with pain to being shaken or dropped, one with a child who is about ten months old and has worked out a system of squeaks and directed cries in order to get attention and deliver an affective response, and one with a child who is nearly two and can ask for objects, evaluate them, and reject them. As you say, perception and semiosis are at work in each situation. But contrary to what you say, they are not equally at work, and the outcomes are very different. There is a good reason why children develop: it's in their interests, both in the long term sense in that it allows a much wider variety of outcomes and in the short term sense in that it allows an escape from ennui. A child who plays the "game" of putting black pieces on black squares and white pieces on white squares will find this game very dull in a matter of hours. A child who plays the game of chess will, in many cases, find a lifetime vocation. Yes, there are "structures" that include perception and semiosis in both cases, but the precise make-up isn't insignificant or irrelevant. One important reason why perezhivanie is such an important unit of structure is that it at last allows us to assign real, concrete, specific values to the influence of its two elements, personality and environment. These vary from period to period--for example, in periods of crisis, the personality always appears to play a leading role (e.g. proto-language in the Crisis at One, negativism in the Crisis at Three, "acting out" in the Crisis at Seven). During stable periods, the environment always appears to dominate (e.g. speech proper in early childhood, play in preschool, and thinking but not thinking-about-thinking in school age). Some "child-centred" pedagogies would like to treat childhood as one long crisis. I think this is a disservice to the child, because it is precisely during the stable periods that the critical neoformations (e.g. protospeech) find a supporting but absolutely crucial role. The child doesn't forget the expressiveness of intonation and stress learned in proto-language, any more than the child who plays chess no longer distinguishes white squares from black ones. David Kellogg Macquarie University On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 7:41 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > David, I admire much of what you write in your first three examples in > your prior post. But I am reacting to your latter post on Chess. It is the > second or third time that you bring the CHESS example to bear in xmca, and > I always feel uneasy about it. > > I see the point that there are different developmental stages and that > these can be best categorised according to the type of generalisation that > the child can engage into. Obviously, treating a piece of marble "as if" it > was a piece in the game of chess involves a different type of > generalization than treating the same piece of marble as if it was a piece > in the game of "let's put the black pieces in black squares and white > pieces in white squares". But I do not think that my 20 months daughter > will put black pieces on black squares in any systematic manner simply > because she can PERCEIVE and act upon the difference between black and > white; and indeed I do not think that my 7 years old first daughter will do > any of these things with the chess pieces, considering she has never > learned to play chess. Indeed, why would any child do that? I do strongly > believe that to get any of my daughters to arrange the pieces by color, > there would have first to be a TEACHING/LEARNING situation, which itself > would involve establishing a semantic field, a field that perhaps out of my > ignorance I would call semiotic (sign). > > In my view, in both cases there are rules and therefore imagination, if > we listen to Vygotsky's writings on play, and perhaps, as Vygotsky notes, > there may be a difference in the "moral attitude", but I would be cautious > by gross divisions between perceptual and semantic structures. Yes,there > are different levels, types, or stages in the way semantic fields are > organised, and that playing the chess pieces as pieces of the CHESS game > involves a qualitative leap compared to playing them as pieces in the game > of putting them together by shape or color; but there is a game going on in > both cases, and therefore a perceptual as much as a semiotic structure > being at play. These are different semiotic contexts, as you say at the end > of your e-mail, but I do think that your assertion that in playing with the > chess pieces by color "the structure would be visual but not semiotic" can > be problematic and may lead to what I consider an incorrect view of the > relation between higher and lower functions in development. > > Alfredo > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of David Kellogg > Sent: 11 January 2017 04:50 > To: Andy Blunden; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > Vygotsky's got a terrific metaphor for how "perezhivanie" is internalized: > it is like internalizing the rules of the game of chess. > > The child who doesn't know how to play chess simply plays WITH the pieces > instead of playing them. She or he might try to create a piece-board > structure by putting black pieces on black squares and white pieces on > white squares, but the structure is a visual one and not a semiotic one; > it's about color and not about meaning. The child who DOES know how to play > chess plays the pieces instead of playing with them. She or he too creates > "structures" but this time they are semiotic ones: a black knight in a > completely different column and a completely different row, can capture a > white pawn. > > The board is the same and so are the kids; the children may have very > similar biological and very similar cultural endowments, but they do not > have the same semiotic context at all. Hence different perezhivanie and > different personalities. > > David Kellogg > Macquarie University > > > > On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 11:54 AM, Andy Blunden wrote: > > > How to understand the personality? ... i.e., the *development* of the > > personality? > > > > The subject's inheritance, and The subject's experiences > (/perezhivaniya/) > > > > ... just think of how you'd go about writing a good biography or > > Bildungsroman. > > > > Andy > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > Andy Blunden > > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > On 11/01/2017 10:24 AM, David Kellogg wrote: > > > >> Andy: > >> > >> A good paradox! Word meaning is a unit, but the spoken word itself is > >> just an element--a thing. We can see that this is, on the face of it, > >> impossible: within a single holistic analysis, an element can be a part > of > >> a unit, but a unit can never be a part of an element. So what you are > >> referring to when you say that the word is a thing is the "sonic" or > >> "phasal" quality of the word: its "acoustic" properties, its > "phonetics". > >> > >> But not its phonology. The word that Vygotsky uses for "phoneme" refers > >> to the 1929 work of the Prague Circle, originally the Moscow Circle. He > is > >> a LITTLE coy about this, because the founders, Jakobson and Trubetskoy, > >> were not very popular with the authorities and Vygotsky already had > plenty > >> of heterodox acquaintances to worry about. Nevertheless, whenever > Vygotsky > >> says "phoneme", we know he really means what Jakobson and Trubetskoy > called > >> "morphophonemes". We know this because the examples he actually > >> gives--Russian case endings--are morpho-phonemes and not simply > phonemes: > >> so for example in English the sound /s/ is a simple phoneme when I say > the > >> word "self" but if I say "Andy's" the sound /s/ is a morpho-phoneme: a > >> difference in sounding that makes a difference in meaning. The system > (that > >> is, the paradigmatic menu) of these differences in soundings are what > the > >> Moscow and Prague Circles called "phonology" (as OPPOSED to phonetics), > and > >> this is the kind of "phoneme" that Vygotsky is really talking about. > >> > >> Still, you can see that it is not what he is talking about when he says > >> word meaning, because these units are still nowhere near big enough to > >> describe the kinds of changes which must occur when verbal thinking > >> develops. I feel the same way about a lot of the examples offered of > >> "perezhivanie", including Marc's. If MacDuff's grief or Carla's epiphany > >> about the misbehavior of her kids being due to "outside influences" > really > >> is the unit of personality and experience that Vygotsky wants us to use > >> when we analyse the ontogenesis of personality, then it is no more > >> appropriate than using the morpho-phoneme to analyse the whole of verbal > >> thinking. Just as evolution (of species) requires very different units > from > >> history (of classes), development, whether we are talking about verbal > >> thinking or the personality as a whole, is going to require very > different > >> units from learning, whether we are talking about MacDuff or Carla. The > >> units must be able to develop; that is, the relationship of the elements > >> within them must be susceptible to many changes over time. > >> > >> Let me give three examples of how this happens in different > >> "perezhivanie". They are not mine; they are Vygotsky's, and they are all > >> from the Pedological Lectures. > >> > >> First, the Crisis at One. Neither the biological nor the social > endowment > >> of the child greatly changes in the acquisition of speech; nevertheless, > >> the relationship between the personality and the environment, of which > both > >> personality moments and environmental ones are constituent elements, is > >> entirely transformed. Here we are not talking about phonemes, or even > >> morpho-phonemes: we are talking about "wordings"--whole utterances. In > >> Melbourne I presented some data that demonstrated this beautifully--a > >> child's first word is actually an attempt to imitate a whole > conversation. > >> > >> Second, the Crisis at Three. Vygotsky spends a lot of time discussing > the > >> "Seven Stars"--the symptoms of the "Terrible Twos" and "Threenagehood" > >> noted by harried parents everywhere. But by the end of his analysis it's > >> clear that what really happens is a new relationship between wish and > will: > >> in extreme cases, the child actually wishes for one thing (e.g. > compromise) > >> and wills the opposite (the everlasting "No!"). Again, neither the > >> personality moments as such nor the environmental ones change, but > there is > >> a separation and a sorting which allows the subordination of wish to > will > >> that we see in play. This isn't the kind of "aha" moment that Marc is > >> offering us at all: Vygotsky actually calls it the "antipode" of future > >> will, because instead of enabling will it actually paralyzes it. But it > is > >> indubitably a key moment in the development of the relation of > personality > >> to environmental moments that we see in "perizhivanie". > >> > >> Thirdly, the Crisis at Seven. I think Gonzalez Rey makes a total hash of > >> this, and I get very cross when I read his article. It is not true that > the > >> essence of perizhivanie remained a mystery to Vygotsky simply because > he no > >> longer subscribes to "the aesthetic reaction" and "catharsis" and other > >> notions that he toyed with in Psych of Art (he's no longer doing > >> experiments on changes in breathing rate when people read the works of > >> Bunin either!). It might be true that he never offered a system of facts > >> and methodological procedures for perezivanie, but that was only because > >> one already existed, for example in the work of Wallon and Stern and > >> others. It is demonstrably not true that when Vygotsky says that the > speech > >> environment of those around him does not change when the child learns to > >> talk at one, he is not "profoundly contradictory with the concept of > >> sense": when you read the quotation in context, it is very clear that > what > >> he is referring to are the kinds of absolute indicators used by Zalkind: > >> how often the parents read the newspapers, the dialect they speak, and > >> their educational background. These do not change, and if the child > wants > >> to make sense, these are the factors the child will have to relate to. > >> > >> Vygotsky gives the example of a child who is severely retarded. The > child > >> wants to play with other children and is rejected. The child walks down > the > >> street and the other children follow, laughing. The child is shrieked > at, > >> insulted, but as soon as the humiliation stops, the child is perfectly > >> happy with himself. Vygotsky points out that the child is not able to > >> "co-generalize" the "perizhivanie" of the humiliations: each is > unpleasant, > >> but they are entirely separate and cannot be connected with any internal > >> sense of inferiority. A normal child, however, is able to "internalize" > >> these humiliations and consequently develops a sense of inferiority. We > can > >> see that what has happened is the insertion of what Vygotsky calls an > >> "intellectual" moment: an inner layer, which is what distinguishes later > >> Chaplin movies from earlier ones (again, Vygotsky's example, not mine!) > and > >> what brings about the "loss of directness and naivete" that we see in > >> pre-schoolers. > >> > >> I think that the reason people find "perizhivanie" so hard to work with > >> is the same reason that they find "word meaning" hard to work with: it > >> develops. The feeling of drinking milk as the infant drinks it is > >> perizhivanie, and the thought of being humiliated when you are mulling > it > >> over and contemplating revenge is also perizhivanie, and only a profound > >> analysis which includes ontogenetic development and not just learning > will > >> show the inner link between them. It's for that reason that I think that > >> "activity" is not a useful unit of analysis and I am much more inclined > to > >> use your word "project", so long as it can include what Vygotsky calls > >> "inner activeness". > >> > >> Vygotsky says: > >> > >> > >> ????? ? ?????????, ?????????? ? ?. ?., ? ???? ???? ? ?????????? > >> ???????????, ??? ?????????? ???????????? ??????????????? ????????? > >> ??????????????? ?? ??????? ? ??????? ?????????????. ??? ??? ????? ????? > >> ?????????? ?????????? ? ???????? ???????? ??????????? ? ???, ???, ? ?? > >> ????? ??? ? ?????????? ???????? ??? ?????????? ???????????? ???????????? > >> ???????????????? ????? ? ?????????, ??????? ???????????, ? ???????? > >> ???????? ?? ????? ???????????? ?????????????? ???????????, ???????????? > >> ??????????? ?????????? ?????????? ?? ????????? ? ??????? ????????????. > ??? > >> ??? ???????, ??????? ????? ??????????, ? ?? ????? ????? ?? ?????? ??? > ????? > >> ???-??????, ???, ? ???????? ????????? ?????????????? ??????? ? > ?????????? > >> ????????????. > >> > >> When I think, remember, etc. I am dealing withinner activeness; this > >> psychological process of inner activity is not directly linked to any > >> external activity. The new form of inner activeness in the School Age > >> consists of this: that while during the preschool years these inner > >> activities demonstrated an immediate link with action, with external > >> activeness, in the school years we have a relative autonomy which > emerges, > >> inner activeness which is relatively independent of external activities. > >> Here is already a child who can think, at the same time when he is > doing or > >> seeing something, one in whom has emerged a differentiation of inner and > >> outer activities. > >> > >> David Kellogg > >> Macquarie University > >> > >> > >> > >> On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 10:07 AM, Andy Blunden >> ablunden@mira.net>> wrote: > >> > >> David: "Are words really units?" > >> > >> Well, firstly, "units" is a *relative* term. That is, > >> the question is: are words units of something, some > >> complex process subject to analysis. And which? > >> > >> Secondly, according to Vygotsky, "no." The concept > >> Vygotsky proposes as a unit is "word meaning" which he > >> says is a unity of sound and meaning. The sound is an > >> artefact, which, detached from its meaningful > >> utterance in a transactional context is just a thing, > >> viz., a word. Whereas "word meaning" is an > >> arrtefact-mediated action, a unit of human social > >> activity. > >> > >> It is true that words can be countable or mass > >> according to context, but I wasn't talking about words > >> was I? I was talking about word meaning. > >> > >> Andy > >> > >> ------------------------------------------------------------ > >> Andy Blunden > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy > >> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective- > decision-making > >> >> decision-making> > >> > >> On 8/01/2017 7:59 AM, David Kellogg wrote: > >> > >> Are words really units? When we look at their > >> ideational meaning (that is, > >> their logical and experiential content--their > >> capacity for representing and > >> linking together human experiences) they seem to > >> fall into two very > >> different categories: lexical words like > >> "perezhivanie" or "sense" or > >> "personality" of "individual" and grammatical > >> words like "of", or "might", > >> or "is". The lexical words seem to behave like > >> units--they are bounded, > >> discrete, and, as Andy would say, "countable" (the > >> problem is that almost > >> all nouns are both countable and uncountable > >> depending on the context you > >> put them in, so this distinction is really not as > >> essential as Andy seems > >> to assume). But the more grammatical words seem to > >> be elements of some > >> larger unit, which we can call wording. > >> > >> Veresov and Fleer come up against this problem > >> with "edintsvo" and > >> "edintsa". Of course, as they say, the two words > >> are distinct. But this > >> doesn't necessarily mean that the former always > >> corresponds to "unity" in > >> English and the latter is always "unit". If you > >> look at the paragraph they > >> translate on 330, you can see that Vygotsky starts > >> with an idea that is > >> quite "synoptic" and is well expressed by "unit". > >> But in the last sentence > >> there is a sense that "perezhivanie" is a > >> meta-stable unit--one that > >> remains self-similar only through a process of > >> thorough change, like a > >> bicycle whose every part is replaced--and in > >> English is it is better to > >> express this idea with "unity". The problem is > >> that the differences between > >> "edintsvo" and "edintsva" in Russian is a matter > >> of gender (I think) and > >> not simply abstractness, and as a result the > >> English version, which cannot > >> use the resource of gender,has to rely on > >> abstractness, so the words > >> "unity" and "unit" are somewhat more distinct and > >> less linked than > >> "edintsvo" and "edintsva". > >> > >> There are other problems that are similar. When > >> Gonzalez Rey uses the word > >> "final moment" to refer to the final period of > >> Vygotsky's thinking, he > >> leaves the anglophone reader the impression that > >> he is referring to > >> Vygotsky's deathbed thoughts. On the other hand, > >> when Veresov and Fleer use > >> "factor" to translate the same Russian word that > >> Gonzalez Rey is using, > >> they are giving us something more quantitative > >> than Vygotsky intended, and > >> their translation of "dalee nerazloshim'im > >> chastyami etava edinstva" > >> into "vital and further indivisible part of the > >> whole" is quite opaque in > >> English (notice that here Veresov and Fleer use > >> "whole" to translate > >> "edinstva" rather than "unit"!) At some point you > >> have to accept that you > >> can change Russian words into English words as if > >> you were exchanging > >> rubles for dollars, but you still won't be able to > >> buy a samovar at Walmart. > >> > >> David Kellogg > >> Macquarie University > >> > >> > >> > >> On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 5:21 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > >> > > >> wrote: > >> > >> Larry, all, > >> > >> our arguments in the 2014 address a science > >> education literature in which > >> the constructivist perspective is the leading > >> perspective; We note that the > >> assertion that people learn from experience is > >> everywhere taken for granted > >> but nowhere accounted for. We resort to > >> pragmatist and phenomenological > >> literature along with Vygotsky's insights to > >> point out the need to account > >> for learning as something that cannot be the > >> result of an individual's > >> construction; in experience there is always > >> something in excess of what you > >> intended, and this is a basic feature of > >> doing, of performing. I take that > >> to be your "trans" in the trans/zhivanie word, > >> Larry, which already is > >> denoted in the word PERezhivanie. > >> > >> But I do not wish to move our discussion too > >> far away from Marc's paper > >> and the Perezhivanie special issue. We also > >> risk disengaging many that have > >> not have the privilege we've had to have the > >> time to read so many articles > >> in just few days into the new year. I think we > >> are a point in the > >> discussion where a pretty clear point of > >> agreement/disagreement, and > >> therefore of possibility for growth, has been > >> reached with regard to the > >> view of perezhivanie as "an experience" and as > >> the "working over it". I > >> think that to allow as many as possible to > >> follow, and hopefully also > >> engage, I think it will be helpful to bring > >> the diverse perspectives and > >> theoretical accounts to matter in accounting > >> for some actual material. And > >> there are a number of cases described in the > >> articles, including Marc's > >> case of a teacher, as well as everyday facts, > >> such as those brought by > >> Beth, and in Beth's article... > >> > >> I take the task for myself too, but Saturday > >> morning need to attend to > >> other things! > >> A > >> > >> > >> > >> ________________________________________ > >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > >> > >> >> > > >> on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com > >> > >> >> > > >> Sent: 07 January 2017 18:26 > >> To: Andy Blunden; Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended > >> Mind, Culture, Activity; > >> Larry Purss > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and > >> Perezhivanie! > >> > >> Andy, Peter, i hope the intention to move > >> beyond politeness to struggle > >> with this topic materializes. > >> In this vein i want to introduce exploration > >> of the 'excess' of actual > >> over intended meaning as he sketched his > >> introduction to 'experience'. > >> > >> Citing Dewey, Alfredo says that this excess of > >> actual learning over > >> intended learning INCLUDES what Dewey refers > >> to as 'attitudes' and these > >> 'attitudes' are FUNDAMENTALLY what count in > >> the future. > >> Alfredo and Roth then add this summary > >> statement : > >> > >> There is therefore, a need to theorize > >> experience in terms that do not > >> assume control and rationality as the sine qua > >> non of learning. It also > >> implies a need to develop analytical accounts > >> that retain the 'uncertainty' > >> that is an 'integral part' of human experience. > >> > >> Where are Alfredo and Roth leading us with > >> this sketch of experience? To > >> highlight 'attitudes' that occur in the excess > >> of actual over intended > >> learning? The word 'attitudes' generates > >> images of (atmosphere) and (moods) > >> that 'flow' like cascading waterfalls that can > >> be imaged as (force) or as > >> (receptive). Attitudes that flow to places > >> where they are received within a > >> certain attitude of care and concern. Not as > >> forceful an image as moving > >> only with control and rationality. Describing > >> 'weaker' thought that > >> remains uncertain but that also opens us to > >> the other's peril and plight. > >> Possibly a post-analytic motion that exceeds > >> the intended by living-through > >> the actual that develops 'attitudes' that are > >> fundamentally what count for > >> the future. > >> > >> > >> Sent from my Windows 10 phone > >> > >> From: Andy Blunden > >> Sent: January 7, 2017 5:00 AM > >> To: Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, > >> Activity > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and > >> Perezhivanie! > >> > >> OK Peter, what you say is all very true I am > >> sure, but it > >> entails conflating activity and action (as > >> mass nouns) and > >> context and mediation, and makes the required > >> distinction > >> much like one could find multiple meanings for > >> the word > >> "and" by listing the different phrases and > >> clauses which can > >> be linked by "and." > >> > >> Andy > >> > >> ------------------------------ > ------------------------------ > >> Andy Blunden > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy > >> > >> http://www.brill.com/products/ > book/origins-collective-decisi > >> on-making > >> >> decision-making> > >> > >> On 7/01/2017 11:42 PM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > >> > >> Let me try to illustrate. > >> > >> Reading as mediated action: The > >> cultural-historical > >> context of reading mediates how one's > >> attention and > >> response are channeled in socially > >> constructed ways. So, > >> in one setting, say at home or reading in > >> the company of > >> friends, a novel might bring a reader to > >> tears, or invite > >> readers to share personal stories that > >> parallel those of > >> the plot lines, or laugh out loud. But > >> another setting, a > >> formal school or university class, would > >> have historical > >> values and practices that mute emotional > >> and personal > >> responses, and promote a more sober, > >> analytic way of > >> reading and talking that fits with > >> specific historical > >> critical conventions and genres, and > >> discourages others. > >> > >> Reading as mediating action: The act of > >> reading can be > >> transformational. In reading about an > >> talking about a > >> character's actions, a reader might > >> reconsider a value > >> system, become more sympathetic to real > >> people who > >> resemble oppressed characters, etc. In > >> other words, > >> reading a text may serve a mediational > >> process in which > >> textual ideas and exemplars enable a > >> reader to think > >> differently. > >> > >> *From:*Andy Blunden > >> [mailto:ablunden@mira.net > >> ] > >> *Sent:* Saturday, January 7, 2017 6:28 AM > >> *To:* Peter Smagorinsky >> >; eXtended Mind, > >> Culture, Activity >> > > >> *Subject:* Re: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year > >> and Perezhivanie! > >> > >> Can you explain in a paragraph or two,. > >> Peter, rather than > >> asking us all to read 10,000 words to > >> extract an answer? > >> > >> Andy > >> > >> ------------------------------ > >> ------------------------------ > >> > >> Andy Blunden > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy > >> > >> > >> http://www.brill.com/products/ > >> book/origins-collective-decision-making > >> >> decision-making> > >> > >> > >> On 7/01/2017 11:23 PM, Peter Smagorinsky > >> wrote: > >> > >> Andy and others, I tried to work out > >> the mediated/mediating question > >> > >> in the area of reading....see if this helps. > >> > >> Smagorinsky, P., & O'Donnell-Allen, > >> C. (1998). Reading as mediated > >> > >> and mediating action: Composing meaning for > >> literature through multimedia > >> interpretive texts. Reading Research > >> Quarterly, 33, 198-226. Available > >> athttp://www.petersmagorinsky.net/About/PDF/RRQ/RRQ1998.pdf > >> > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> > >> From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > >> > >> >> .ucsd.edu > >> > > >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ > >> > >> > >> mailman.ucsd.edu ] On > >> Behalf Of Andy Blunden > >> > >> Sent: Friday, January 6, 2017 7:12 PM > >> > >> To:xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu > >> > >> >> > > >> > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year > >> and Perezhivanie! > >> > >> I have never understood this supposed > >> distinction, Alfredo, between > >> > >> "mediated activity" and "mediating activity" > >> given that all activity is > >> mediated and all activity mediates. > >> > >> Also, could you spell out what you > >> mean by the "tension" > >> > >> between perezhivanie as meaning and > >> perezhivanie as struggle. > >> > >> Andy > >> > >> ------------------------------ > >> ------------------------------ > >> > >> Andy Blunden > >> > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy > >> > >> > >> > >> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective- > >> > > >> > >> decision-making > >> > >> On 5/01/2017 6:26 PM, Alfredo Jornet > >> Gil wrote: > >> > >> Thanks Marc for your careful > >> response. > >> > >> I am familiar to Vygotsky's > >> notion of cultural mediation and I > >> > >> am aware and acknowledge that it was > >> elaborated as a means to overcome > >> dualism, and that it is not analog to a > >> computational approach. > >> > >> When I brought the computing > >> analogy, I did so with regard not > >> > >> to the concept of cultural mediation in > >> general, but to the way it can be > >> (and is) deployed analytically. I react to > >> what it seems to me a dichotomy > >> between a "meaning" as something that is > >> static (thereby a form of > >> "representation" or reflection of the relation > >> with the environment instead > >> of?refraction)?? and the > >> experiencing-as-struggling, which is described > >> as?transformation or change. If so, mediation > >> here would seem to be part of > >> a methodological device that first dissects "a > >> type of meaning" from "a > >> type of activity" (or a given state from the > >> process that changes that > >> state), and then unites it by adding the term > >> "mediation." And this may be > >> my misreading, but in that (mis)reading (which > >> perhaps is mostly due to the > >> fact that in your empirical illustration only > >> the initial and end product, > >> i.e., perezhivanie, are described, but not the > >> experiencing-as-struggle, > >> that is, the moving between the two), > >> mediation here seems to do as > >> analytical concept precisely what you were > >> afraid our monism was doing: > >> explaining nothing. Only the end products but > >> not the process of producing > >> perezhivanie are revealed. This may be > >> problematic if one attends to what > >> Veresov argues in the paper I shared > >> yesterday, where he defends the notion > >> of mediation but also specifies that Vygotsky > >> speaks of *mediating > >> activity* (as opposed to *mediated* activity). > >> That is, not mediation by > >> signs as products, but mediating activity as > >> the activity of producing > >> signs (which again is an activity of producing > >> social relations, perhaps > >> what you refer as "holistic meanings"?). What > >> do you think? > >> > >> I did not think you were trying > >> to deny the influence of > >> > >> Spinoza, and I do not think we ever said that > >> Perezhivanie was primarily a > >> move from Cartesian Dualism to Monism, as you > >> suggest in your post. I copy > >> and paste from my prior post: "The fact is > >> that Vygotsky was building a > >> theory on the unity of the affect and the > >> intellect that was to be grounded > >> on Spinoza, and what we try to do is to > >> explore how perezhivanie, as a > >> concept being developed during the same period > >> (but not finalised or > >> totally settled!), could be seen from the > >> perspective of the Spinozist > >> Vygotsky." > >> > >> I totally believe that bringing > >> the distinction between > >> > >> perezhivanie as meaning, and perezhivanie as > >> struggle, is totally relevant, > >> and Beth Ferholt's vignettes of Where the Wild > >> Things Are do indeed > >> illustrate this. We really need to address > >> this tension, which as Beth's > >> examples and as our own everyday experience > >> shows, is a tension that > >> matters not just to books and to theories but > >> to living persons (children, > >> teachers), a tension that moreover is present > >> and mentioned in all the > >> articles of the symposium. The papers offer > >> different proposals, and I > >> think is so great we have the chance to > >> discuss them! I too, as you, am > >> very interesting in hearing others about the > >> questions you had concerning > >> sense and meaning. > >> > >> Alfredo > >> > >> From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > >> > >> >> .ucsd.edu > >> > > >> > >> >> > > >> >> .ucsd.edu > >> > > >> on behalf of Marc > >> > >> Clara > >> > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> > >> Sent: 04 January 2017 22:31 > >> > >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > >> > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New > >> Year and Perezhivanie! > >> > >> Thank you very much, Alfredo, for > >> sharing this excellent paper by > >> > >> Veresov, and thanks also for your > >> responses, which really helped > >> > >> me to > >> > >> better understand your points. My > >> main doubt about your proposal > >> > >> was/is caused by the statement > >> that the idea of cultural > >> > >> mediation/mediator implies a > >> cartesian dualism. This shocks me > >> > >> because, to me, the idea of > >> cultural mediation is absolutely > >> > >> crucial > >> > >> (in fact, the keystone) for the > >> construction of a monist (and > >> > >> scientific) psychology that does > >> not forget mind -that is, a > >> > >> cultural > >> > >> psychology. From your response, > >> however, I realized that we may > >> > >> be > >> > >> approaching the idea of mediation > >> in different ways. I talk of > >> > >> mediation and mediators in a > >> quite restricted way. The starting > >> > >> point > >> > >> of my understanding of mediation > >> is a dialectical relationship > >> > >> (organic, transactional) between > >> the subject and the world > >> > >> (Vygotsky departs from the scheme > >> stimulus-response, from reflexology). > >> > >> This relationship, that Vygotsky > >> calls primitive psychological > >> > >> functions, would be basically > >> biological. However, in human > >> > >> beings > >> > >> this relationship is mediated by > >> cultural means: signs and > >> > >> tools; or > >> > >> primary, secondary and terciary > >> artifacts. These cultural means > >> > >> reorganize the primitive > >> functions (dialectic S-O relationship), > >> > >> which > >> > >> become then higher psychological > >> functions (S-M-O) (see for > >> > >> example, > >> > >> The problem of the cultural > >> development of the child, in The > >> > >> Vygotsky > >> > >> Reader). Now, the subject, the > >> cultural mediators, and the > >> > >> object form > >> > >> an inseparable dialectical unit, > >> so that the subject acts on > >> > >> (transforms) the object through > >> the prism of the cultural > >> > >> mediators, > >> > >> the object acts on (transforms) > >> the subject also through the > >> > >> prism of > >> > >> the cultural mediators, and the > >> cultural means are themselves > >> > >> also > >> > >> transformed as a consequence of > >> their mediation in this > >> > >> continuous > >> > >> dynamic dialectical tension. > >> Here, for me, it is important the > >> > >> idea > >> > >> that the cultural means are as > >> material (if we assume a > >> > >> materialist > >> > >> monism) as all the rest of the > >> world; in fact, are parts of the > >> > >> material world which become signs > >> or tools (and can be therefore > >> > >> socially distributed). This > >> permits the introduction of the > >> > >> scientific > >> > >> study of mind-consciousness (as > >> mediating systems of signs), > >> > >> because > >> > >> mind is not anymore something > >> immaterial and unobservable, but > >> > >> it is > >> > >> as material and observable as the > >> rest of the natural world. It > >> > >> is > >> > >> from this view that, for me, the > >> idea of cultural mediation is > >> > >> the > >> > >> keystone of a monist psychology > >> that includes mind. Thus, when I > >> > >> speak > >> > >> of mediators, I refer to the > >> cultural means which mediate in the > >> > >> S-O > >> > >> dialectics; I am especially > >> interested in signs/secondary > >> > >> artifacts. > >> > >> Here, it is perhaps necessary to > >> insist that when I talk of > >> > >> studying > >> > >> mediators (and their semantic > >> structure), this doesn't mean that > >> > >> they > >> > >> are taken out from the activity > >> (the flux of live) in which they > >> > >> mediate (since out of activity > >> they are not signs anymore); > >> > >> here, I > >> > >> think Vygotsky tries again to > >> overcome another old dichotomy, the > >> > >> functionalism-structuralism one. > >> I hope that all this makes also > >> > >> clear the difference between this view and > >> that of computational > >> psychologies (which in general are profoundly > >> and explicitly dualist and > >> not dialectic). > >> > >> Back to perezhivanie, I'm not > >> obviously trying to deny the > >> > >> influence > >> > >> of Spinoza on Vygotsky's thinking > >> (this is explicit in Vygotsky's > >> > >> writings, especially in "The > >> teaching about emotions", in the > >> > >> Vol.6 of > >> > >> the Collected Works). But I have > >> doubts that Vygotsky's > >> > >> introduction > >> > >> of the concept of perezhivanie is > >> to be regarded primarily as a > >> > >> movement towards monism (from a > >> previous cartesian dualism), and > >> > >> that > >> > >> this movement questions the > >> concept of cultural mediation. > >> > >> Instead, > >> > >> and I think that this is in line > >> with some of Gonzalez-Rey > >> > >> observations in his paper, my > >> impression is that the > >> > >> introduction of > >> > >> the concept of perezhivanie > >> responds more to a movement (a > >> > >> further > >> > >> step) towards holism (something > >> that, in my understanding, can > >> > >> also be > >> > >> found in Spinoza). Thus, I think > >> that the word meaning is still > >> > >> the > >> > >> unit of analysis in the last > >> Vygotsky -and therefore, the idea of > >> > >> cultural mediation is still > >> crucial (in fact, in The problem of > >> > >> the > >> > >> environment, he connects the > >> concept of perezhivanie, which has > >> > >> just > >> > >> introduced, to the development of > >> word meaning [p.345-346, also > >> > >> cited > >> > >> in my paper]). However, in my > >> view, in the last Vygotsky the > >> > >> focus is > >> > >> not anymore primarily on the > >> word-meaning as formed for things > >> > >> (or > >> > >> collections of things, as in the > >> ontogenetic research with > >> > >> Sakharov), but the focus is now in the > >> formation of meaning for holistic > >> situations. > >> > >> Best regards, > >> > >> Marc. > >> > >> 2017-01-03 19:16 GMT+01:00 > >> Alfredo Jornet Gil< > >> > >> a.j.gil@iped.uio.no > >> > > >> >> >: > >> > >> Hi Marc, all, > >> > >> thanks for joining and for > >> your interesting work, which I > >> > >> follow > >> > >> since I became aware of it. I > >> appreciate the way in your > >> > >> paper you > >> > >> show careful and honest > >> attention to the texts of the authors > >> > >> involved, but perhaps most of > >> all I appreciate that the > >> > >> paper makes > >> > >> the transformational > >> dimension related to struggle and change > >> > >> salient, a dimension all > >> papers deemed central to > >> > >> perezhivanie. And I > >> > >> have learned more about > >> Vasilyuk by reading your paper. But > >> > >> I also > >> > >> see that we have approached > >> the question of perezhivanie > >> > >> differently > >> > >> and I think that addressing > >> the questions that you raise > >> > >> concerning > >> > >> our article may be a good way > >> to both respond and discuss > >> > >> your paper. > >> > >> I am aware that our use of > >> the term monism may be > >> > >> problematic to > >> > >> some, and N. Veresov, who has > >> recently written about this > >> > >> (see > >> > >> attached article), warns > >> against the dangers of simply > >> > >> moving from > >> > >> dualism into an > >> undifferentiating monism that relativizes > >> > >> everything, > >> > >> making development > >> un-studiable. This seems to be the way in > >> > >> which > >> > >> you have understood our > >> argument, and of course this is not > >> > >> what we are or want to be doing. > >> > >> Probably many will think that > >> *dialectical materialism* > >> > >> rather than > >> > >> monism is the proper term, > >> and I could agree with them; we > >> > >> do in fact > >> > >> use dialectical materialism > >> there and elsewhere. Yet, we > >> > >> wanted to > >> > >> emphasise the Spinozist > >> influence (an influence that also > >> > >> runs > >> > >> through Marx) and so we found > >> it appropriate to use the term > >> > >> monism, > >> > >> a term that Vygotsky uses > >> before arguing that Spinoza > >> > >> "develops an essentially materialistic view" > >> > >> (Collected Works, Vol. 6, p. > >> 124). For us, the aim is > >> > >> working out > >> > >> ways to empirically examine > >> and formulate problems in ways > >> > >> that do > >> > >> not reify a mind-body dualism. > >> > >> Although overcoming dualism > >> is foundational to the CHAT > >> > >> paradigm, I > >> > >> would however not say that > >> Vygotsky did get to solve all of > >> > >> the > >> > >> problems that Cartesian > >> dualism had created for psychology, > >> > >> even > >> > >> though he recognised those > >> problems brilliantly as early as > >> > >> in the > >> > >> "Crisis". It should suffice > >> to cite Vygotsky's own remarks, > >> > >> which we quote in the paper (and which A.N. > >> > >> Leont'ev mentions in the > >> introduction to the collected > >> > >> works), where > >> > >> Vygotsky explicitly critiques > >> some of his own prior ideas > >> > >> for failing > >> > >> to overcome dualism. We agree > >> with those who, like F. G. > >> > >> Rey, see > >> > >> Vygotsky's project as a > >> developing rather than as a > >> > >> finalised one. > >> > >> The fact is that Vygotsky was > >> building a theory on the unity > >> > >> of the > >> > >> affect and the intellect that > >> was to be grounded on Spinoza, > >> > >> and what > >> > >> we try to do is to explore > >> how perezhivanie, as a concept > >> > >> being > >> > >> developed during the same > >> period (but not finalised or > >> > >> totally > >> > >> settled!), could be seen from > >> the perspective of the > >> > >> Spinozist Vygotsky. > >> > >> As you note, in our article > >> we argue that, if one takes the > >> > >> Spinozist > >> > >> one-substance approach, > >> classical concepts used in > >> > >> non-classical > >> > >> psychology, at least in the > >> way they are commonly used in > >> > >> the current > >> > >> literature, should be > >> revised. One such concept is > >> > >> mediation. And I > >> > >> personally do not have much > >> of a problem when mediation is > >> > >> used to > >> > >> denote the fundamental fact > >> that every thing exists always > >> > >> through > >> > >> *another*, never in and of > >> itself. But I do think that it is > >> > >> problematic to identify > >> MEDIATORS, such as "a meaning", as a > >> > >> means to > >> > >> account for or explain > >> developmental processes and learning > >> > >> events, > >> > >> precisely because it is > >> there, at least in my view, that > >> > >> dualism creeps in. > >> > >> For example, I find it > >> paradoxical that you are concerned > >> > >> that our > >> > >> monist approach risks turning > >> perezhivanie into a useless > >> > >> category > >> > >> because it may be used to > >> explain everything and nothing, > >> > >> and yet you > >> > >> do not seem to have a problem > >> using the term mediation to > >> > >> account for > >> > >> the transformation of > >> perezhivanie without clearly > >> > >> elaborating on how > >> > >> mediation does change > >> anything or what it looks like as a > >> > >> real > >> > >> process. How is it different > >> saying that a perezhivanie > >> > >> mediates the > >> > >> experiencing-as-struggle from > >> simply saying that it > >> > >> "affects" or > >> > >> "determines" it? Indeed, if > >> perezhivanie mediates > >> > >> experiencing-as-struggle, > >> does not experiencing-as-struglgle > >> > >> too > >> > >> mediate perezhivanie? And do > >> not both may be said to mediate > >> > >> development, or development mediate them? Is > >> not this explaining everything > >> and nothing? > >> > >> I do believe you can argue > >> that there is a difference between > >> > >> mediation and classical > >> psychology's cause-effect relations, > >> > >> but to > >> > >> show this you need to dig > >> into the dialectical underpinnings > >> > >> of the > >> > >> theory. In your paper, you > >> offer a nice analysis of a lovely > >> > >> case of > >> > >> a teacher who, in dealing > >> with a challenge with one of her > >> > >> students, > >> > >> changes her perezhivanie. I > >> think you can rightly argue that > >> > >> there is > >> > >> a semiotic transformation, > >> and I fully support your > >> > >> statement that by > >> > >> studying discourse we can > >> empirically approach questions of > >> > >> psychological development. > >> The contradictions you show as > >> > >> being > >> > >> involved and resolved > >> resonate really well with what I > >> > >> experience as > >> > >> a parent or as a teacher in > >> the classroom. Yet, without > >> > >> unpacking > >> > >> what this "mediation" taking > >> place between one perezhivanie > >> > >> and the > >> > >> next one means as a concrete > >> and real, the same analysis > >> > >> could be done taking an information processing > >> approach: > >> > >> there is an situation that is > >> processed (represented?) in > >> > >> one way, > >> > >> which then leads to a > >> (cognitive) dissonance, and then there > >> > >> is a > >> > >> cognitive resolution by means > >> of which the situation is > >> > >> presented > >> > >> differently in consciousness > >> (indeed, when seen in this way, > >> > >> the term > >> > >> perezhivanie and the term > >> "representation" become almost > >> > >> indistinguishable). How is > >> mediation, as an analytical > >> > >> concept, > >> > >> helping here? And most > >> importantly to the question of > >> > >> perezhivanie, > >> > >> how is this analysis going to > >> show the internal connection > >> > >> between > >> > >> intellect and affect that > >> Vygotsky formulates as > >> > >> constitutive of the notion of perezhivanie? > >> > >> I believe that the key lies > >> in understanding what Vygotsky > >> > >> means when > >> > >> he says that perezhivanie is > >> a unit of analysis. I will not > >> > >> repeat > >> > >> here what already is written > >> in at least a couple of the > >> > >> articles in > >> > >> the special issue (Blunden, > >> ours), that is the difference > >> > >> between > >> > >> analysis by elements and unit > >> analysis (Vygotsky 1987). A > >> > >> unit > >> > >> analysis approach is > >> consistent with Spinoza, for whom > >> > >> cause-effect > >> > >> explanations were not > >> adequate, requiring instead an > >> > >> understanding of > >> > >> self-development, > >> perezhivanie as a kernel cell for the > >> > >> development > >> > >> of personality. And I think > >> you may be after this in your > >> > >> article in > > > > > From R.Parker-Rees@plymouth.ac.uk Sun Jan 15 10:06:52 2017 From: R.Parker-Rees@plymouth.ac.uk (Rod Parker-Rees) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2017 18:06:52 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! In-Reply-To: <1484328718783.79382@iped.uio.no> References: <1483344752182.40904@iped.uio.no> <1483467423798.57819@iped.uio.no> <1483601196884.31418@iped.uio.no> <5df5e870-3ef8-70d6-0c17-f8647ba17e62@mira.net> <587124d9.d957620a.4a5a8.bd56@mx.google.com> <1483820996800.91513@iped.uio.no> <1484253698990.7728@iped.uio.no>, <1484328718783.79382@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: I have to apologise again for walking in on a long and rich conversation (I am looking forward to catching up when I get a chance) but I felt I had to say something about the chess playing example. The child who plays with the chess pieces as 'things' is unlikely to have seen chess being played with them - children who have grown up in a family where chess is played with have picked up a lot of awareness of how people do things with the pieces - the focused concentration, alternating moves, emotional responses etc. so the child's 'activity' with the pieces cannot be understood as an isolated 'unit' because it is inseparable from the social learning which has gone before. Surely the same is true of any use of words. I am yet to be convinced of the real value of looking for a unit of analysis for communication (a process which tends to turn flow and interaction into sequences of only notionally separable 'bits'). I have also started watching 'The Fate of a Man' - too much to keep up with! All the best, Rod -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Alfredo Jornet Gil Sent: 13 January 2017 17:32 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! Thanks, David, for such a beautiful and clarifying post. You have such a brilliant manner to language Vygotsky in Vygotsky's language! I think we agree much more than we disagree, and before I turn to Andy's very timely link to the "Fate of a Man", this may be a nice tutorial on terminology, at least for me. My only problem had been seeing what to me had looked like an all too empiricist treatment of the notion of perception in your prior post(s) (including some older posts on micro-genesis). But I think you still agree that part of what it takes to become an experienced chess player is being able to ATTEND (and *attention* may be a better term than perception) to the pieces and their position in the board in front of her in much closer detail than the child who merely plays "with" the pieces. Thus the "perception" in the expert may be said to be much more rich and *concrete* than what one "perceives" by merely attending to (abstracting) color and shape relations. But I keep thinking that perception is not the right word here, is it? Certainly not one "element" (I use your wording below) in the unit. But this may just be a wording problem. I really like your very important observation that chess produces life-long learners, whereas the child that merely plays "with" the chess pieces will soon find the game uninteresting. But again I don't think that the key here is an opposition between perceiving and semiosis, but perhaps between habit and conscious awareness (which at the end may be just different words for saying the same thing). As a habit, the task of grouping pieces by color involves a person-environment relation in which the *need* for consciousness (and thereby interest!) to awaken is lesser, thereby offering less possibilities for development. I think it is this that you would phrase as "the environment seems to dominate". The way habits are formed in chess, however, are such that they require of consciousness for the operation to continue (which you may phrase as "personality dominates more"). The relation between habit and awareness is transformed in the higher-order activity (or form of human consciousness) that is chess-playing. Same thing, different words? Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of David Kellogg Sent: 13 January 2017 01:02 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! Alfredo: Let's apply your reasoning to the distinction between non-language, proto-language, and language proper. Imagine a nursery in which there are three beds, one with a child who is only week old and who responds with pleasure to a nipple and with pain to being shaken or dropped, one with a child who is about ten months old and has worked out a system of squeaks and directed cries in order to get attention and deliver an affective response, and one with a child who is nearly two and can ask for objects, evaluate them, and reject them. As you say, perception and semiosis are at work in each situation. But contrary to what you say, they are not equally at work, and the outcomes are very different. There is a good reason why children develop: it's in their interests, both in the long term sense in that it allows a much wider variety of outcomes and in the short term sense in that it allows an escape from ennui. A child who plays the "game" of putting black pieces on black squares and white pieces on white squares will find this game very dull in a matter of hours. A child who plays the game of chess will, in many cases, find a lifetime vocation. Yes, there are "structures" that include perception and semiosis in both cases, but the precise make-up isn't insignificant or irrelevant. One important reason why perezhivanie is such an important unit of structure is that it at last allows us to assign real, concrete, specific values to the influence of its two elements, personality and environment. These vary from period to period--for example, in periods of crisis, the personality always appears to play a leading role (e.g. proto-language in the Crisis at One, negativism in the Crisis at Three, "acting out" in the Crisis at Seven). During stable periods, the environment always appears to dominate (e.g. speech proper in early childhood, play in preschool, and thinking but not thinking-about-thinking in school age). Some "child-centred" pedagogies would like to treat childhood as one long crisis. I think this is a disservice to the child, because it is precisely during the stable periods that the critical neoformations (e.g. protospeech) find a supporting but absolutely crucial role. The child doesn't forget the expressiveness of intonation and stress learned in proto-language, any more than the child who plays chess no longer distinguishes white squares from black ones. David Kellogg Macquarie University On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 7:41 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > David, I admire much of what you write in your first three examples in > your prior post. But I am reacting to your latter post on Chess. It is the > second or third time that you bring the CHESS example to bear in xmca, and > I always feel uneasy about it. > > I see the point that there are different developmental stages and that > these can be best categorised according to the type of generalisation that > the child can engage into. Obviously, treating a piece of marble "as if" it > was a piece in the game of chess involves a different type of > generalization than treating the same piece of marble as if it was a piece > in the game of "let's put the black pieces in black squares and white > pieces in white squares". But I do not think that my 20 months daughter > will put black pieces on black squares in any systematic manner simply > because she can PERCEIVE and act upon the difference between black and > white; and indeed I do not think that my 7 years old first daughter will do > any of these things with the chess pieces, considering she has never > learned to play chess. Indeed, why would any child do that? I do strongly > believe that to get any of my daughters to arrange the pieces by color, > there would have first to be a TEACHING/LEARNING situation, which itself > would involve establishing a semantic field, a field that perhaps out of my > ignorance I would call semiotic (sign). > > In my view, in both cases there are rules and therefore imagination, if > we listen to Vygotsky's writings on play, and perhaps, as Vygotsky notes, > there may be a difference in the "moral attitude", but I would be cautious > by gross divisions between perceptual and semantic structures. Yes,there > are different levels, types, or stages in the way semantic fields are > organised, and that playing the chess pieces as pieces of the CHESS game > involves a qualitative leap compared to playing them as pieces in the game > of putting them together by shape or color; but there is a game going on in > both cases, and therefore a perceptual as much as a semiotic structure > being at play. These are different semiotic contexts, as you say at the end > of your e-mail, but I do think that your assertion that in playing with the > chess pieces by color "the structure would be visual but not semiotic" can > be problematic and may lead to what I consider an incorrect view of the > relation between higher and lower functions in development. > > Alfredo > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of David Kellogg > Sent: 11 January 2017 04:50 > To: Andy Blunden; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > Vygotsky's got a terrific metaphor for how "perezhivanie" is internalized: > it is like internalizing the rules of the game of chess. > > The child who doesn't know how to play chess simply plays WITH the pieces > instead of playing them. She or he might try to create a piece-board > structure by putting black pieces on black squares and white pieces on > white squares, but the structure is a visual one and not a semiotic one; > it's about color and not about meaning. The child who DOES know how to play > chess plays the pieces instead of playing with them. She or he too creates > "structures" but this time they are semiotic ones: a black knight in a > completely different column and a completely different row, can capture a > white pawn. > > The board is the same and so are the kids; the children may have very > similar biological and very similar cultural endowments, but they do not > have the same semiotic context at all. Hence different perezhivanie and > different personalities. > > David Kellogg > Macquarie University > > > > On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 11:54 AM, Andy Blunden wrote: > > > How to understand the personality? ... i.e., the *development* of the > > personality? > > > > The subject's inheritance, and The subject's experiences > (/perezhivaniya/) > > > > ... just think of how you'd go about writing a good biography or > > Bildungsroman. > > > > Andy > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > Andy Blunden > > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > On 11/01/2017 10:24 AM, David Kellogg wrote: > > > >> Andy: > >> > >> A good paradox! Word meaning is a unit, but the spoken word itself is > >> just an element--a thing. We can see that this is, on the face of it, > >> impossible: within a single holistic analysis, an element can be a part > of > >> a unit, but a unit can never be a part of an element. So what you are > >> referring to when you say that the word is a thing is the "sonic" or > >> "phasal" quality of the word: its "acoustic" properties, its > "phonetics". > >> > >> But not its phonology. The word that Vygotsky uses for "phoneme" refers > >> to the 1929 work of the Prague Circle, originally the Moscow Circle. He > is > >> a LITTLE coy about this, because the founders, Jakobson and Trubetskoy, > >> were not very popular with the authorities and Vygotsky already had > plenty > >> of heterodox acquaintances to worry about. Nevertheless, whenever > Vygotsky > >> says "phoneme", we know he really means what Jakobson and Trubetskoy > called > >> "morphophonemes". We know this because the examples he actually > >> gives--Russian case endings--are morpho-phonemes and not simply > phonemes: > >> so for example in English the sound /s/ is a simple phoneme when I say > the > >> word "self" but if I say "Andy's" the sound /s/ is a morpho-phoneme: a > >> difference in sounding that makes a difference in meaning. The system > (that > >> is, the paradigmatic menu) of these differences in soundings are what > the > >> Moscow and Prague Circles called "phonology" (as OPPOSED to phonetics), > and > >> this is the kind of "phoneme" that Vygotsky is really talking about. > >> > >> Still, you can see that it is not what he is talking about when he says > >> word meaning, because these units are still nowhere near big enough to > >> describe the kinds of changes which must occur when verbal thinking > >> develops. I feel the same way about a lot of the examples offered of > >> "perezhivanie", including Marc's. If MacDuff's grief or Carla's epiphany > >> about the misbehavior of her kids being due to "outside influences" > really > >> is the unit of personality and experience that Vygotsky wants us to use > >> when we analyse the ontogenesis of personality, then it is no more > >> appropriate than using the morpho-phoneme to analyse the whole of verbal > >> thinking. Just as evolution (of species) requires very different units > from > >> history (of classes), development, whether we are talking about verbal > >> thinking or the personality as a whole, is going to require very > different > >> units from learning, whether we are talking about MacDuff or Carla. The > >> units must be able to develop; that is, the relationship of the elements > >> within them must be susceptible to many changes over time. > >> > >> Let me give three examples of how this happens in different > >> "perezhivanie". They are not mine; they are Vygotsky's, and they are all > >> from the Pedological Lectures. > >> > >> First, the Crisis at One. Neither the biological nor the social > endowment > >> of the child greatly changes in the acquisition of speech; nevertheless, > >> the relationship between the personality and the environment, of which > both > >> personality moments and environmental ones are constituent elements, is > >> entirely transformed. Here we are not talking about phonemes, or even > >> morpho-phonemes: we are talking about "wordings"--whole utterances. In > >> Melbourne I presented some data that demonstrated this beautifully--a > >> child's first word is actually an attempt to imitate a whole > conversation. > >> > >> Second, the Crisis at Three. Vygotsky spends a lot of time discussing > the > >> "Seven Stars"--the symptoms of the "Terrible Twos" and "Threenagehood" > >> noted by harried parents everywhere. But by the end of his analysis it's > >> clear that what really happens is a new relationship between wish and > will: > >> in extreme cases, the child actually wishes for one thing (e.g. > compromise) > >> and wills the opposite (the everlasting "No!"). Again, neither the > >> personality moments as such nor the environmental ones change, but > there is > >> a separation and a sorting which allows the subordination of wish to > will > >> that we see in play. This isn't the kind of "aha" moment that Marc is > >> offering us at all: Vygotsky actually calls it the "antipode" of future > >> will, because instead of enabling will it actually paralyzes it. But it > is > >> indubitably a key moment in the development of the relation of > personality > >> to environmental moments that we see in "perizhivanie". > >> > >> Thirdly, the Crisis at Seven. I think Gonzalez Rey makes a total hash of > >> this, and I get very cross when I read his article. It is not true that > the > >> essence of perizhivanie remained a mystery to Vygotsky simply because > he no > >> longer subscribes to "the aesthetic reaction" and "catharsis" and other > >> notions that he toyed with in Psych of Art (he's no longer doing > >> experiments on changes in breathing rate when people read the works of > >> Bunin either!). It might be true that he never offered a system of facts > >> and methodological procedures for perezivanie, but that was only because > >> one already existed, for example in the work of Wallon and Stern and > >> others. It is demonstrably not true that when Vygotsky says that the > speech > >> environment of those around him does not change when the child learns to > >> talk at one, he is not "profoundly contradictory with the concept of > >> sense": when you read the quotation in context, it is very clear that > what > >> he is referring to are the kinds of absolute indicators used by Zalkind: > >> how often the parents read the newspapers, the dialect they speak, and > >> their educational background. These do not change, and if the child > wants > >> to make sense, these are the factors the child will have to relate to. > >> > >> Vygotsky gives the example of a child who is severely retarded. The > child > >> wants to play with other children and is rejected. The child walks down > the > >> street and the other children follow, laughing. The child is shrieked > at, > >> insulted, but as soon as the humiliation stops, the child is perfectly > >> happy with himself. Vygotsky points out that the child is not able to > >> "co-generalize" the "perizhivanie" of the humiliations: each is > unpleasant, > >> but they are entirely separate and cannot be connected with any internal > >> sense of inferiority. A normal child, however, is able to "internalize" > >> these humiliations and consequently develops a sense of inferiority. We > can > >> see that what has happened is the insertion of what Vygotsky calls an > >> "intellectual" moment: an inner layer, which is what distinguishes later > >> Chaplin movies from earlier ones (again, Vygotsky's example, not mine!) > and > >> what brings about the "loss of directness and naivete" that we see in > >> pre-schoolers. > >> > >> I think that the reason people find "perizhivanie" so hard to work with > >> is the same reason that they find "word meaning" hard to work with: it > >> develops. The feeling of drinking milk as the infant drinks it is > >> perizhivanie, and the thought of being humiliated when you are mulling > it > >> over and contemplating revenge is also perizhivanie, and only a profound > >> analysis which includes ontogenetic development and not just learning > will > >> show the inner link between them. It's for that reason that I think that > >> "activity" is not a useful unit of analysis and I am much more inclined > to > >> use your word "project", so long as it can include what Vygotsky calls > >> "inner activeness". > >> > >> Vygotsky says: > >> > >> > >> ????? ? ?????????, ?????????? ? ?. ?., ? ???? ???? ? ?????????? > >> ???????????, ??? ?????????? ???????????? ??????????????? ????????? > >> ??????????????? ?? ??????? ? ??????? ?????????????. ??? ??? ????? ????? > >> ?????????? ?????????? ? ???????? ???????? ??????????? ? ???, ???, ? ?? > >> ????? ??? ? ?????????? ???????? ??? ?????????? ???????????? ???????????? > >> ???????????????? ????? ? ?????????, ??????? ???????????, ? ???????? > >> ???????? ?? ????? ???????????? ?????????????? ???????????, ???????????? > >> ??????????? ?????????? ?????????? ?? ????????? ? ??????? ????????????. > ??? > >> ??? ???????, ??????? ????? ??????????, ? ?? ????? ????? ?? ?????? ??? > ????? > >> ???-??????, ???, ? ???????? ????????? ?????????????? ??????? ? > ?????????? > >> ????????????. > >> > >> When I think, remember, etc. I am dealing withinner activeness; this > >> psychological process of inner activity is not directly linked to any > >> external activity. The new form of inner activeness in the School Age > >> consists of this: that while during the preschool years these inner > >> activities demonstrated an immediate link with action, with external > >> activeness, in the school years we have a relative autonomy which > emerges, > >> inner activeness which is relatively independent of external activities. > >> Here is already a child who can think, at the same time when he is > doing or > >> seeing something, one in whom has emerged a differentiation of inner and > >> outer activities. > >> > >> David Kellogg > >> Macquarie University > >> > >> > >> > >> On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 10:07 AM, Andy Blunden >> ablunden@mira.net>> wrote: > >> > >> David: "Are words really units?" > >> > >> Well, firstly, "units" is a *relative* term. That is, > >> the question is: are words units of something, some > >> complex process subject to analysis. And which? > >> > >> Secondly, according to Vygotsky, "no." The concept > >> Vygotsky proposes as a unit is "word meaning" which he > >> says is a unity of sound and meaning. The sound is an > >> artefact, which, detached from its meaningful > >> utterance in a transactional context is just a thing, > >> viz., a word. Whereas "word meaning" is an > >> arrtefact-mediated action, a unit of human social > >> activity. > >> > >> It is true that words can be countable or mass > >> according to context, but I wasn't talking about words > >> was I? I was talking about word meaning. > >> > >> Andy > >> > >> ------------------------------------------------------------ > >> Andy Blunden > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy > >> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective- > decision-making > >> >> decision-making> > >> > >> On 8/01/2017 7:59 AM, David Kellogg wrote: > >> > >> Are words really units? When we look at their > >> ideational meaning (that is, > >> their logical and experiential content--their > >> capacity for representing and > >> linking together human experiences) they seem to > >> fall into two very > >> different categories: lexical words like > >> "perezhivanie" or "sense" or > >> "personality" of "individual" and grammatical > >> words like "of", or "might", > >> or "is". The lexical words seem to behave like > >> units--they are bounded, > >> discrete, and, as Andy would say, "countable" (the > >> problem is that almost > >> all nouns are both countable and uncountable > >> depending on the context you > >> put them in, so this distinction is really not as > >> essential as Andy seems > >> to assume). But the more grammatical words seem to > >> be elements of some > >> larger unit, which we can call wording. > >> > >> Veresov and Fleer come up against this problem > >> with "edintsvo" and > >> "edintsa". Of course, as they say, the two words > >> are distinct. But this > >> doesn't necessarily mean that the former always > >> corresponds to "unity" in > >> English and the latter is always "unit". If you > >> look at the paragraph they > >> translate on 330, you can see that Vygotsky starts > >> with an idea that is > >> quite "synoptic" and is well expressed by "unit". > >> But in the last sentence > >> there is a sense that "perezhivanie" is a > >> meta-stable unit--one that > >> remains self-similar only through a process of > >> thorough change, like a > >> bicycle whose every part is replaced--and in > >> English is it is better to > >> express this idea with "unity". The problem is > >> that the differences between > >> "edintsvo" and "edintsva" in Russian is a matter > >> of gender (I think) and > >> not simply abstractness, and as a result the > >> English version, which cannot > >> use the resource of gender,has to rely on > >> abstractness, so the words > >> "unity" and "unit" are somewhat more distinct and > >> less linked than > >> "edintsvo" and "edintsva". > >> > >> There are other problems that are similar. When > >> Gonzalez Rey uses the word > >> "final moment" to refer to the final period of > >> Vygotsky's thinking, he > >> leaves the anglophone reader the impression that > >> he is referring to > >> Vygotsky's deathbed thoughts. On the other hand, > >> when Veresov and Fleer use > >> "factor" to translate the same Russian word that > >> Gonzalez Rey is using, > >> they are giving us something more quantitative > >> than Vygotsky intended, and > >> their translation of "dalee nerazloshim'im > >> chastyami etava edinstva" > >> into "vital and further indivisible part of the > >> whole" is quite opaque in > >> English (notice that here Veresov and Fleer use > >> "whole" to translate > >> "edinstva" rather than "unit"!) At some point you > >> have to accept that you > >> can change Russian words into English words as if > >> you were exchanging > >> rubles for dollars, but you still won't be able to > >> buy a samovar at Walmart. > >> > >> David Kellogg > >> Macquarie University > >> > >> > >> > >> On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 5:21 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > >> > > >> wrote: > >> > >> Larry, all, > >> > >> our arguments in the 2014 address a science > >> education literature in which > >> the constructivist perspective is the leading > >> perspective; We note that the > >> assertion that people learn from experience is > >> everywhere taken for granted > >> but nowhere accounted for. We resort to > >> pragmatist and phenomenological > >> literature along with Vygotsky's insights to > >> point out the need to account > >> for learning as something that cannot be the > >> result of an individual's > >> construction; in experience there is always > >> something in excess of what you > >> intended, and this is a basic feature of > >> doing, of performing. I take that > >> to be your "trans" in the trans/zhivanie word, > >> Larry, which already is > >> denoted in the word PERezhivanie. > >> > >> But I do not wish to move our discussion too > >> far away from Marc's paper > >> and the Perezhivanie special issue. We also > >> risk disengaging many that have > >> not have the privilege we've had to have the > >> time to read so many articles > >> in just few days into the new year. I think we > >> are a point in the > >> discussion where a pretty clear point of > >> agreement/disagreement, and > >> therefore of possibility for growth, has been > >> reached with regard to the > >> view of perezhivanie as "an experience" and as > >> the "working over it". I > >> think that to allow as many as possible to > >> follow, and hopefully also > >> engage, I think it will be helpful to bring > >> the diverse perspectives and > >> theoretical accounts to matter in accounting > >> for some actual material. And > >> there are a number of cases described in the > >> articles, including Marc's > >> case of a teacher, as well as everyday facts, > >> such as those brought by > >> Beth, and in Beth's article... > >> > >> I take the task for myself too, but Saturday > >> morning need to attend to > >> other things! > >> A > >> > >> > >> > >> ________________________________________ > >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > >> > >> >> > > >> on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com > >> > >> >> > > >> Sent: 07 January 2017 18:26 > >> To: Andy Blunden; Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended > >> Mind, Culture, Activity; > >> Larry Purss > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and > >> Perezhivanie! > >> > >> Andy, Peter, i hope the intention to move > >> beyond politeness to struggle > >> with this topic materializes. > >> In this vein i want to introduce exploration > >> of the 'excess' of actual > >> over intended meaning as he sketched his > >> introduction to 'experience'. > >> > >> Citing Dewey, Alfredo says that this excess of > >> actual learning over > >> intended learning INCLUDES what Dewey refers > >> to as 'attitudes' and these > >> 'attitudes' are FUNDAMENTALLY what count in > >> the future. > >> Alfredo and Roth then add this summary > >> statement : > >> > >> There is therefore, a need to theorize > >> experience in terms that do not > >> assume control and rationality as the sine qua > >> non of learning. It also > >> implies a need to develop analytical accounts > >> that retain the 'uncertainty' > >> that is an 'integral part' of human experience. > >> > >> Where are Alfredo and Roth leading us with > >> this sketch of experience? To > >> highlight 'attitudes' that occur in the excess > >> of actual over intended > >> learning? The word 'attitudes' generates > >> images of (atmosphere) and (moods) > >> that 'flow' like cascading waterfalls that can > >> be imaged as (force) or as > >> (receptive). Attitudes that flow to places > >> where they are received within a > >> certain attitude of care and concern. Not as > >> forceful an image as moving > >> only with control and rationality. Describing > >> 'weaker' thought that > >> remains uncertain but that also opens us to > >> the other's peril and plight. > >> Possibly a post-analytic motion that exceeds > >> the intended by living-through > >> the actual that develops 'attitudes' that are > >> fundamentally what count for > >> the future. > >> > >> > >> Sent from my Windows 10 phone > >> > >> From: Andy Blunden > >> Sent: January 7, 2017 5:00 AM > >> To: Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, > >> Activity > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and > >> Perezhivanie! > >> > >> OK Peter, what you say is all very true I am > >> sure, but it > >> entails conflating activity and action (as > >> mass nouns) and > >> context and mediation, and makes the required > >> distinction > >> much like one could find multiple meanings for > >> the word > >> "and" by listing the different phrases and > >> clauses which can > >> be linked by "and." > >> > >> Andy > >> > >> ------------------------------ > ------------------------------ > >> Andy Blunden > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy > >> > >> http://www.brill.com/products/ > book/origins-collective-decisi > >> on-making > >> >> decision-making> > >> > >> On 7/01/2017 11:42 PM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > >> > >> Let me try to illustrate. > >> > >> Reading as mediated action: The > >> cultural-historical > >> context of reading mediates how one's > >> attention and > >> response are channeled in socially > >> constructed ways. So, > >> in one setting, say at home or reading in > >> the company of > >> friends, a novel might bring a reader to > >> tears, or invite > >> readers to share personal stories that > >> parallel those of > >> the plot lines, or laugh out loud. But > >> another setting, a > >> formal school or university class, would > >> have historical > >> values and practices that mute emotional > >> and personal > >> responses, and promote a more sober, > >> analytic way of > >> reading and talking that fits with > >> specific historical > >> critical conventions and genres, and > >> discourages others. > >> > >> Reading as mediating action: The act of > >> reading can be > >> transformational. In reading about an > >> talking about a > >> character's actions, a reader might > >> reconsider a value > >> system, become more sympathetic to real > >> people who > >> resemble oppressed characters, etc. In > >> other words, > >> reading a text may serve a mediational > >> process in which > >> textual ideas and exemplars enable a > >> reader to think > >> differently. > >> > >> *From:*Andy Blunden > >> [mailto:ablunden@mira.net > >> ] > >> *Sent:* Saturday, January 7, 2017 6:28 AM > >> *To:* Peter Smagorinsky >> >; eXtended Mind, > >> Culture, Activity >> > > >> *Subject:* Re: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year > >> and Perezhivanie! > >> > >> Can you explain in a paragraph or two,. > >> Peter, rather than > >> asking us all to read 10,000 words to > >> extract an answer? > >> > >> Andy > >> > >> ------------------------------ > >> ------------------------------ > >> > >> Andy Blunden > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy > >> > >> > >> http://www.brill.com/products/ > >> book/origins-collective-decision-making > >> >> decision-making> > >> > >> > >> On 7/01/2017 11:23 PM, Peter Smagorinsky > >> wrote: > >> > >> Andy and others, I tried to work out > >> the mediated/mediating question > >> > >> in the area of reading....see if this helps. > >> > >> Smagorinsky, P., & O'Donnell-Allen, > >> C. (1998). Reading as mediated > >> > >> and mediating action: Composing meaning for > >> literature through multimedia > >> interpretive texts. Reading Research > >> Quarterly, 33, 198-226. Available > >> athttp://www.petersmagorinsky.net/About/PDF/RRQ/RRQ1998.pdf > >> > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> > >> From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > >> > >> >> .ucsd.edu > >> > > >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ > >> > >> > >> mailman.ucsd.edu ] On > >> Behalf Of Andy Blunden > >> > >> Sent: Friday, January 6, 2017 7:12 PM > >> > >> To:xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu > >> > >> >> > > >> > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year > >> and Perezhivanie! > >> > >> I have never understood this supposed > >> distinction, Alfredo, between > >> > >> "mediated activity" and "mediating activity" > >> given that all activity is > >> mediated and all activity mediates. > >> > >> Also, could you spell out what you > >> mean by the "tension" > >> > >> between perezhivanie as meaning and > >> perezhivanie as struggle. > >> > >> Andy > >> > >> ------------------------------ > >> ------------------------------ > >> > >> Andy Blunden > >> > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy > >> > >> > >> > >> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective- > >> > > >> > >> decision-making > >> > >> On 5/01/2017 6:26 PM, Alfredo Jornet > >> Gil wrote: > >> > >> Thanks Marc for your careful > >> response. > >> > >> I am familiar to Vygotsky's > >> notion of cultural mediation and I > >> > >> am aware and acknowledge that it was > >> elaborated as a means to overcome > >> dualism, and that it is not analog to a > >> computational approach. > >> > >> When I brought the computing > >> analogy, I did so with regard not > >> > >> to the concept of cultural mediation in > >> general, but to the way it can be > >> (and is) deployed analytically. I react to > >> what it seems to me a dichotomy > >> between a "meaning" as something that is > >> static (thereby a form of > >> "representation" or reflection of the relation > >> with the environment instead > >> of?refraction)?? and the > >> experiencing-as-struggling, which is described > >> as?transformation or change. If so, mediation > >> here would seem to be part of > >> a methodological device that first dissects "a > >> type of meaning" from "a > >> type of activity" (or a given state from the > >> process that changes that > >> state), and then unites it by adding the term > >> "mediation." And this may be > >> my misreading, but in that (mis)reading (which > >> perhaps is mostly due to the > >> fact that in your empirical illustration only > >> the initial and end product, > >> i.e., perezhivanie, are described, but not the > >> experiencing-as-struggle, > >> that is, the moving between the two), > >> mediation here seems to do as > >> analytical concept precisely what you were > >> afraid our monism was doing: > >> explaining nothing. Only the end products but > >> not the process of producing > >> perezhivanie are revealed. This may be > >> problematic if one attends to what > >> Veresov argues in the paper I shared > >> yesterday, where he defends the notion > >> of mediation but also specifies that Vygotsky > >> speaks of *mediating > >> activity* (as opposed to *mediated* activity). > >> That is, not mediation by > >> signs as products, but mediating activity as > >> the activity of producing > >> signs (which again is an activity of producing > >> social relations, perhaps > >> what you refer as "holistic meanings"?). What > >> do you think? > >> > >> I did not think you were trying > >> to deny the influence of > >> > >> Spinoza, and I do not think we ever said that > >> Perezhivanie was primarily a > >> move from Cartesian Dualism to Monism, as you > >> suggest in your post. I copy > >> and paste from my prior post: "The fact is > >> that Vygotsky was building a > >> theory on the unity of the affect and the > >> intellect that was to be grounded > >> on Spinoza, and what we try to do is to > >> explore how perezhivanie, as a > >> concept being developed during the same period > >> (but not finalised or > >> totally settled!), could be seen from the > >> perspective of the Spinozist > >> Vygotsky." > >> > >> I totally believe that bringing > >> the distinction between > >> > >> perezhivanie as meaning, and perezhivanie as > >> struggle, is totally relevant, > >> and Beth Ferholt's vignettes of Where the Wild > >> Things Are do indeed > >> illustrate this. We really need to address > >> this tension, which as Beth's > >> examples and as our own everyday experience > >> shows, is a tension that > >> matters not just to books and to theories but > >> to living persons (children, > >> teachers), a tension that moreover is present > >> and mentioned in all the > >> articles of the symposium. The papers offer > >> different proposals, and I > >> think is so great we have the chance to > >> discuss them! I too, as you, am > >> very interesting in hearing others about the > >> questions you had concerning > >> sense and meaning. > >> > >> Alfredo > >> > >> From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > >> > >> >> .ucsd.edu > >> > > >> > >> >> > > >> >> .ucsd.edu > >> > > >> on behalf of Marc > >> > >> Clara > >> > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> > >> Sent: 04 January 2017 22:31 > >> > >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > >> > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New > >> Year and Perezhivanie! > >> > >> Thank you very much, Alfredo, for > >> sharing this excellent paper by > >> > >> Veresov, and thanks also for your > >> responses, which really helped > >> > >> me to > >> > >> better understand your points. My > >> main doubt about your proposal > >> > >> was/is caused by the statement > >> that the idea of cultural > >> > >> mediation/mediator implies a > >> cartesian dualism. This shocks me > >> > >> because, to me, the idea of > >> cultural mediation is absolutely > >> > >> crucial > >> > >> (in fact, the keystone) for the > >> construction of a monist (and > >> > >> scientific) psychology that does > >> not forget mind -that is, a > >> > >> cultural > >> > >> psychology. From your response, > >> however, I realized that we may > >> > >> be > >> > >> approaching the idea of mediation > >> in different ways. I talk of > >> > >> mediation and mediators in a > >> quite restricted way. The starting > >> > >> point > >> > >> of my understanding of mediation > >> is a dialectical relationship > >> > >> (organic, transactional) between > >> the subject and the world > >> > >> (Vygotsky departs from the scheme > >> stimulus-response, from reflexology). > >> > >> This relationship, that Vygotsky > >> calls primitive psychological > >> > >> functions, would be basically > >> biological. However, in human > >> > >> beings > >> > >> this relationship is mediated by > >> cultural means: signs and > >> > >> tools; or > >> > >> primary, secondary and terciary > >> artifacts. These cultural means > >> > >> reorganize the primitive > >> functions (dialectic S-O relationship), > >> > >> which > >> > >> become then higher psychological > >> functions (S-M-O) (see for > >> > >> example, > >> > >> The problem of the cultural > >> development of the child, in The > >> > >> Vygotsky > >> > >> Reader). Now, the subject, the > >> cultural mediators, and the > >> > >> object form > >> > >> an inseparable dialectical unit, > >> so that the subject acts on > >> > >> (transforms) the object through > >> the prism of the cultural > >> > >> mediators, > >> > >> the object acts on (transforms) > >> the subject also through the > >> > >> prism of > >> > >> the cultural mediators, and the > >> cultural means are themselves > >> > >> also > >> > >> transformed as a consequence of > >> their mediation in this > >> > >> continuous > >> > >> dynamic dialectical tension. > >> Here, for me, it is important the > >> > >> idea > >> > >> that the cultural means are as > >> material (if we assume a > >> > >> materialist > >> > >> monism) as all the rest of the > >> world; in fact, are parts of the > >> > >> material world which become signs > >> or tools (and can be therefore > >> > >> socially distributed). This > >> permits the introduction of the > >> > >> scientific > >> > >> study of mind-consciousness (as > >> mediating systems of signs), > >> > >> because > >> > >> mind is not anymore something > >> immaterial and unobservable, but > >> > >> it is > >> > >> as material and observable as the > >> rest of the natural world. It > >> > >> is > >> > >> from this view that, for me, the > >> idea of cultural mediation is > >> > >> the > >> > >> keystone of a monist psychology > >> that includes mind. Thus, when I > >> > >> speak > >> > >> of mediators, I refer to the > >> cultural means which mediate in the > >> > >> S-O > >> > >> dialectics; I am especially > >> interested in signs/secondary > >> > >> artifacts. > >> > >> Here, it is perhaps necessary to > >> insist that when I talk of > >> > >> studying > >> > >> mediators (and their semantic > >> structure), this doesn't mean that > >> > >> they > >> > >> are taken out from the activity > >> (the flux of live) in which they > >> > >> mediate (since out of activity > >> they are not signs anymore); > >> > >> here, I > >> > >> think Vygotsky tries again to > >> overcome another old dichotomy, the > >> > >> functionalism-structuralism one. > >> I hope that all this makes also > >> > >> clear the difference between this view and > >> that of computational > >> psychologies (which in general are profoundly > >> and explicitly dualist and > >> not dialectic). > >> > >> Back to perezhivanie, I'm not > >> obviously trying to deny the > >> > >> influence > >> > >> of Spinoza on Vygotsky's thinking > >> (this is explicit in Vygotsky's > >> > >> writings, especially in "The > >> teaching about emotions", in the > >> > >> Vol.6 of > >> > >> the Collected Works). But I have > >> doubts that Vygotsky's > >> > >> introduction > >> > >> of the concept of perezhivanie is > >> to be regarded primarily as a > >> > >> movement towards monism (from a > >> previous cartesian dualism), and > >> > >> that > >> > >> this movement questions the > >> concept of cultural mediation. > >> > >> Instead, > >> > >> and I think that this is in line > >> with some of Gonzalez-Rey > >> > >> observations in his paper, my > >> impression is that the > >> > >> introduction of > >> > >> the concept of perezhivanie > >> responds more to a movement (a > >> > >> further > >> > >> step) towards holism (something > >> that, in my understanding, can > >> > >> also be > >> > >> found in Spinoza). Thus, I think > >> that the word meaning is still > >> > >> the > >> > >> unit of analysis in the last > >> Vygotsky -and therefore, the idea of > >> > >> cultural mediation is still > >> crucial (in fact, in The problem of > >> > >> the > >> > >> environment, he connects the > >> concept of perezhivanie, which has > >> > >> just > >> > >> introduced, to the development of > >> word meaning [p.345-346, also > >> > >> cited > >> > >> in my paper]). However, in my > >> view, in the last Vygotsky the > >> > >> focus is > >> > >> not anymore primarily on the > >> word-meaning as formed for things > >> > >> (or > >> > >> collections of things, as in the > >> ontogenetic research with > >> > >> Sakharov), but the focus is now in the > >> formation of meaning for holistic > >> situations. > >> > >> Best regards, > >> > >> Marc. > >> > >> 2017-01-03 19:16 GMT+01:00 > >> Alfredo Jornet Gil< > >> > >> a.j.gil@iped.uio.no > >> > > >> >> >: > >> > >> Hi Marc, all, > >> > >> thanks for joining and for > >> your interesting work, which I > >> > >> follow > >> > >> since I became aware of it. I > >> appreciate the way in your > >> > >> paper you > >> > >> show careful and honest > >> attention to the texts of the authors > >> > >> involved, but perhaps most of > >> all I appreciate that the > >> > >> paper makes > >> > >> the transformational > >> dimension related to struggle and change > >> > >> salient, a dimension all > >> papers deemed central to > >> > >> perezhivanie. And I > >> > >> have learned more about > >> Vasilyuk by reading your paper. But > >> > >> I also > >> > >> see that we have approached > >> the question of perezhivanie > >> > >> differently > >> > >> and I think that addressing > >> the questions that you raise > >> > >> concerning > >> > >> our article may be a good way > >> to both respond and discuss > >> > >> your paper. > >> > >> I am aware that our use of > >> the term monism may be > >> > >> problematic to > >> > >> some, and N. Veresov, who has > >> recently written about this > >> > >> (see > >> > >> attached article), warns > >> against the dangers of simply > >> > >> moving from > >> > >> dualism into an > >> undifferentiating monism that relativizes > >> > >> everything, > >> > >> making development > >> un-studiable. This seems to be the way in > >> > >> which > >> > >> you have understood our > >> argument, and of course this is not > >> > >> what we are or want to be doing. > >> > >> Probably many will think that > >> *dialectical materialism* > >> > >> rather than > >> > >> monism is the proper term, > >> and I could agree with them; we > >> > >> do in fact > >> > >> use dialectical materialism > >> there and elsewhere. Yet, we > >> > >> wanted to > >> > >> emphasise the Spinozist > >> influence (an influence that also > >> > >> runs > >> > >> through Marx) and so we found > >> it appropriate to use the term > >> > >> monism, > >> > >> a term that Vygotsky uses > >> before arguing that Spinoza > >> > >> "develops an essentially materialistic view" > >> > >> (Collected Works, Vol. 6, p. > >> 124). For us, the aim is > >> > >> working out > >> > >> ways to empirically examine > >> and formulate problems in ways > >> > >> that do > >> > >> not reify a mind-body dualism. > >> > >> Although overcoming dualism > >> is foundational to the CHAT > >> > >> paradigm, I > >> > >> would however not say that > >> Vygotsky did get to solve all of > >> > >> the > >> > >> problems that Cartesian > >> dualism had created for psychology, > >> > >> even > >> > >> though he recognised those > >> problems brilliantly as early as > >> > >> in the > >> > >> "Crisis". It should suffice > >> to cite Vygotsky's own remarks, > >> > >> which we quote in the paper (and which A.N. > >> > >> Leont'ev mentions in the > >> introduction to the collected > >> > >> works), where > >> > >> Vygotsky explicitly critiques > >> some of his own prior ideas > >> > >> for failing > >> > >> to overcome dualism. We agree > >> with those who, like F. G. > >> > >> Rey, see > >> > >> Vygotsky's project as a > >> developing rather than as a > >> > >> finalised one. > >> > >> The fact is that Vygotsky was > >> building a theory on the unity > >> > >> of the > >> > >> affect and the intellect that > >> was to be grounded on Spinoza, > >> > >> and what > >> > >> we try to do is to explore > >> how perezhivanie, as a concept > >> > >> being > >> > >> developed during the same > >> period (but not finalised or > >> > >> totally > >> > >> settled!), could be seen from > >> the perspective of the > >> > >> Spinozist Vygotsky. > >> > >> As you note, in our article > >> we argue that, if one takes the > >> > >> Spinozist > >> > >> one-substance approach, > >> classical concepts used in > >> > >> non-classical > >> > >> psychology, at least in the > >> way they are commonly used in > >> > >> the current > >> > >> literature, should be > >> revised. One such concept is > >> > >> mediation. And I > >> > >> personally do not have much > >> of a problem when mediation is > >> > >> used to > >> > >> denote the fundamental fact > >> that every thing exists always > >> > >> through > >> > >> *another*, never in and of > >> itself. But I do think that it is > >> > >> problematic to identify > >> MEDIATORS, such as "a meaning", as a > >> > >> means to > >> > >> account for or explain > >> developmental processes and learning > >> > >> events, > >> > >> precisely because it is > >> there, at least in my view, that > >> > >> dualism creeps in. > >> > >> For example, I find it > >> paradoxical that you are concerned > >> > >> that our > >> > >> monist approach risks turning > >> perezhivanie into a useless > >> > >> category > >> > >> because it may be used to > >> explain everything and nothing, > >> > >> and yet you > >> > >> do not seem to have a problem > >> using the term mediation to > >> > >> account for > >> > >> the transformation of > >> perezhivanie without clearly > >> > >> elaborating on how > >> > >> mediation does change > >> anything or what it looks like as a > >> > >> real > >> > >> process. How is it different > >> saying that a perezhivanie > >> > >> mediates the > >> > >> experiencing-as-struggle from > >> simply saying that it > >> > >> "affects" or > >> > >> "determines" it? Indeed, if > >> perezhivanie mediates > >> > >> experiencing-as-struggle, > >> does not experiencing-as-struglgle > >> > >> too > >> > >> mediate perezhivanie? And do > >> not both may be said to mediate > >> > >> development, or development mediate them? Is > >> not this explaining everything > >> and nothing? > >> > >> I do believe you can argue > >> that there is a difference between > >> > >> mediation and classical > >> psychology's cause-effect relations, > >> > >> but to > >> > >> show this you need to dig > >> into the dialectical underpinnings > >> > >> of the > >> > >> theory. In your paper, you > >> offer a nice analysis of a lovely > >> > >> case of > >> > >> a teacher who, in dealing > >> with a challenge with one of her > >> > >> students, > >> > >> changes her perezhivanie. I > >> think you can rightly argue that > >> > >> there is > >> > >> a semiotic transformation, > >> and I fully support your > >> > >> statement that by > >> > >> studying discourse we can > >> empirically approach questions of > >> > >> psychological development. > >> The contradictions you show as > >> > >> being > >> > >> involved and resolved > >> resonate really well with what I > >> > >> experience as > >> > >> a parent or as a teacher in > >> the classroom. Yet, without > >> > >> unpacking > >> > >> what this "mediation" taking > >> place between one perezhivanie > >> > >> and the > >> > >> next one means as a concrete > >> and real, the same analysis > >> > >> could be done taking an information processing > >> approach: > >> > >> there is an situation that is > >> processed (represented?) in > >> > >> one way, > >> > >> which then leads to a > >> (cognitive) dissonance, and then there > >> > >> is a > >> > >> cognitive resolution by means > >> of which the situation is > >> > >> presented > >> > >> differently in consciousness > >> (indeed, when seen in this way, > >> > >> the term > >> > >> perezhivanie and the term > >> "representation" become almost > >> > >> indistinguishable). How is > >> mediation, as an analytical > >> > >> concept, > >> > >> helping here? And most > >> importantly to the question of > >> > >> perezhivanie, > >> > >> how is this analysis going to > >> show the internal connection > >> > >> between > >> > >> intellect and affect that > >> Vygotsky formulates as > >> > >> constitutive of the notion of perezhivanie? > >> > >> I believe that the key lies > >> in understanding what Vygotsky > >> > >> means when > >> > >> he says that perezhivanie is > >> a unit of analysis. I will not > >> > >> repeat > >> > >> here what already is written > >> in at least a couple of the > >> > >> articles in > >> > >> the special issue (Blunden, > >> ours), that is the difference > >> > >> between > >> > >> analysis by elements and unit > >> analysis (Vygotsky 1987). A > >> > >> unit > >> > >> analysis approach is > >> consistent with Spinoza, for whom > >> > >> cause-effect > >> > >> explanations were not > >> adequate, requiring instead an > >> > >> understanding of > >> > >> self-development, > >> perezhivanie as a kernel cell for the > >> > >> development > >> > >> of personality. And I think > >> you may be after this in your > >> > >> article in > > > > > ________________________________ [http://www.plymouth.ac.uk/images/email_footer.gif] This email and any files with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the recipient to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient then copying, distribution or other use of the information contained is strictly prohibited and you should not rely on it. If you have received this email in error please let the sender know immediately and delete it from your system(s). Internet emails are not necessarily secure. While we take every care, Plymouth University accepts no responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to scan emails and their attachments. Plymouth University does not accept responsibility for any changes made after it was sent. Nothing in this email or its attachments constitutes an order for goods or services unless accompanied by an official order form. From lpscholar2@gmail.com Sun Jan 15 11:09:05 2017 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2017 11:09:05 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! In-Reply-To: References: <1484256089562.1752@iped.uio.no> <58791c9d.4a35630a.1111d.ed74@mx.google.com> <5162f846-8bd9-3260-7d40-b343e4b6af4e@mira.net> Message-ID: <587bc8fb.5156620a.6b3ce.5c39@mx.google.com> Marc, Thank you for this thoughtful synthesis of the way to navigate through this emerging theme. As i read (and listened) i also was wondering whether you were going to reference Beth?s and Monica?s contribution to this month?s special journal? I just now went back and re-read their opening paragraph that captured my imagination with their answer (and my listening) to this emerging theme. Their paper opens with Jay Lemke?s question?: How do ?moments? add up to ?lives?? Their next move is to bring in Lilly Briscoe to speak from within Virginia Woolf?s book (To the Lighthouse). Lilly asks the question?: What is the meaning of life? So ... Within my listening to these questions from various speakers to WHOM am I listening. Are the speakers real or fictional? AND Does the answer matter to my listening if they are real or fictional? Lilly Briscoe does give an answer to the question?: What is the meaning of Life? Listen?: The GREAT revelation had never come. The great revelation perhaps never did come. Instead there were little daily miracles, illuminations, matches struck UNEXPECTEDLY in the dark; ... THIS, THAT, AND THE OTHER. What is the meaning of life? Lilly gives her answer. Meaning is trying to make of the ?moment? something PERmanent. Beth and Monica then say (and i hear) that perezhivanie is a concept that addresses Lemke?s question and Woolf?s response. I would ADD and my listening. Not sure if this fits function or structure or is a fusion? It however opens a place to explore WHO is real, fantasy, and imaginal and if the demarcations matter to my ?listening? to the characters expressing perezhivanie/experience. Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Marc Clar? Sent: January 15, 2017 8:30 AM To: Andy Blunden; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! Hi, all, I have the impression that part of this thread of the discussion echoes the old (and eternal) discussion between functionalism and structuralism. In our case, perhaps these two broad positions would seem to take the form of what could be called an ?activity approach? and a ?semiotic approach? respectively. Or in other terms, ?perezhivanie is activity-function? vs. ?perezhivanie is structure-counciousness-mind?. In my understanding, within the ?activity approach?, Alfredo's position seems to be more radical than Antti's. I see Alfredo's position somewhat closer, in some aspects, to ?participation? approaches (e.g. Rogoff's). If I understand him well, he seems to assume that in reality there is not anything but social interaction; that is, that not only there is a UNITY but also an IDENTITY between activity, social interaction, and meaning, and that therefore all is reducible to social interaction. Thus, in his article with Roth, they write: ?In the case of Sylvia?s categorizing her mystery object, we already see her as part of the social relation that is mathematical practice, a (social) practice that exists in the linking of an act of classification to its account. That practice is social in and as of the link; in the life of Sylvia, it first was a social relation. Thus, there is not something happening in the relation that then is transferred to the inside of the girl.? (p.321). Accordingly, Alfredo, in this conversation, says that ?a changing activity IS changing ?meaning? (where ?to be? is to be heard as an ?unity/identity? in the dialectical sense)?, and also that a ?SIGN is not a thing, but a relation between two persons. But the sign then is not something between things, or even between persons; it really and concretely is a relation between people that has to be accounted for empirically?. He adds that mediation is a ?particular class of activities in which sign relations are produced?. Reading Antti's questions and comments, I have the impression that his position assumes the UNITY, but not the IDENTITY, between activity, meaning and social interaction. But before going ahead, I have to stress that, as I have already mentioned in a previous e-mail, Alfredo's use of the concepts of SIGN and CULTURAL MEDIATION seems to me very different from the way I use these concepts, which I tried to make explicit in a previous e-mail. It would seem that this could be because, from Alfredo's view, the things and phenomena I call signs and cultural mediation don't really exist, so he uses these concepts to refer to phenomena that, in his view, do really exist (this also echoes Vytosky's ?historical meaning of the crisis in psychology?). I have the impression that others in this discussion (e.g., David, Andy, me), which take a more semiotic approach, departs from the assumption that these phenomena and things that, in my understanding, Vygotsky calls cultural mediation and signs, do exist, and that are the key to study mind-consciousness. It seems to me that Antti also would assume the existence of signs and cultural mediation (in Vygotsky's terms) but that he is concerned on whether we have to study a structure (that is, consciousness-mind, and therefore use as a unit the sign-meaning -a microcosm of consciousness) or we have to study a function (that is, activity). One of the many contributions I find interesting in Vygotsky is precisely that, in my understanding, he tries to conciliate these two positions -functionalism and structuralism. In my view, he departs from the idea that how the things are is strongly related to how the things function (Vygotsky's law of the unity of the structure and function in thinking). Vygotsky writes: ?It is becoming clear that functions depend on the structure of that which is thought. Any act of thought must somehow establish a connection between the various aspects of reality which are represented in consciousness. The way that this reality is represented in consciousness cannot be without some significance in determining the operations of thinking that will be possible. In other words, the various functions of thinking are inevitably dependent on that which functions, is moved, and is the foundation of this process. Stated yet more simply, the functions of thinking depend on the structure of thought itself.? (Vygotsky, collected works, v.1, p.237). I think that this can enable an approach which overcome what is often presented as a dichotomy between structure and function, without eliminating neither structure nor function. That is, the object of study can be mind-consciousness, and therefore the unit can be the sign-meaning; but the mind-consciousness must always be studied at work, that is, how the mind-consciousness works in psychological functions, i.e. within activity. In my view, this means studying how sign-meaning mediates in specific psychological functions. More specifically, in the study mentioned in my paper of MCA, it means studying how certain semiotic structures mediate in activities of experiencing-as-struggle. For example, from this study, it seems that certain semiotic structures, which I call modal contradictions (e.g., duty vs. incapability), in m-perezhivanie may be important in experiencing-as-struggle activities: their semiotic transformation seems to imply an emotional transformation, and seems to realize the psychological function of experiencing-as-struggle. Of course, I introduce my empirical study here just to exemplify my point and the general epistemological approach I am assuming; I don't claim that my methodological approach is unproblematic; in fact, I am struggling to deal with the many methodological problems that arise. Just to cite two of these many problems: first, the study is incomplete, in the sense that, as Antti mentions, the social relations which are also a crucial aspect of the activity of experiencing-as-struggle are beyond the scope of this study (I hope finding ways to being able to analyze this aspect in the future); second, although the study intents to be microgenetic, this is done retrospectively from one narrative, what is certainly problematic (the opposite problem is how to identify processes of experiencing-as-struggle in advance, in order to undertake a longitudinal study -this would also permit studying better all aspects of activity). But all this is at a methodological plane, which perhaps would deserve a new thread; I think that the discussion in this thread is more on the epistemological (and at times ontological) plane. Best regards, Marc. 2017-01-15 5:21 GMT+01:00 Andy Blunden : > /Perezhivanie/ is a type of activity, according Vasilyuk, as Alex Kozulin > remarked some years ago, a "life-project." > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Andy Blunden > http://home.mira.net/~andy > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > On 15/01/2017 10:22 AM, Antti Rajala wrote: > >> ... >> >> Andy also uses Vasilyuk in informing his definition of perezhivanie. I >> wondered that for Andy, in what way perezhivenie would be different as a >> unit of analysis as compared to activity (Andy - I have read your >> critique >> of Leontiev, so please feel free to substitute e.g., collaborative project >> for activity). I like in Andy's paper the idea that through perezhivanie >> not only the actor is changed but sometimes also the social circumstances >> (also the reference to Bildungsroman). Why only focus on ontogenesis and >> not also sociogenesis? In my own work, I am interested to study the >> relation between perezhivanie and agency. >> >> >> > From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Sun Jan 15 15:52:21 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2017 23:52:21 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Fw: author articles MCA Issue 4 Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: <1484327382734.77186@iped.uio.no> References: <1484327382734.77186@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <1484524342219.11085@iped.uio.no> ?I meant to send this e-mail last week, but it seems it did not go through, I am trying again Alfredo ________________________________ From: Alfredo Jornet Gil Sent: 13 January 2017 18:09 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: author articles MCA Issue 4 Perezhivanie Hi all, as a complement to our ongoing perezhivanie discussion, and since the discussion has nicely taken the symposium form that also is present in the special issue, all the authors have now agreed that we share their author versions. These are the versions accepted for publication before the proofs. That means that the ?articles attached may differ slightly from the ones published, but they should be accurate enough to grant access to everyone who, like Larry and others, do not have institutional access to the T&F pages. Alfredo -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: MCA%20Symposium%20Phases%201%20and%202.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 822355 bytes Desc: MCA%20Symposium%20Phases%201%20and%202.pdf Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20170115/a6e7b22c/attachment-0001.pdf From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Sun Jan 15 16:52:02 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2017 00:52:02 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! In-Reply-To: <587bc8fb.5156620a.6b3ce.5c39@mx.google.com> References: <1484256089562.1752@iped.uio.no> <58791c9d.4a35630a.1111d.ed74@mx.google.com> <5162f846-8bd9-3260-7d40-b343e4b6af4e@mira.net> , <587bc8fb.5156620a.6b3ce.5c39@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <1484527921481.59875@iped.uio.no> Marc, the questions you bring up are broad, but I'll try to address them briefly. Few posts ago, Andy asked if I was saying that the sign was something "immaterial". My answer was this: (Alfredo says:) "... if your question is whether I think that words (as signs) are immaterial, or that a cube (as per the empirical case in our article) is immaterial as sign, then of course not. If your question is whether I think that sign relations are immaterial because they are not things but relations, then again no, that's not what I think or try to say. I assume we agree, however, that a pointing finger *does* things in a very different way than things can be done with a stick." Andy then took up on my latter point very nicely: (Andy says:) "One can of course point with a stick, and poke with a finger, yes?" And I of course agree with Andy, that's precisely the point I was trying to make. So, I disagree that our differences have to do with the fact that I take signs as not existent, and that therefore I reduce what you call signs to (material) social interaction. What is the difference between pointing sticks and sticks lying on the ground on Mars, or Arizona, then? Is it that one exists and the other one does not? Of course not. Is it not the difference between them the fact that they exist as part of different cosmic determinations? To me, the difference between the sticks is not whether their sign-ness exists or it does not exist. The difference lies in the way theirs are different modes of existence. The thing-ness of the sticks exists and is sustained by a cosmic determination that is very different from that which sustains their sign-ness existence. The forces that hold the stick to be a lying-on-the-ground stick are very different from those that make it a sign or gesture, even if the stick as sign also requires of those forces. And to me, to study the forces that make a stick a sign (to EXPLAIN the stick as sign), you need to understand the social relation in which the stick *becomes* sign or gesture. And I don't think this is some behaviourist position, or that it is susceptible to be critiqued as falling into one of the functionalism/structuralism poles. I do believe the relation is indeed semiotic. I simply don't think that the verb "to mediate" adds anything new to our understanding of the difference between the two ways in which a pointing stick exists (as thing, as gesture) unless the verb "to mediate" is elaborated concretely in the transition from not-yet-sign to sign. This, you suggest in your e-mail, is a methodological problem. But to me, the fact that it is methodological does not make it a lesser problem. K. Marx speaks of a table as table, and of a table as commodity. In the latter case, the table is not just a sensous thing, but a sensous supersensible thing. Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com Sent: 15 January 2017 20:09 To: Marc Clar?; Andy Blunden; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! Marc, Thank you for this thoughtful synthesis of the way to navigate through this emerging theme. As i read (and listened) i also was wondering whether you were going to reference Beth?s and Monica?s contribution to this month?s special journal? I just now went back and re-read their opening paragraph that captured my imagination with their answer (and my listening) to this emerging theme. Their paper opens with Jay Lemke?s question : How do ?moments? add up to ?lives?? Their next move is to bring in Lilly Briscoe to speak from within Virginia Woolf?s book (To the Lighthouse). Lilly asks the question : What is the meaning of life? So ... Within my listening to these questions from various speakers to WHOM am I listening. Are the speakers real or fictional? AND Does the answer matter to my listening if they are real or fictional? Lilly Briscoe does give an answer to the question : What is the meaning of Life? Listen : The GREAT revelation had never come. The great revelation perhaps never did come. Instead there were little daily miracles, illuminations, matches struck UNEXPECTEDLY in the dark; ... THIS, THAT, AND THE OTHER. What is the meaning of life? Lilly gives her answer. Meaning is trying to make of the ?moment? something PERmanent. Beth and Monica then say (and i hear) that perezhivanie is a concept that addresses Lemke?s question and Woolf?s response. I would ADD and my listening. Not sure if this fits function or structure or is a fusion? It however opens a place to explore WHO is real, fantasy, and imaginal and if the demarcations matter to my ?listening? to the characters expressing perezhivanie/experience. Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Marc Clar? Sent: January 15, 2017 8:30 AM To: Andy Blunden; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! Hi, all, I have the impression that part of this thread of the discussion echoes the old (and eternal) discussion between functionalism and structuralism. In our case, perhaps these two broad positions would seem to take the form of what could be called an ?activity approach? and a ?semiotic approach? respectively. Or in other terms, ?perezhivanie is activity-function? vs. ?perezhivanie is structure-counciousness-mind?. In my understanding, within the ?activity approach?, Alfredo's position seems to be more radical than Antti's. I see Alfredo's position somewhat closer, in some aspects, to ?participation? approaches (e.g. Rogoff's). If I understand him well, he seems to assume that in reality there is not anything but social interaction; that is, that not only there is a UNITY but also an IDENTITY between activity, social interaction, and meaning, and that therefore all is reducible to social interaction. Thus, in his article with Roth, they write: ?In the case of Sylvia?s categorizing her mystery object, we already see her as part of the social relation that is mathematical practice, a (social) practice that exists in the linking of an act of classification to its account. That practice is social in and as of the link; in the life of Sylvia, it first was a social relation. Thus, there is not something happening in the relation that then is transferred to the inside of the girl.? (p.321). Accordingly, Alfredo, in this conversation, says that ?a changing activity IS changing ?meaning? (where ?to be? is to be heard as an ?unity/identity? in the dialectical sense)?, and also that a ?SIGN is not a thing, but a relation between two persons. But the sign then is not something between things, or even between persons; it really and concretely is a relation between people that has to be accounted for empirically?. He adds that mediation is a ?particular class of activities in which sign relations are produced?. Reading Antti's questions and comments, I have the impression that his position assumes the UNITY, but not the IDENTITY, between activity, meaning and social interaction. But before going ahead, I have to stress that, as I have already mentioned in a previous e-mail, Alfredo's use of the concepts of SIGN and CULTURAL MEDIATION seems to me very different from the way I use these concepts, which I tried to make explicit in a previous e-mail. It would seem that this could be because, from Alfredo's view, the things and phenomena I call signs and cultural mediation don't really exist, so he uses these concepts to refer to phenomena that, in his view, do really exist (this also echoes Vytosky's ?historical meaning of the crisis in psychology?). I have the impression that others in this discussion (e.g., David, Andy, me), which take a more semiotic approach, departs from the assumption that these phenomena and things that, in my understanding, Vygotsky calls cultural mediation and signs, do exist, and that are the key to study mind-consciousness. It seems to me that Antti also would assume the existence of signs and cultural mediation (in Vygotsky's terms) but that he is concerned on whether we have to study a structure (that is, consciousness-mind, and therefore use as a unit the sign-meaning -a microcosm of consciousness) or we have to study a function (that is, activity). One of the many contributions I find interesting in Vygotsky is precisely that, in my understanding, he tries to conciliate these two positions -functionalism and structuralism. In my view, he departs from the idea that how the things are is strongly related to how the things function (Vygotsky's law of the unity of the structure and function in thinking). Vygotsky writes: ?It is becoming clear that functions depend on the structure of that which is thought. Any act of thought must somehow establish a connection between the various aspects of reality which are represented in consciousness. The way that this reality is represented in consciousness cannot be without some significance in determining the operations of thinking that will be possible. In other words, the various functions of thinking are inevitably dependent on that which functions, is moved, and is the foundation of this process. Stated yet more simply, the functions of thinking depend on the structure of thought itself.? (Vygotsky, collected works, v.1, p.237). I think that this can enable an approach which overcome what is often presented as a dichotomy between structure and function, without eliminating neither structure nor function. That is, the object of study can be mind-consciousness, and therefore the unit can be the sign-meaning; but the mind-consciousness must always be studied at work, that is, how the mind-consciousness works in psychological functions, i.e. within activity. In my view, this means studying how sign-meaning mediates in specific psychological functions. More specifically, in the study mentioned in my paper of MCA, it means studying how certain semiotic structures mediate in activities of experiencing-as-struggle. For example, from this study, it seems that certain semiotic structures, which I call modal contradictions (e.g., duty vs. incapability), in m-perezhivanie may be important in experiencing-as-struggle activities: their semiotic transformation seems to imply an emotional transformation, and seems to realize the psychological function of experiencing-as-struggle. Of course, I introduce my empirical study here just to exemplify my point and the general epistemological approach I am assuming; I don't claim that my methodological approach is unproblematic; in fact, I am struggling to deal with the many methodological problems that arise. Just to cite two of these many problems: first, the study is incomplete, in the sense that, as Antti mentions, the social relations which are also a crucial aspect of the activity of experiencing-as-struggle are beyond the scope of this study (I hope finding ways to being able to analyze this aspect in the future); second, although the study intents to be microgenetic, this is done retrospectively from one narrative, what is certainly problematic (the opposite problem is how to identify processes of experiencing-as-struggle in advance, in order to undertake a longitudinal study -this would also permit studying better all aspects of activity). But all this is at a methodological plane, which perhaps would deserve a new thread; I think that the discussion in this thread is more on the epistemological (and at times ontological) plane. Best regards, Marc. 2017-01-15 5:21 GMT+01:00 Andy Blunden : > /Perezhivanie/ is a type of activity, according Vasilyuk, as Alex Kozulin > remarked some years ago, a "life-project." > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Andy Blunden > http://home.mira.net/~andy > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > On 15/01/2017 10:22 AM, Antti Rajala wrote: > >> ... >> >> Andy also uses Vasilyuk in informing his definition of perezhivanie. I >> wondered that for Andy, in what way perezhivenie would be different as a >> unit of analysis as compared to activity (Andy - I have read your >> critique >> of Leontiev, so please feel free to substitute e.g., collaborative project >> for activity). I like in Andy's paper the idea that through perezhivanie >> not only the actor is changed but sometimes also the social circumstances >> (also the reference to Bildungsroman). Why only focus on ontogenesis and >> not also sociogenesis? In my own work, I am interested to study the >> relation between perezhivanie and agency. >> >> >> > From ablunden@mira.net Sun Jan 15 17:28:58 2017 From: ablunden@mira.net (Andy Blunden) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2017 12:28:58 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! In-Reply-To: References: <1484256089562.1752@iped.uio.no> <58791c9d.4a35630a.1111d.ed74@mx.google.com> <5162f846-8bd9-3260-7d40-b343e4b6af4e@mira.net> Message-ID: <79207370-5946-b4d4-8311-3046a78dd982@mira.net> Marc, I must distance myself from your characterisation of my ontological position. I loathe structuralism and functionalism, but I define my position in opposition to both structuralism and functionalism on the one hand and hermeneutic and psychologicstic approaches to human life on the other. See for example my appropriation and critique of Anthony Giddens here: https://www.academia.edu/21493136/Anthony_Giddens_on_Structuration and my appreciation of Vasilyuk here: https://www.academia.edu/15198661/Fedor_Vasilyuk_s_Psychology_of_Life-projects and if you are a real sucker for punishment: https://www.academia.edu/29582222/An_ontology_of_social_life . Andy ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making On 16/01/2017 3:27 AM, Marc Clar? wrote: > > Hi, all, > > I have the impression that part of this thread of the > discussion echoes the old (and eternal) discussion between > functionalism and structuralism. In our case, perhaps > these two broad positions would seem to take the form of > what could be called an ?activity approach? and a > ?semiotic approach? respectively. Or in other terms, > ?perezhivanie is activity-function? vs. ?perezhivanie is > structure-counciousness-mind?. > > In my understanding, within the ?activity approach?, > Alfredo's position seems to be more radical than Antti's. > I see Alfredo's position somewhat closer, in some aspects, > to ?participation? approaches (e.g. Rogoff's). If I > understand him well, he seems to assume that in reality > there is not anything but social interaction; that is, > that not only there is a UNITY but also an IDENTITY > between activity, social interaction, and meaning, and > that therefore all is reducible to social interaction. > Thus, in his article with Roth, they write: ?In the case > of Sylvia?s categorizing her mystery object, we already > see her as part of the social relation that is > mathematical practice, a (social) practice that exists in > the linking of an act of classification to its account. > That practice is social in and as of the link; in the life > of Sylvia, it first was a social relation. Thus, there is > not something happening in the relation that then is > transferred to the inside of the girl.? (p.321). > Accordingly, Alfredo, in this conversation, says that ?a > changing activity IS changing ?meaning? (where ?to be? is > to be heard as an ?unity/identity? in the dialectical > sense)?, and also that a ?SIGN is not a thing, but a > relation between two persons. But the sign then is not > something between things, or even between persons; it > really and concretely is a relation between people that > has to be accounted for empirically?. He adds that > mediation is a ?particular class of activities in which > sign relations are produced?. Reading Antti's questions > and comments, I have the impression that his position > assumes the UNITY, but not the IDENTITY, between activity, > meaning and social interaction. But before going ahead, I > have to stress that, as I have already mentioned in a > previous e-mail, Alfredo's use of the concepts of SIGN and > CULTURAL MEDIATION seems to me very different from the way > I use these concepts, which I tried to make explicit in a > previous e-mail. It would seem that this could be because, > from Alfredo's view, the things and phenomena I call signs > and cultural mediation don't really exist, so he uses > these concepts to refer to phenomena that, in his view, do > really exist (this also echoes Vytosky's ?historical > meaning of the crisis in psychology?). > > I have the impression that others in this discussion > (e.g., David, Andy, me), which take a more semiotic > approach, departs from the assumption that these phenomena > and things that, in my understanding, Vygotsky calls > cultural mediation and signs, do exist, and that are the > key to study mind-consciousness. It seems to me that Antti > also would assume the existence of signs and cultural > mediation (in Vygotsky's terms) but that he is concerned > on whether we have to study a structure (that is, > consciousness-mind, and therefore use as a unit the > sign-meaning -a microcosm of consciousness) or we have to > study a function (that is, activity). > > One of the many contributions I find interesting in > Vygotsky is precisely that, in my understanding, he tries > to conciliate these two positions -functionalism and > structuralism. In my view, he departs from the idea that > how the things are is strongly related to how the things > function (Vygotsky's law of the unity of the structure and > function in thinking). Vygotsky writes: ?It is becoming > clear that functions depend on the structure of that which > is thought. Any act of thought must somehow establish a > connection between the various aspects of reality which > are represented in consciousness. The way that this > reality is represented in consciousness cannot be without > some significance in determining the operations of > thinking that will be possible. In other words, the > various functions of thinking are inevitably dependent on > that which functions, is moved, and is the foundation of > this process. Stated yet more simply, the functions of > thinking depend on the structure of thought itself.? > (Vygotsky, collected works, v.1, p.237). > > I think that this can enable an approach which overcome > what is often presented as a dichotomy between structure > and function, without eliminating neither structure nor > function. That is, the object of study can be > mind-consciousness, and therefore the unit can be the > sign-meaning; but the mind-consciousness must always be > studied at work, that is, how the mind-consciousness works > in psychological functions, i.e. within activity. > > In my view, this means studying how sign-meaning mediates > in specific psychological functions. More specifically, in > the study mentioned in my paper of MCA, it means studying > how certain semiotic structures mediate in activities of > experiencing-as-struggle. For example, from this study, it > seems that certain semiotic structures, which I call modal > contradictions (e.g., duty vs. incapability), in > m-perezhivanie may be important in > experiencing-as-struggle activities: their semiotic > transformation seems to imply an emotional transformation, > and seems to realize the psychological function of > experiencing-as-struggle. > > Of course, I introduce my empirical study here just to > exemplify my point and the general epistemological > approach I am assuming; I don't claim that my > methodological approach is unproblematic; in fact, I am > struggling to deal with the many methodological problems > that arise. Just to cite two of these many problems: > first, the study is incomplete, in the sense that, as > Antti mentions, the social relations which are also a > crucial aspect of the activity of experiencing-as-struggle > are beyond the scope of this study (I hope finding ways to > being able to analyze this aspect in the future); second, > although the study intents to be microgenetic, this is > done retrospectively from one narrative, what is certainly > problematic (the opposite problem is how to identify > processes of experiencing-as-struggle in advance, in order > to undertake a longitudinal study -this would also permit > studying better all aspects of activity). But all this is > at a methodological plane, which perhaps would deserve a > new thread; I think that the discussion in this thread is > more on the epistemological (and at times ontological) plane. > > Best regards, > > Marc. > > > 2017-01-15 5:21 GMT+01:00 Andy Blunden >: > > /Perezhivanie/ is a type of activity, according > Vasilyuk, as Alex Kozulin remarked some years ago, a > "life-project." > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Andy Blunden > http://home.mira.net/~andy > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > > On 15/01/2017 10:22 AM, Antti Rajala wrote: > > ... > > Andy also uses Vasilyuk in informing his > definition of perezhivanie. I > wondered that for Andy, in what way perezhivenie > would be different as a > unit of analysis as compared to activity (Andy - > I have read your critique > of Leontiev, so please feel free to substitute > e.g., collaborative project > for activity). I like in Andy's paper the idea > that through perezhivanie > not only the actor is changed but sometimes also > the social circumstances > (also the reference to Bildungsroman). Why only > focus on ontogenesis and > not also sociogenesis? In my own work, I am > interested to study the > relation between perezhivanie and agency. > > > > From mcole@ucsd.edu Sun Jan 15 20:28:50 2017 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2017 04:28:50 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Fw: author articles MCA Issue 4 Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: <1484524342219.11085@iped.uio.no> References: <1484327382734.77186@iped.uio.no> <1484524342219.11085@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: Nice. Thanks Mike On Sun, Jan 15, 2017 at 3:56 PM Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > ?I meant to send this e-mail last week, but it seems it did not go > through, I am trying again > > > > Alfredo > > > > ________________________________ > > From: Alfredo Jornet Gil > > Sent: 13 January 2017 18:09 > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: author articles MCA Issue 4 Perezhivanie > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > as a complement to our ongoing perezhivanie discussion, and since the > discussion has nicely taken the symposium form that also is present in the > special issue, all the authors have now agreed that we share their author > versions. These are the versions accepted for publication before the > proofs. That means that the ?articles attached may differ slightly from the > ones published, but they should be accurate enough to grant access to > everyone who, like Larry and others, do not have institutional access to > the T&F pages. > > > > > > Alfredo > > > > From lpscholar2@gmail.com Sun Jan 15 22:54:01 2017 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2017 22:54:01 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Fw: author articles MCA Issue 4 Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: <1484524342219.11085@iped.uio.no> References: <1484327382734.77186@iped.uio.no> <1484524342219.11085@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <587c5eeb.4379630a.d3d04.fbd3@mx.google.com> Alfredo, Thanks for sending the 87 pages that are exploring the multifaceted threads exploring perezhivanie. I believe we must also be closing in on another 87 pages generated in our discussions. I have now printed out the 87 pages of the journal and also many pages of the XMCA threads. THIS rich resource opens up multiple doors to enter into. I assume these are first steps and each separate article feels like a doorway into this common theme moving through multiple traditions. Yes, a symposium and also a symphony of questions & listening being played. Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From: Alfredo Jornet Gil Sent: January 15, 2017 3:56 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Fw: author articles MCA Issue 4 Perezhivanie ?I meant to send this e-mail last week, but it seems it did not go through, I am trying again Alfredo ________________________________ From: Alfredo Jornet Gil Sent: 13 January 2017 18:09 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: author articles MCA Issue 4 Perezhivanie Hi all, as a complement to our ongoing perezhivanie discussion, and since the discussion has nicely taken the symposium form that also is present in the special issue, all the authors have now agreed that we share their author versions. These are the versions accepted for publication before the proofs. That means that the ?articles attached may differ slightly from the ones published, but they should be accurate enough to grant access to everyone who, like Larry and others, do not have institutional access to the T&F pages. Alfredo From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Sun Jan 15 22:13:06 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2017 06:13:06 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! In-Reply-To: References: <1484256089562.1752@iped.uio.no> <58791c9d.4a35630a.1111d.ed74@mx.google.com> , Message-ID: <1484547184097.76200@iped.uio.no> Hi Antti, nice to read you! and thanks for these important questions. I'll try to address those you pose to me explicitly. I hear you ask this: what does perezhivanie add that activity does not? Human activity already implies experience, as Leont'ev's quotation you quote states. Perezhivanie, in turn, denotes unity of person and environment, and so it presupposes activity.Do not we actually think that the adequate unit is activity and NOT perezhivanie? But do we really have to choose? For, what is uniquely *human* activity? What is *human* about human activity? IThe principle that *labor* creates man is not lost in Vygotsky (see Vygotsky and Luria in their "Studies of the History of Behavior"). Still, I do not think that Vygotsky would agree that activity, and not experiencing, is the proper unit. Because it is not just any sort of experience that Vygotsky seems to be after, but CONSCIOUS experience. That which is uniquely human is not the fact of human doing, but the fact of *conscious* human experiencing. And it is ONLY? through conscious experience that we can change and grow as humans. Cannot certain human activities lead to a de-humanization of humans? But as long as consciousness can be awaken, there is hope of freedom. Perezhivanie is a unit of CONSCIOUS personality, Vygotsky says several times in his lecture. Every experience presupposes a doing (and and undergoing!) but it is conscious experience what makes activity human; even if in phylogenesis there may have been a point at which a non-human was doing human things (activity) that made her human. He writes: ?Consciousness determines life (the image), but it derives itself from life, and forms its component: ergo life determines life [itself] through consciousness.? So, why do we study social interaction if we think that perezhivanie is a proper, and, if one had to choose, more proper unit than activity? Vygotsky writes: "consciousness . . .exists in practice for other people and therefore for myself". He also paraphrases Feuerbach and says that the word is that which is impossible to accomplish for one but possible for two. Thus, the word is IRREDUCIBLE to one person, even if the person is using it alone (e.g., for herself). He also writes that the word is a microcosm of consciousness. So, if you were concerned trying to understand questions of consciousness, where should we go and look for it? But, then, is perezhivanie the SAME as social interaction? Are they an undifferentiated whole? No. But you simply cannot study people's personal development outside social relation, for by the time you have been able to recognise an action as an instance of a person's experience, it has already become a social rather than an individual event: it already and in principle is a generalisation. BUT this is not because of a methodological limitation, it has nothing to do with a limitation in our observations methods: consciousness IS of the social nature, cannot be individual (only hallucinations and other inchoate forms of experience can). I think that is why several of us have turn to DRAMA, and Vygotsky too following G. Politzer: the psychological (i.e. uniquely human) fact is a dramatic fact, not the fact of (e.g.) perception. I try to make it short, but the questions are tough! Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Antti Rajala Sent: 15 January 2017 00:22 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! I am joining late. Over the week, I've been reading again the papers in the special issue and tried to make sense of the very stimulating but complex discussion. Apologize in advance for possibly confusing the discussion with some misunderstandings. Thinking about Marc's distinction between m-perezhivanie and experiencing as struggle, I wonder if in the latter case perezhivanie is in fact not a unit of analysis. Marc refers to Vasilyuk's book in which (if I remember it right) Vasilyuk builds on A.N Leontiev's theory of activity and defends it at some length. So isn't a proper unit of analysis for studying 'experiencing as struggle' then 'activity' and not 'perezhivanie'? After all, isn't activity a unit of analysis that also helps to overcome the dualism between person and environment? For A.N Leontiev (in his critique of Vygotsky's essay, 2005) perezhivanie is a helpful addition to activity theory but he states: "... can we view experiencing as an initial psychological fact specifically in the sense that experiencing determines the degree and nature of the influence of a given situation or, speaking in general terms, of a given object of reality on a subject? We assert that we cannot. After all, how a given object appears in experience is determined by the activity of the subject in relation to this object. Experience truly appears in each specific act of human activity, but it is neither the activity itself nor its cause, because before becoming a cause, activity itself is a result." A.N Leontiev developed the concept of personal sense that is very similar to perezhivanie. In ISCAR meeting in Sydney D. Leontiev made a remark that for ANL 'personal sense' is an elaboration of 'perezhivanie' and not of Vygotsky's 'sense' which is a different concept. Fernando Gonzales Rey discusses the difference between his theory of sense and Leontiev's in his essay Path to Subjectivity. A major issue seems to be if one talks about reflection or refraction. But is this really an issue for more recent scholars that have developed Leontiev's work further to account for subjectivity, agency, etc (e.g., Engestr?m, Stetsenko, Roth) What Marc seems to analyze in his nice paper are the changes in the meanings that the teacher makes of his situation; thus the unit of analysis appears to me to be m-perezhivanie. A bit in line with Alfredo's earlier remark, I also think that Marc is not really analyzing the teacher's experiencing as struggle but using the notion as an explanation of the changes in the meanings that are analyzed from the teacher's narratives. The activity that provokes these changes seems to be left for further studies. Andy also uses Vasilyuk in informing his definition of perezhivanie. I wondered that for Andy, in what way perezhivenie would be different as a unit of analysis as compared to activity (Andy - I have read your critique of Leontiev, so please feel free to substitute e.g., collaborative project for activity). I like in Andy's paper the idea that through perezhivanie not only the actor is changed but sometimes also the social circumstances (also the reference to Bildungsroman). Why only focus on ontogenesis and not also sociogenesis? In my own work, I am interested to study the relation between perezhivanie and agency. Regarding the units of analysis, I found Veresov and Fleer paper very helpful. It seems to me that perezhivanie as a unit of consciousness is indeed a helpful unit of analysis to understand ontogenesis. But they also say that perezhivanie can be a unit of personal and environmental characteristics. It would have been nice to see an example of this, since I did not understand how this would be studied. I also think that perezhivanie as a unit of personal and environmental characteristics is seems still a bit vague and undifferentiated as compared to the notion of activity. Perhaps Roth and Jornet paper comes closest to actually analyzing the dynamic unit comprising personal and environmental. Alfredo - could you clarify why do you think that perezhivanie as a unit of analysis is different in your case to activity or situated interaction. After all, the analysis built very much on the conventions of conversation analysis in which the unit of analysis is often something like situated interaction. Roth and Jornet in their earlier paper on the topic (Toward the theory of experience) make use of Leontiev's theory of activity to interpret the data. Alfredo, have you changed your mind on this topic? All the best, Antti "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 10:34 PM, David Kellogg wrote: > Ruqaiya Hasan had three criticisms of "word meaning" as a unit of analysis > for consciousness. She said that there was no theory of language use behind > it, that it was a finished product which obscured the > interpersonal-cum-sociocultural origins of verbal meaning, and that > Vygotsky used it in a way that was socially undifferentiated, as if the > word meanings in a classs society were homogeneous and shared. > > For many years, I tried to satisfy these criticisms with a bit of > retranslation: "znachenie slova" is not "word meaning" but "verbal > meaning", "slovo" is not "word" but "parole", and "znachenie" is not > "znachenie" but actually "smysl", etc. But it now seems to me that the real > way to satisfy Hasan is to admit that so long as "word meaning" refers only > to ideational, representational, "znachenie" Hasan is right. > > But consciousness is not the same thing as the development of personality. > As soon as we say that the real unit of analysis for the development of > personality is not word meaning but perezhivanie, it seems to me that it > becomes possible to answer Ruqaiya's criticisms of Vygotsky in a satisfying > way. A unit of personal and environmental moments has a theory of language > use (sense convergence, not znachenie), it develops interpersonally from > the feeling of drinking milk as you are being nursed and socioculturally to > the transexperiencing of a life as you lie on your deathbed and of course > it must by that very fact include the code orientations of class origins. > > Diachronically, Ruqaiya considered the semantics to be the ensemble of > relations between context on the one hand and the production of text on the > other. But synchronically, it was the way in which a single unified act of > meaning is differentiated into the three different elements that create the > clause: the figure of experience, the quantum of interaction, the > informational message. So now it seems to me that a "perezhivanie" is a > unit of the semantics, a unit of personality and environmental moments > corresponding, in most life stories, to a grammatical clause. > > David Kellogg > Macquarie University > > On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 3:29 AM, wrote: > > > Alfredo, Marc, and Fernando > > > > Thanks for sharing this 3 way conversation. I want to highlight another > > word meaning that is in play (imagination) as expressed in Fernando?s > > article : > > The Concept of Perazhivanie in the Psychology of art. > > > > Fernando says Vygotsky differentiated emotion from perezhivanie and > offers > > this quotation from Vygotsky : > > > > By its nature, artistic ?perezhivanie? remains incomprehensible AND > CLOSED > > to the subject in its COURSE and ESSENCE. We never know why we like or > > dislike a work of art. Everything we LATER invent to explain its > influence > > is thought to be a complete RATIONALIZATION of unconscious processes. The > > very essence of perezhivanie remains A MYSTERY to us. > > > > Fernando further adds that one of the strong points RAISED (LP > > -highlighted or picked out or comprehended) by Vygotsky in (The > Psychology > > of Art) was to recognize the value of emotions AS HUMAN REALITY, which > > OVERCAME the logical and intellectual REDUCTIONISM that has characterized > > psychology until today. Fernando then offers this quotation to prove this > > Strong position : > > > > ... all our fantastic (and unreal) perezhivaniya, take place on a > > completely REAL emotional basis. We see, therefore that emotion and > > imagination are NOT two separate processes; on the contrary, they are the > > SAME PROCESS. We can rightly can regard A FANTASY AS the central > expression > > of an emotional reaction. > > > > Fernando is circling around what he sees as a STRONG point here. Marc > > views it as a particular type of perezhivanie. > > > > I question if this fantasy ?element? or this imaginal ?element actually > > PERvades all the 4 types of perezhivanie. However, i would also make > > distinct that fantasy meaning ?unreal? is not the same as ?imaginal? that > > is ?real?. I would therefore re-place the word (fantasy) with (imaginal) > in > > Vygotsky?s quote above. > > > > A complex topic, butmy turn is up. > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > From: Alfredo Jornet Gil > > Sent: January 12, 2017 1:22 PM > > To: Andy Blunden; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > > > Marc, > > > > at the beginning of the discussion you raised the following question: > > > > >From Marc: > > < > them for possible discussion. The first one was raised by Gonz?lez-Rey, > > when he introduces, in connection with perezhivanie, the concepts of > > personality, and especially, of sense. So, which is the conceptual > (and-or > > phenomenal) relation between perezhivanie and sense? Gonz?lez-Rey > suggests > > that both concepts are somewhat similar (and overcome by the concept of > > ?subjective sense?); my opinion, partly expressed in my commentary, is > that > > perezhivanie is a type of meaning, which includes different levels of > > depth, and that sense corresponds to the deepest level of meaning (which > > can be characterized as a system of semic oppositions). Therefore, sense > > wouldn't be in opposition to meaning (as ?a microcosm of human > > consciousness?, as Kozulin remembers in his commentary), although it > would > > be in opposition to manifested meaning (the surface level of meaning).>> > > > > I am here forwarding Fernando G. Rey's response to your question > > concerning sense and meaning. I have not edited any of his notes but have > > copied and pasted them as he wrote them. Fernando is positively > recovering > > from a medical intervention, but has been kind enough to follow up the > > discussion and is willing to take up specific questions if these rise. > > > > >From Fernando: > > < account > > the importance given by Vygotsky to emotions at that final moment of his > > work. In ??On the Questions of the Psychology of the Creative Artist? he > > wrote: ?In the process of societal life . . . emotions come into a new > > relationship with the other elements of psychical life, news systems > > appear, new blendings of psychical functions; units of a higher order > > emerge, governed by special laws, mutual dependencies, and special forms > of > > connections and motion. (Vygotsky, 1984, p. 328) . In that comment he > > attributed a generative character to emotions; emotions come in relation > to > > other elements of the psychic life and are treated as equivalent to them > . > > From this relations new systems appear. It is possible to ask, to which > > systems Vygotsky is referred in that statement?. We don?t know , but it > was > > a strong interest of Vygotsky in that time; to define new psychological > > systems on the basis of the units he was tried to advance with concepts > > like sense and perezhivanie. In ?Thought and world? that Thinking was > > divorced from the full vitality of life, from the motives, interests and > > inclinations of the thinking individual.(Vygotsky, 1987b, p. 50). This > > position is fully consistent with that expressed before by Vygotsky . > Both > > positions reveal his comprehension of emotions as inseparable from other > > functions and elements of psychical life, as part of the ontological > nature > > of psychological phenomena. Subjective senses embody the idea of the full > > vitality of life referred by Vygotsky in relation to thinking. For my > > viewpoint that ?full vitality of life ? have to be defined by the way of > in > > which the constellation of symbolic social constructions within which > > human experience takes place, emerge as singular subjective senses that > > organizing themselves in subjective configurations becoming > self-generative > > subjective systems. Subjective senses and configurations express how > social > > symbolical realities as, norms, institutionalized o > > rders, myth, race, gender and many others simultaneously appear as > > subjective production. The own Vygotsky explicitly defended that meaning > > was only one zone of sense. Unlike Vygotsky?s definition of sense, as > > word?s sense, subjective senses and configurations are integrative units > of > > symbolical processes and emotions through which the social and cultural > > realities appear as they are lived by individual, groups and social > > instances. From my point of view, there is no doubt that Vygotsky at the > > end of his life was looking for a new kind of units to advance a new > > definition of consciousness ( at his time identified as the more complex > > psychological system). He clearly considered meaning as the unit of > > consciousness for a little period of time. His references to the > > personality both in the definition of the sense and the perezhivanie, > lead > > to think that the attempted to articulate those concepts with psychic > > systems. He only explicitly wrote on perezhivanie as unit of > consciousness, > > but he did no advanced forward this idea>> > > > > > > > > ________________________________________ > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil > > Sent: 12 January 2017 21:41 > > To: Andy Blunden; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > > > David, I admire much of what you write in your first three examples in > > your prior post. But I am reacting to your latter post on Chess. It is > the > > second or third time that you bring the CHESS example to bear in xmca, > and > > I always feel uneasy about it. > > > > I see the point that there are different developmental stages and that > > these can be best categorised according to the type of generalisation > that > > the child can engage into. Obviously, treating a piece of marble "as if" > it > > was a piece in the game of chess involves a different type of > > generalization than treating the same piece of marble as if it was a > piece > > in the game of "let's put the black pieces in black squares and white > > pieces in white squares". But I do not think that my 20 months daughter > > will put black pieces on black squares in any systematic manner simply > > because she can PERCEIVE and act upon the difference between black and > > white; and indeed I do not think that my 7 years old first daughter will > do > > any of these things with the chess pieces, considering she has never > > learned to play chess. Indeed, why would any child do that? I do strongly > > believe that to get any of my daughters to arrange the pieces by color, > > there would have first to be a TEACHING/LEARNING situation, which itself > > would involve establishing a semantic field, a field that perhaps out of > my > > ignorance I would call semiotic (sign). > > > > In my view, in both cases there are rules and therefore imagination, if > > we listen to Vygotsky's writings on play, and perhaps, as Vygotsky notes, > > there may be a difference in the "moral attitude", but I would be > cautious > > by gross divisions between perceptual and semantic structures. Yes,there > > are different levels, types, or stages in the way semantic fields are > > organised, and that playing the chess pieces as pieces of the CHESS game > > involves a qualitative leap compared to playing them as pieces in the > game > > of putting them together by shape or color; but there is a game going on > in > > both cases, and therefore a perceptual as much as a semiotic structure > > being at play. These are different semiotic contexts, as you say at the > end > > of your e-mail, but I do think that your assertion that in playing with > the > > chess pieces by color "the structure would be visual but not semiotic" > can > > be problematic and may lead to what I consider an incorrect view of the > > relation between higher and lower functions in development. > > > > Alfredo > > ________________________________________ > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > on behalf of David Kellogg > > Sent: 11 January 2017 04:50 > > To: Andy Blunden; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > > > Vygotsky's got a terrific metaphor for how "perezhivanie" is > internalized: > > it is like internalizing the rules of the game of chess. > > > > The child who doesn't know how to play chess simply plays WITH the pieces > > instead of playing them. She or he might try to create a piece-board > > structure by putting black pieces on black squares and white pieces on > > white squares, but the structure is a visual one and not a semiotic one; > > it's about color and not about meaning. The child who DOES know how to > play > > chess plays the pieces instead of playing with them. She or he too > creates > > "structures" but this time they are semiotic ones: a black knight in a > > completely different column and a completely different row, can capture a > > white pawn. > > > > The board is the same and so are the kids; the children may have very > > similar biological and very similar cultural endowments, but they do not > > have the same semiotic context at all. Hence different perezhivanie and > > different personalities. > > > > David Kellogg > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 11:54 AM, Andy Blunden > wrote: > > > > > How to understand the personality? ... i.e., the *development* of the > > > personality? > > > > > > The subject's inheritance, and The subject's experiences > > (/perezhivaniya/) > > > > > > ... just think of how you'd go about writing a good biography or > > > Bildungsroman. > > > > > > Andy > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > Andy Blunden > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > > On 11/01/2017 10:24 AM, David Kellogg wrote: > > > > > >> Andy: > > >> > > >> A good paradox! Word meaning is a unit, but the spoken word itself is > > >> just an element--a thing. We can see that this is, on the face of it, > > >> impossible: within a single holistic analysis, an element can be a > part > > of > > >> a unit, but a unit can never be a part of an element. So what you are > > >> referring to when you say that the word is a thing is the "sonic" or > > >> "phasal" quality of the word: its "acoustic" properties, its > > "phonetics". > > >> > > >> But not its phonology. The word that Vygotsky uses for "phoneme" > refers > > >> to the 1929 work of the Prague Circle, originally the Moscow Circle. > He > > is > > >> a LITTLE coy about this, because the founders, Jakobson and > Trubetskoy, > > >> were not very popular with the authorities and Vygotsky already had > > plenty > > >> of heterodox acquaintances to worry about. Nevertheless, whenever > > Vygotsky > > >> says "phoneme", we know he really means what Jakobson and Trubetskoy > > called > > >> "morphophonemes". We know this because the examples he actually > > >> gives--Russian case endings--are morpho-phonemes and not simply > > phonemes: > > >> so for example in English the sound /s/ is a simple phoneme when I say > > the > > >> word "self" but if I say "Andy's" the sound /s/ is a morpho-phoneme: a > > >> difference in sounding that makes a difference in meaning. The system > > (that > > >> is, the paradigmatic menu) of these differences in soundings are what > > the > > >> Moscow and Prague Circles called "phonology" (as OPPOSED to > phonetics), > > and > > >> this is the kind of "phoneme" that Vygotsky is really talking about. > > >> > > >> Still, you can see that it is not what he is talking about when he > says > > >> word meaning, because these units are still nowhere near big enough to > > >> describe the kinds of changes which must occur when verbal thinking > > >> develops. I feel the same way about a lot of the examples offered of > > >> "perezhivanie", including Marc's. If MacDuff's grief or Carla's > epiphany > > >> about the misbehavior of her kids being due to "outside influences" > > really > > >> is the unit of personality and experience that Vygotsky wants us to > use > > >> when we analyse the ontogenesis of personality, then it is no more > > >> appropriate than using the morpho-phoneme to analyse the whole of > verbal > > >> thinking. Just as evolution (of species) requires very different units > > from > > >> history (of classes), development, whether we are talking about verbal > > >> thinking or the personality as a whole, is going to require very > > different > > >> units from learning, whether we are talking about MacDuff or Carla. > The > > >> units must be able to develop; that is, the relationship of the > elements > > >> within them must be susceptible to many changes over time. > > >> > > >> Let me give three examples of how this happens in different > > >> "perezhivanie". They are not mine; they are Vygotsky's, and they are > all > > >> from the Pedological Lectures. > > >> > > >> First, the Crisis at One. Neither the biological nor the social > > endowment > > >> of the child greatly changes in the acquisition of speech; > nevertheless, > > >> the relationship between the personality and the environment, of which > > both > > >> personality moments and environmental ones are constituent elements, > is > > >> entirely transformed. Here we are not talking about phonemes, or even > > >> morpho-phonemes: we are talking about "wordings"--whole utterances. In > > >> Melbourne I presented some data that demonstrated this beautifully--a > > >> child's first word is actually an attempt to imitate a whole > > conversation. > > >> > > >> Second, the Crisis at Three. Vygotsky spends a lot of time discussing > > the > > >> "Seven Stars"--the symptoms of the "Terrible Twos" and "Threenagehood" > > >> noted by harried parents everywhere. But by the end of his analysis > it's > > >> clear that what really happens is a new relationship between wish and > > will: > > >> in extreme cases, the child actually wishes for one thing (e.g. > > compromise) > > >> and wills the opposite (the everlasting "No!"). Again, neither the > > >> personality moments as such nor the environmental ones change, but > > there is > > >> a separation and a sorting which allows the subordination of wish to > > will > > >> that we see in play. This isn't the kind of "aha" moment that Marc is > > >> offering us at all: Vygotsky actually calls it the "antipode" of > future > > >> will, because instead of enabling will it actually paralyzes it. But > it > > is > > >> indubitably a key moment in the development of the relation of > > personality > > >> to environmental moments that we see in "perizhivanie". > > >> > > >> Thirdly, the Crisis at Seven. I think Gonzalez Rey makes a total hash > of > > >> this, and I get very cross when I read his article. It is not true > that > > the > > >> essence of perizhivanie remained a mystery to Vygotsky simply because > > he no > > >> longer subscribes to "the aesthetic reaction" and "catharsis" and > other > > >> notions that he toyed with in Psych of Art (he's no longer doing > > >> experiments on changes in breathing rate when people read the works of > > >> Bunin either!). It might be true that he never offered a system of > facts > > >> and methodological procedures for perezivanie, but that was only > because > > >> one already existed, for example in the work of Wallon and Stern and > > >> others. It is demonstrably not true that when Vygotsky says that the > > speech > > >> environment of those around him does not change when the child learns > to > > >> talk at one, he is not "profoundly contradictory with the concept of > > >> sense": when you read the quotation in context, it is very clear that > > what > > >> he is referring to are the kinds of absolute indicators used by > Zalkind: > > >> how often the parents read the newspapers, the dialect they speak, and > > >> their educational background. These do not change, and if the child > > wants > > >> to make sense, these are the factors the child will have to relate to. > > >> > > >> Vygotsky gives the example of a child who is severely retarded. The > > child > > >> wants to play with other children and is rejected. The child walks > down > > the > > >> street and the other children follow, laughing. The child is shrieked > > at, > > >> insulted, but as soon as the humiliation stops, the child is perfectly > > >> happy with himself. Vygotsky points out that the child is not able to > > >> "co-generalize" the "perizhivanie" of the humiliations: each is > > unpleasant, > > >> but they are entirely separate and cannot be connected with any > internal > > >> sense of inferiority. A normal child, however, is able to > "internalize" > > >> these humiliations and consequently develops a sense of inferiority. > We > > can > > >> see that what has happened is the insertion of what Vygotsky calls an > > >> "intellectual" moment: an inner layer, which is what distinguishes > later > > >> Chaplin movies from earlier ones (again, Vygotsky's example, not > mine!) > > and > > >> what brings about the "loss of directness and naivete" that we see in > > >> pre-schoolers. > > >> > > >> I think that the reason people find "perizhivanie" so hard to work > with > > >> is the same reason that they find "word meaning" hard to work with: it > > >> develops. The feeling of drinking milk as the infant drinks it is > > >> perizhivanie, and the thought of being humiliated when you are mulling > > it > > >> over and contemplating revenge is also perizhivanie, and only a > profound > > >> analysis which includes ontogenetic development and not just learning > > will > > >> show the inner link between them. It's for that reason that I think > that > > >> "activity" is not a useful unit of analysis and I am much more > inclined > > to > > >> use your word "project", so long as it can include what Vygotsky calls > > >> "inner activeness". > > >> > > >> Vygotsky says: > > >> > > >> > > >> ????? ? ?????????, ?????????? ? ?. ?., ? ???? ???? ? ?????????? > > >> ???????????, ??? ?????????? ???????????? ??????????????? ????????? > > >> ??????????????? ?? ??????? ? ??????? ?????????????. ??? ??? ????? > ????? > > >> ?????????? ?????????? ? ???????? ???????? ??????????? ? ???, ???, ? ?? > > >> ????? ??? ? ?????????? ???????? ??? ?????????? ???????????? > ???????????? > > >> ???????????????? ????? ? ?????????, ??????? ???????????, ? ???????? > > >> ???????? ?? ????? ???????????? ?????????????? ???????????, > ???????????? > > >> ??????????? ?????????? ?????????? ?? ????????? ? ??????? ????????????. > > ??? > > >> ??? ???????, ??????? ????? ??????????, ? ?? ????? ????? ?? ?????? ??? > > ????? > > >> ???-??????, ???, ? ???????? ????????? ?????????????? ??????? ? > > ?????????? > > >> ????????????. > > >> > > >> When I think, remember, etc. I am dealing withinner activeness; this > > >> psychological process of inner activity is not directly linked to any > > >> external activity. The new form of inner activeness in the School Age > > >> consists of this: that while during the preschool years these inner > > >> activities demonstrated an immediate link with action, with external > > >> activeness, in the school years we have a relative autonomy which > > emerges, > > >> inner activeness which is relatively independent of external > activities. > > >> Here is already a child who can think, at the same time when he is > > doing or > > >> seeing something, one in whom has emerged a differentiation of inner > and > > >> outer activities. > > >> > > >> David Kellogg > > >> Macquarie University > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 10:07 AM, Andy Blunden > > >> ablunden@mira.net>> wrote: > > >> > > >> David: "Are words really units?" > > >> > > >> Well, firstly, "units" is a *relative* term. That is, > > >> the question is: are words units of something, some > > >> complex process subject to analysis. And which? > > >> > > >> Secondly, according to Vygotsky, "no." The concept > > >> Vygotsky proposes as a unit is "word meaning" which he > > >> says is a unity of sound and meaning. The sound is an > > >> artefact, which, detached from its meaningful > > >> utterance in a transactional context is just a thing, > > >> viz., a word. Whereas "word meaning" is an > > >> arrtefact-mediated action, a unit of human social > > >> activity. > > >> > > >> It is true that words can be countable or mass > > >> according to context, but I wasn't talking about words > > >> was I? I was talking about word meaning. > > >> > > >> Andy > > >> > > >> ------------------------------------------------------------ > > >> Andy Blunden > > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy > > >> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective- > > decision-making > > >> > >> decision-making> > > >> > > >> On 8/01/2017 7:59 AM, David Kellogg wrote: > > >> > > >> Are words really units? When we look at their > > >> ideational meaning (that is, > > >> their logical and experiential content--their > > >> capacity for representing and > > >> linking together human experiences) they seem to > > >> fall into two very > > >> different categories: lexical words like > > >> "perezhivanie" or "sense" or > > >> "personality" of "individual" and grammatical > > >> words like "of", or "might", > > >> or "is". The lexical words seem to behave like > > >> units--they are bounded, > > >> discrete, and, as Andy would say, "countable" (the > > >> problem is that almost > > >> all nouns are both countable and uncountable > > >> depending on the context you > > >> put them in, so this distinction is really not as > > >> essential as Andy seems > > >> to assume). But the more grammatical words seem to > > >> be elements of some > > >> larger unit, which we can call wording. > > >> > > >> Veresov and Fleer come up against this problem > > >> with "edintsvo" and > > >> "edintsa". Of course, as they say, the two words > > >> are distinct. But this > > >> doesn't necessarily mean that the former always > > >> corresponds to "unity" in > > >> English and the latter is always "unit". If you > > >> look at the paragraph they > > >> translate on 330, you can see that Vygotsky starts > > >> with an idea that is > > >> quite "synoptic" and is well expressed by "unit". > > >> But in the last sentence > > >> there is a sense that "perezhivanie" is a > > >> meta-stable unit--one that > > >> remains self-similar only through a process of > > >> thorough change, like a > > >> bicycle whose every part is replaced--and in > > >> English is it is better to > > >> express this idea with "unity". The problem is > > >> that the differences between > > >> "edintsvo" and "edintsva" in Russian is a matter > > >> of gender (I think) and > > >> not simply abstractness, and as a result the > > >> English version, which cannot > > >> use the resource of gender,has to rely on > > >> abstractness, so the words > > >> "unity" and "unit" are somewhat more distinct and > > >> less linked than > > >> "edintsvo" and "edintsva". > > >> > > >> There are other problems that are similar. When > > >> Gonzalez Rey uses the word > > >> "final moment" to refer to the final period of > > >> Vygotsky's thinking, he > > >> leaves the anglophone reader the impression that > > >> he is referring to > > >> Vygotsky's deathbed thoughts. On the other hand, > > >> when Veresov and Fleer use > > >> "factor" to translate the same Russian word that > > >> Gonzalez Rey is using, > > >> they are giving us something more quantitative > > >> than Vygotsky intended, and > > >> their translation of "dalee nerazloshim'im > > >> chastyami etava edinstva" > > >> into "vital and further indivisible part of the > > >> whole" is quite opaque in > > >> English (notice that here Veresov and Fleer use > > >> "whole" to translate > > >> "edinstva" rather than "unit"!) At some point you > > >> have to accept that you > > >> can change Russian words into English words as if > > >> you were exchanging > > >> rubles for dollars, but you still won't be able to > > >> buy a samovar at Walmart. > > >> > > >> David Kellogg > > >> Macquarie University > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 5:21 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > > >> > > > >> wrote: > > >> > > >> Larry, all, > > >> > > >> our arguments in the 2014 address a science > > >> education literature in which > > >> the constructivist perspective is the leading > > >> perspective; We note that the > > >> assertion that people learn from experience is > > >> everywhere taken for granted > > >> but nowhere accounted for. We resort to > > >> pragmatist and phenomenological > > >> literature along with Vygotsky's insights to > > >> point out the need to account > > >> for learning as something that cannot be the > > >> result of an individual's > > >> construction; in experience there is always > > >> something in excess of what you > > >> intended, and this is a basic feature of > > >> doing, of performing. I take that > > >> to be your "trans" in the trans/zhivanie word, > > >> Larry, which already is > > >> denoted in the word PERezhivanie. > > >> > > >> But I do not wish to move our discussion too > > >> far away from Marc's paper > > >> and the Perezhivanie special issue. We also > > >> risk disengaging many that have > > >> not have the privilege we've had to have the > > >> time to read so many articles > > >> in just few days into the new year. I think we > > >> are a point in the > > >> discussion where a pretty clear point of > > >> agreement/disagreement, and > > >> therefore of possibility for growth, has been > > >> reached with regard to the > > >> view of perezhivanie as "an experience" and as > > >> the "working over it". I > > >> think that to allow as many as possible to > > >> follow, and hopefully also > > >> engage, I think it will be helpful to bring > > >> the diverse perspectives and > > >> theoretical accounts to matter in accounting > > >> for some actual material. And > > >> there are a number of cases described in the > > >> articles, including Marc's > > >> case of a teacher, as well as everyday facts, > > >> such as those brought by > > >> Beth, and in Beth's article... > > >> > > >> I take the task for myself too, but Saturday > > >> morning need to attend to > > >> other things! > > >> A > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> ________________________________________ > > >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >> > > >> > >> > > > >> on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com > > >> > > >> > >> > > > >> Sent: 07 January 2017 18:26 > > >> To: Andy Blunden; Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended > > >> Mind, Culture, Activity; > > >> Larry Purss > > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and > > >> Perezhivanie! > > >> > > >> Andy, Peter, i hope the intention to move > > >> beyond politeness to struggle > > >> with this topic materializes. > > >> In this vein i want to introduce exploration > > >> of the 'excess' of actual > > >> over intended meaning as he sketched his > > >> introduction to 'experience'. > > >> > > >> Citing Dewey, Alfredo says that this excess of > > >> actual learning over > > >> intended learning INCLUDES what Dewey refers > > >> to as 'attitudes' and these > > >> 'attitudes' are FUNDAMENTALLY what count in > > >> the future. > > >> Alfredo and Roth then add this summary > > >> statement : > > >> > > >> There is therefore, a need to theorize > > >> experience in terms that do not > > >> assume control and rationality as the sine qua > > >> non of learning. It also > > >> implies a need to develop analytical accounts > > >> that retain the 'uncertainty' > > >> that is an 'integral part' of human experience. > > >> > > >> Where are Alfredo and Roth leading us with > > >> this sketch of experience? To > > >> highlight 'attitudes' that occur in the excess > > >> of actual over intended > > >> learning? The word 'attitudes' generates > > >> images of (atmosphere) and (moods) > > >> that 'flow' like cascading waterfalls that can > > >> be imaged as (force) or as > > >> (receptive). Attitudes that flow to places > > >> where they are received within a > > >> certain attitude of care and concern. Not as > > >> forceful an image as moving > > >> only with control and rationality. Describing > > >> 'weaker' thought that > > >> remains uncertain but that also opens us to > > >> the other's peril and plight. > > >> Possibly a post-analytic motion that exceeds > > >> the intended by living-through > > >> the actual that develops 'attitudes' that are > > >> fundamentally what count for > > >> the future. > > >> > > >> > > >> Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > >> > > >> From: Andy Blunden > > >> Sent: January 7, 2017 5:00 AM > > >> To: Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, > > >> Activity > > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and > > >> Perezhivanie! > > >> > > >> OK Peter, what you say is all very true I am > > >> sure, but it > > >> entails conflating activity and action (as > > >> mass nouns) and > > >> context and mediation, and makes the required > > >> distinction > > >> much like one could find multiple meanings for > > >> the word > > >> "and" by listing the different phrases and > > >> clauses which can > > >> be linked by "and." > > >> > > >> Andy > > >> > > >> ------------------------------ > > ------------------------------ > > >> Andy Blunden > > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy > > >> > > >> http://www.brill.com/products/ > > book/origins-collective-decisi > > >> on-making > > >> > >> decision-making> > > >> > > >> On 7/01/2017 11:42 PM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > > >> > > >> Let me try to illustrate. > > >> > > >> Reading as mediated action: The > > >> cultural-historical > > >> context of reading mediates how one's > > >> attention and > > >> response are channeled in socially > > >> constructed ways. So, > > >> in one setting, say at home or reading in > > >> the company of > > >> friends, a novel might bring a reader to > > >> tears, or invite > > >> readers to share personal stories that > > >> parallel those of > > >> the plot lines, or laugh out loud. But > > >> another setting, a > > >> formal school or university class, would > > >> have historical > > >> values and practices that mute emotional > > >> and personal > > >> responses, and promote a more sober, > > >> analytic way of > > >> reading and talking that fits with > > >> specific historical > > >> critical conventions and genres, and > > >> discourages others. > > >> > > >> Reading as mediating action: The act of > > >> reading can be > > >> transformational. In reading about an > > >> talking about a > > >> character's actions, a reader might > > >> reconsider a value > > >> system, become more sympathetic to real > > >> people who > > >> resemble oppressed characters, etc. In > > >> other words, > > >> reading a text may serve a mediational > > >> process in which > > >> textual ideas and exemplars enable a > > >> reader to think > > >> differently. > > >> > > >> *From:*Andy Blunden > > >> [mailto:ablunden@mira.net > > >> ] > > >> *Sent:* Saturday, January 7, 2017 6:28 AM > > >> *To:* Peter Smagorinsky > >> >; eXtended Mind, > > >> Culture, Activity > >> > > > >> *Subject:* Re: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year > > >> and Perezhivanie! > > >> > > >> Can you explain in a paragraph or two,. > > >> Peter, rather than > > >> asking us all to read 10,000 words to > > >> extract an answer? > > >> > > >> Andy > > >> > > >> ------------------------------ > > >> ------------------------------ > > >> > > >> Andy Blunden > > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy > > >> > > >> > > >> http://www.brill.com/products/ > > >> book/origins-collective-decision-making > > >> s/book/origins-collective- > > >> decision-making> > > >> > > >> > > >> On 7/01/2017 11:23 PM, Peter Smagorinsky > > >> wrote: > > >> > > >> Andy and others, I tried to work out > > >> the mediated/mediating question > > >> > > >> in the area of reading....see if this helps. > > >> > > >> Smagorinsky, P., & O'Donnell-Allen, > > >> C. (1998). Reading as mediated > > >> > > >> and mediating action: Composing meaning for > > >> literature through multimedia > > >> interpretive texts. Reading Research > > >> Quarterly, 33, 198-226. Available > > >> athttp://www.petersmagorinsky.net/About/ > PDF/RRQ/RRQ1998.pdf > > >> net/About/PDF/RRQ/RRQ1998.pdf> > > >> > > >> -----Original Message----- > > >> > > >> From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >> > > >> > >> .ucsd.edu > > >> > > > >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ > > >> > > >> > > >> mailman.ucsd.edu ] On > > >> Behalf Of Andy Blunden > > >> > > >> Sent: Friday, January 6, 2017 7:12 PM > > >> > > >> To:xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >> > > >> > >> > > > >> > > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year > > >> and Perezhivanie! > > >> > > >> I have never understood this supposed > > >> distinction, Alfredo, between > > >> > > >> "mediated activity" and "mediating activity" > > >> given that all activity is > > >> mediated and all activity mediates. > > >> > > >> Also, could you spell out what you > > >> mean by the "tension" > > >> > > >> between perezhivanie as meaning and > > >> perezhivanie as struggle. > > >> > > >> Andy > > >> > > >> ------------------------------ > > >> ------------------------------ > > >> > > >> Andy Blunden > > >> > > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins- > collective- > > >> s/book/origins-collective- > > > > > >> > > >> decision-making > > >> > > >> On 5/01/2017 6:26 PM, Alfredo Jornet > > >> Gil wrote: > > >> > > >> Thanks Marc for your careful > > >> response. > > >> > > >> I am familiar to Vygotsky's > > >> notion of cultural mediation and I > > >> > > >> am aware and acknowledge that it was > > >> elaborated as a means to overcome > > >> dualism, and that it is not analog to a > > >> computational approach. > > >> > > >> When I brought the computing > > >> analogy, I did so with regard not > > >> > > >> to the concept of cultural mediation in > > >> general, but to the way it can be > > >> (and is) deployed analytically. I react to > > >> what it seems to me a dichotomy > > >> between a "meaning" as something that is > > >> static (thereby a form of > > >> "representation" or reflection of the relation > > >> with the environment instead > > >> of?refraction)?? and the > > >> experiencing-as-struggling, which is described > > >> as?transformation or change. If so, mediation > > >> here would seem to be part of > > >> a methodological device that first dissects "a > > >> type of meaning" from "a > > >> type of activity" (or a given state from the > > >> process that changes that > > >> state), and then unites it by adding the term > > >> "mediation." And this may be > > >> my misreading, but in that (mis)reading (which > > >> perhaps is mostly due to the > > >> fact that in your empirical illustration only > > >> the initial and end product, > > >> i.e., perezhivanie, are described, but not the > > >> experiencing-as-struggle, > > >> that is, the moving between the two), > > >> mediation here seems to do as > > >> analytical concept precisely what you were > > >> afraid our monism was doing: > > >> explaining nothing. Only the end products but > > >> not the process of producing > > >> perezhivanie are revealed. This may be > > >> problematic if one attends to what > > >> Veresov argues in the paper I shared > > >> yesterday, where he defends the notion > > >> of mediation but also specifies that Vygotsky > > >> speaks of *mediating > > >> activity* (as opposed to *mediated* activity). > > >> That is, not mediation by > > >> signs as products, but mediating activity as > > >> the activity of producing > > >> signs (which again is an activity of producing > > >> social relations, perhaps > > >> what you refer as "holistic meanings"?). What > > >> do you think? > > >> > > >> I did not think you were trying > > >> to deny the influence of > > >> > > >> Spinoza, and I do not think we ever said that > > >> Perezhivanie was primarily a > > >> move from Cartesian Dualism to Monism, as you > > >> suggest in your post. I copy > > >> and paste from my prior post: "The fact is > > >> that Vygotsky was building a > > >> theory on the unity of the affect and the > > >> intellect that was to be grounded > > >> on Spinoza, and what we try to do is to > > >> explore how perezhivanie, as a > > >> concept being developed during the same period > > >> (but not finalised or > > >> totally settled!), could be seen from the > > >> perspective of the Spinozist > > >> Vygotsky." > > >> > > >> I totally believe that bringing > > >> the distinction between > > >> > > >> perezhivanie as meaning, and perezhivanie as > > >> struggle, is totally relevant, > > >> and Beth Ferholt's vignettes of Where the Wild > > >> Things Are do indeed > > >> illustrate this. We really need to address > > >> this tension, which as Beth's > > >> examples and as our own everyday experience > > >> shows, is a tension that > > >> matters not just to books and to theories but > > >> to living persons (children, > > >> teachers), a tension that moreover is present > > >> and mentioned in all the > > >> articles of the symposium. The papers offer > > >> different proposals, and I > > >> think is so great we have the chance to > > >> discuss them! I too, as you, am > > >> very interesting in hearing others about the > > >> questions you had concerning > > >> sense and meaning. > > >> > > >> Alfredo > > >> > > >> From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >> > > >> mailman > > >> .ucsd.edu > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> > > > >> mailman > > >> .ucsd.edu > > >> > > > >> on behalf of Marc > > >> > > >> Clara > > >> > > >> > >> > > > >> > >> > > > >> > > >> Sent: 04 January 2017 22:31 > > >> > > >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > >> > > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New > > >> Year and Perezhivanie! > > >> > > >> Thank you very much, Alfredo, for > > >> sharing this excellent paper by > > >> > > >> Veresov, and thanks also for your > > >> responses, which really helped > > >> > > >> me to > > >> > > >> better understand your points. My > > >> main doubt about your proposal > > >> > > >> was/is caused by the statement > > >> that the idea of cultural > > >> > > >> mediation/mediator implies a > > >> cartesian dualism. This shocks me > > >> > > >> because, to me, the idea of > > >> cultural mediation is absolutely > > >> > > >> crucial > > >> > > >> (in fact, the keystone) for the > > >> construction of a monist (and > > >> > > >> scientific) psychology that does > > >> not forget mind -that is, a > > >> > > >> cultural > > >> > > >> psychology. From your response, > > >> however, I realized that we may > > >> > > >> be > > >> > > >> approaching the idea of mediation > > >> in different ways. I talk of > > >> > > >> mediation and mediators in a > > >> quite restricted way. The starting > > >> > > >> point > > >> > > >> of my understanding of mediation > > >> is a dialectical relationship > > >> > > >> (organic, transactional) between > > >> the subject and the world > > >> > > >> (Vygotsky departs from the scheme > > >> stimulus-response, from reflexology). > > >> > > >> This relationship, that Vygotsky > > >> calls primitive psychological > > >> > > >> functions, would be basically > > >> biological. However, in human > > >> > > >> beings > > >> > > >> this relationship is mediated by > > >> cultural means: signs and > > >> > > >> tools; or > > >> > > >> primary, secondary and terciary > > >> artifacts. These cultural means > > >> > > >> reorganize the primitive > > >> functions (dialectic S-O relationship), > > >> > > >> which > > >> > > >> become then higher psychological > > >> functions (S-M-O) (see for > > >> > > >> example, > > >> > > >> The problem of the cultural > > >> development of the child, in The > > >> > > >> Vygotsky > > >> > > >> Reader). Now, the subject, the > > >> cultural mediators, and the > > >> > > >> object form > > >> > > >> an inseparable dialectical unit, > > >> so that the subject acts on > > >> > > >> (transforms) the object through > > >> the prism of the cultural > > >> > > >> mediators, > > >> > > >> the object acts on (transforms) > > >> the subject also through the > > >> > > >> prism of > > >> > > >> the cultural mediators, and the > > >> cultural means are themselves > > >> > > >> also > > >> > > >> transformed as a consequence of > > >> their mediation in this > > >> > > >> continuous > > >> > > >> dynamic dialectical tension. > > >> Here, for me, it is important the > > >> > > >> idea > > >> > > >> that the cultural means are as > > >> material (if we assume a > > >> > > >> materialist > > >> > > >> monism) as all the rest of the > > >> world; in fact, are parts of the > > >> > > >> material world which become signs > > >> or tools (and can be therefore > > >> > > >> socially distributed). This > > >> permits the introduction of the > > >> > > >> scientific > > >> > > >> study of mind-consciousness (as > > >> mediating systems of signs), > > >> > > >> because > > >> > > >> mind is not anymore something > > >> immaterial and unobservable, but > > >> > > >> it is > > >> > > >> as material and observable as the > > >> rest of the natural world. It > > >> > > >> is > > >> > > >> from this view that, for me, the > > >> idea of cultural mediation is > > >> > > >> the > > >> > > >> keystone of a monist psychology > > >> that includes mind. Thus, when I > > >> > > >> speak > > >> > > >> of mediators, I refer to the > > >> cultural means which mediate in the > > >> > > >> S-O > > >> > > >> dialectics; I am especially > > >> interested in signs/secondary > > >> > > >> artifacts. > > >> > > >> Here, it is perhaps necessary to > > >> insist that when I talk of > > >> > > >> studying > > >> > > >> mediators (and their semantic > > >> structure), this doesn't mean that > > >> > > >> they > > >> > > >> are taken out from the activity > > >> (the flux of live) in which they > > >> > > >> mediate (since out of activity > > >> they are not signs anymore); > > >> > > >> here, I > > >> > > >> think Vygotsky tries again to > > >> overcome another old dichotomy, the > > >> > > >> functionalism-structuralism one. > > >> I hope that all this makes also > > >> > > >> clear the difference between this view and > > >> that of computational > > >> psychologies (which in general are profoundly > > >> and explicitly dualist and > > >> not dialectic). > > >> > > >> Back to perezhivanie, I'm not > > >> obviously trying to deny the > > >> > > >> influence > > >> > > >> of Spinoza on Vygotsky's thinking > > >> (this is explicit in Vygotsky's > > >> > > >> writings, especially in "The > > >> teaching about emotions", in the > > >> > > >> Vol.6 of > > >> > > >> the Collected Works). But I have > > >> doubts that Vygotsky's > > >> > > >> introduction > > >> > > >> of the concept of perezhivanie is > > >> to be regarded primarily as a > > >> > > >> movement towards monism (from a > > >> previous cartesian dualism), and > > >> > > >> that > > >> > > >> this movement questions the > > >> concept of cultural mediation. > > >> > > >> Instead, > > >> > > >> and I think that this is in line > > >> with some of Gonzalez-Rey > > >> > > >> observations in his paper, my > > >> impression is that the > > >> > > >> introduction of > > >> > > >> the concept of perezhivanie > > >> responds more to a movement (a > > >> > > >> further > > >> > > >> step) towards holism (something > > >> that, in my understanding, can > > >> > > >> also be > > >> > > >> found in Spinoza). Thus, I think > > >> that the word meaning is still > > >> > > >> the > > >> > > >> unit of analysis in the last > > >> Vygotsky -and therefore, the idea of > > >> > > >> cultural mediation is still > > >> crucial (in fact, in The problem of > > >> > > >> the > > >> > > >> environment, he connects the > > >> concept of perezhivanie, which has > > >> > > >> just > > >> > > >> introduced, to the development of > > >> word meaning [p.345-346, also > > >> > > >> cited > > >> > > >> in my paper]). However, in my > > >> view, in the last Vygotsky the > > >> > > >> focus is > > >> > > >> not anymore primarily on the > > >> word-meaning as formed for things > > >> > > >> (or > > >> > > >> collections of things, as in the > > >> ontogenetic research with > > >> > > >> Sakharov), but the focus is now in the > > >> formation of meaning for holistic > > >> situations. > > >> > > >> Best regards, > > >> > > >> Marc. > > >> > > >> 2017-01-03 19:16 GMT+01:00 > > >> Alfredo Jornet Gil< > > >> > > >> a.j.gil@iped.uio.no > > >> > > > >> > >> >: > > >> > > >> Hi Marc, all, > > >> > > >> thanks for joining and for > > >> your interesting work, which I > > >> > > >> follow > > >> > > >> since I became aware of it. I > > >> appreciate the way in your > > >> > > >> paper you > > >> > > >> show careful and honest > > >> attention to the texts of the authors > > >> > > >> involved, but perhaps most of > > >> all I appreciate that the > > >> > > >> paper makes > > >> > > >> the transformational > > >> dimension related to struggle and change > > >> > > >> salient, a dimension all > > >> papers deemed central to > > >> > > >> perezhivanie. And I > > >> > > >> have learned more about > > >> Vasilyuk by reading your paper. But > > >> > > >> I also > > >> > > >> see that we have approached > > >> the question of perezhivanie > > >> > > >> differently > > >> > > >> and I think that addressing > > >> the questions that you raise > > >> > > >> concerning > > >> > > >> our article may be a good way > > >> to both respond and discuss > > >> > > >> your paper. > > >> > > >> I am aware that our use of > > >> the term monism may be > > >> > > >> problematic to > > >> > > >> some, and N. Veresov, who has > > >> recently written about this > > >> > > >> (see > > >> > > >> attached article), warns > > >> against the dangers of simply > > >> > > >> moving from > > >> > > >> dualism into an > > >> undifferentiating monism that relativizes > > >> > > >> everything, > > >> > > >> making development > > >> un-studiable. This seems to be the way in > > >> > > >> which > > >> > > >> you have understood our > > >> argument, and of course this is not > > >> > > >> what we are or want to be doing. > > >> > > >> Probably many will think that > > >> *dialectical materialism* > > >> > > >> rather than > > >> > > >> monism is the proper term, > > >> and I could agree with them; we > > >> > > >> do in fact > > >> > > >> use dialectical materialism > > >> there and elsewhere. Yet, we > > >> > > >> wanted to > > >> > > >> emphasise the Spinozist > > >> influence (an influence that also > > >> > > >> runs > > >> > > >> through Marx) and so we found > > >> it appropriate to use the term > > >> > > >> monism, > > >> > > >> a term that Vygotsky uses > > >> before arguing that Spinoza > > >> > > >> "develops an essentially materialistic view" > > >> > > >> (Collected Works, Vol. 6, p. > > >> 124). For us, the aim is > > >> > > >> working out > > >> > > >> ways to empirically examine > > >> and formulate problems in ways > > >> > > >> that do > > >> > > >> not reify a mind-body dualism. > > >> > > >> Although overcoming dualism > > >> is foundational to the CHAT > > >> > > >> paradigm, I > > >> > > >> would however not say that > > >> Vygotsky did get to solve all of > > >> > > >> the > > >> > > >> problems that Cartesian > > >> dualism had created for psychology, > > >> > > >> even > > >> > > >> though he recognised those > > >> problems brilliantly as early as > > >> > > >> in the > > >> > > >> "Crisis". It should suffice > > >> to cite Vygotsky's own remarks, > > >> > > >> which we quote in the paper (and which A.N. > > >> > > >> Leont'ev mentions in the > > >> introduction to the collected > > >> > > >> works), where > > >> > > >> Vygotsky explicitly critiques > > >> some of his own prior ideas > > >> > > >> for failing > > >> > > >> to overcome dualism. We agree > > >> with those who, like F. G. > > >> > > >> Rey, see > > >> > > >> Vygotsky's project as a > > >> developing rather than as a > > >> > > >> finalised one. > > >> > > >> The fact is that Vygotsky was > > >> building a theory on the unity > > >> > > >> of the > > >> > > >> affect and the intellect that > > >> was to be grounded on Spinoza, > > >> > > >> and what > > >> > > >> we try to do is to explore > > >> how perezhivanie, as a concept > > >> > > >> being > > >> > > >> developed during the same > > >> period (but not finalised or > > >> > > >> totally > > >> > > >> settled!), could be seen from > > >> the perspective of the > > >> > > >> Spinozist Vygotsky. > > >> > > >> As you note, in our article > > >> we argue that, if one takes the > > >> > > >> Spinozist > > >> > > >> one-substance approach, > > >> classical concepts used in > > >> > > >> non-classical > > >> > > >> psychology, at least in the > > >> way they are commonly used in > > >> > > >> the current > > >> > > >> literature, should be > > >> revised. One such concept is > > >> > > >> mediation. And I > > >> > > >> personally do not have much > > >> of a problem when mediation is > > >> > > >> used to > > >> > > >> denote the fundamental fact > > >> that every thing exists always > > >> > > >> through > > >> > > >> *another*, never in and of > > >> itself. But I do think that it is > > >> > > >> problematic to identify > > >> MEDIATORS, such as "a meaning", as a > > >> > > >> means to > > >> > > >> account for or explain > > >> developmental processes and learning > > >> > > >> events, > > >> > > >> precisely because it is > > >> there, at least in my view, that > > >> > > >> dualism creeps in. > > >> > > >> For example, I find it > > >> paradoxical that you are concerned > > >> > > >> that our > > >> > > >> monist approach risks turning > > >> perezhivanie into a useless > > >> > > >> category > > >> > > >> because it may be used to > > >> explain everything and nothing, > > >> > > >> and yet you > > >> > > >> do not seem to have a problem > > >> using the term mediation to > > >> > > >> account for > > >> > > >> the transformation of > > >> perezhivanie without clearly > > >> > > >> elaborating on how > > >> > > >> mediation does change > > >> anything or what it looks like as a > > >> > > >> real > > >> > > >> process. How is it different > > >> saying that a perezhivanie > > >> > > >> mediates the > > >> > > >> experiencing-as-struggle from > > >> simply saying that it > > >> > > >> "affects" or > > >> > > >> "determines" it? Indeed, if > > >> perezhivanie mediates > > >> > > >> experiencing-as-struggle, > > >> does not experiencing-as-struglgle > > >> > > >> too > > >> > > >> mediate perezhivanie? And do > > >> not both may be said to mediate > > >> > > >> development, or development mediate them? Is > > >> not this explaining everything > > >> and nothing? > > >> > > >> I do believe you can argue > > >> that there is a difference between > > >> > > >> mediation and classical > > >> psychology's cause-effect relations, > > >> > > >> but to > > >> > > >> show this you need to dig > > >> into the dialectical underpinnings > > >> > > >> of the > > >> > > >> theory. In your paper, you > > >> offer a nice analysis of a lovely > > >> > > >> case of > > >> > > >> a teacher who, in dealing > > >> with a challenge with one of her > > >> > > >> students, > > >> > > >> changes her perezhivanie. I > > >> think you can rightly argue that > > >> > > >> there is > > >> > > >> a semiotic transformation, > > >> and I fully support your > > >> > > >> statement that by > > >> > > >> studying discourse we can > > >> empirically approach questions of > > >> > > >> psychological development. > > >> The contradictions you show as > > >> > > >> being > > >> > > >> involved and resolved > > >> resonate really well with what I > > >> > > >> experience as > > >> > > >> a parent or as a teacher in > > >> the classroom. Yet, without > > >> > > >> unpacking > > >> > > >> what this "mediation" taking > > >> place between one perezhivanie > > >> > > >> and the > > >> > > >> next one means as a concrete > > >> and real, the same analysis > > >> > > >> could be done taking an information processing > > >> approach: > > >> > > >> there is an situation that is > > >> processed (represented?) in > > >> > > >> one way, > > >> > > >> which then leads to a > > >> (cognitive) dissonance, and then there > > >> > > >> is a > > >> > > >> cognitive resolution by means > > >> of which the situation is > > >> > > >> presented > > >> > > >> differently in consciousness > > >> (indeed, when seen in this way, > > >> > > >> the term > > >> > > >> perezhivanie and the term > > >> "representation" become almost > > >> > > >> indistinguishable). How is > > >> mediation, as an analytical > > >> > > >> concept, > > >> > > >> helping here? And most > > >> importantly to the question of > > >> > > >> perezhivanie, > > >> > > >> how is this analysis going to > > >> show the internal connection > > >> > > >> between > > >> > > >> intellect and affect that > > >> Vygotsky formulates as > > >> > > >> constitutive of the notion of perezhivanie? > > >> > > >> I believe that the key lies > > >> in understanding what Vygotsky > > >> > > >> means when > > >> > > >> he says that perezhivanie is > > >> a unit of analysis. I will not > > >> > > >> repeat > > >> > > >> here what already is written > > >> in at least a couple of the > > >> > > >> articles in > > >> > > >> the special issue (Blunden, > > >> ours), that is the difference > > >> > > >> between > > >> > > >> analysis by elements and unit > > >> analysis (Vygotsky 1987). A > > >> > > >> unit > > >> > > >> analysis approach is > > >> consistent with Spinoza, for whom > > >> > > >> cause-effect > > >> > > >> explanations were not > > >> adequate, requiring instead an > > >> > > >> understanding of > > >> > > >> self-development, > > >> perezhivanie as a kernel cell for the > > >> > > >> development > > >> > > >> of personality. And I think > > >> you may be after this in your > > >> > > >> article in > > > > > > > > > > > > > From dkellogg60@gmail.com Mon Jan 16 02:53:34 2017 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2017 19:53:34 +0900 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! In-Reply-To: <1484328718783.79382@iped.uio.no> References: <1483344752182.40904@iped.uio.no> <1483467423798.57819@iped.uio.no> <1483601196884.31418@iped.uio.no> <5df5e870-3ef8-70d6-0c17-f8647ba17e62@mira.net> <587124d9.d957620a.4a5a8.bd56@mx.google.com> <1483820996800.91513@iped.uio.no> <1484253698990.7728@iped.uio.no> <1484328718783.79382@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: Alfredo: Well, I think that you are doing the really difficult and beautiful work, filling in Mike's ten league boots and keeping the cats in a coherent herd. Contrary to the popular expression, though, it is possible to herd cats. Lions, for example, herd themselves, apparently because the prey they consume is too large to consume individually before it goes bad, and if they work in a pride, they don't have to work every day. House cats, on the other hand, feed on small prey in individual portions and so they are notoriously selfish and competitive. It seems to me that with the "perezhivanie" symposium, we have at last begun to hunt lion-sized prey. Perhaps I am still doing mousework, though: I think we actually disagree more than we agree. Unlike Andy, I am very willing to embrace both the label "structuralist" and the label "functionalist", so long as I can embrace them together, and add the label developmentalist: structures are as they are because they function as they do, but sometimes they function as they do for historical, developmental reasons rather than obvious and immediate ones. In the second chapter of HDHMF, Vygotsky invokes what he calls the "Jennings" principle: that is, that functions are always "functions of structure": organisms do what they are allowed to do by their organic structure and no more. For example, cats cannot herd themselves because their prey is too small. But he points out that a) organic structure is itself a product of doing things over thousands and millions of years, b) structures can be "borrowed" to do more than they are adapted for (what S.J. Gould called "exaptation") and c) none of this applies to "artificial organs", such as tools and signs, because mediational means are precisely structures "borrowed" from the environment to do more than they are adapted for. One of these supra-adaptive functions is to adapt the environment to human needs instead of vice versa. This by definition cannot be something that a tool or a sign is adapted for; you don't get tools or signs simply by adapting to the environment: you only get them by imagining how the environment can be made different and acting accordingly. Both tools and signs are the product of some quantum of conscious awareness, and neither is a creation of habit. And that is why, again quite unlike Andy, I am also happy to embrace the label of semiotic as opposed to activity theoretic. I think that although both tools and signs involve an idealization of the environment, they do not do so equally. Signs, for example, include conscious attentive idealization of the self as well (the self as part of the environment, as part of perizhivanie--as Vygotsky points out, what endures from the crisis at seven is the "self" in self-esteem and the "self" in "self respect", not the self of posing, mannerism and acting out). The flaw in Greimas is that he is uninterested this functional, this developmental aspect of structural semantics, and it is precisely this that allows us to distinguish, at three, between the child who is interested in changing the chess board as environment by playing with the pieces and the child who is interested in changing the semiotic structure of the board by playing the game, and to distinguish, at seven, between the child who is disappointed with the inferior affordances for constructing himself as a first person shooter that a chess board offers and the child who is excited by the superior affordances for constructing himself as a future grand master. . I was very interested in what you said about attention versus perception. They are developmentally linked, in Vygotsky, but functionally and thus structurally quite distinct. Volitional attention is so much a part of adult life we sometimes have to work at nonvolitional attention (!). But volitional perception occurs only in rare circumstances, e.g. the Edgar Rubin vases, Necker's cube, etc. I find myself straining to see every passing mouse as a zebra. David Kellogg Macquarie University . On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 2:31 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > Thanks, David, for such a beautiful and clarifying post. You have such a > brilliant manner to language Vygotsky in Vygotsky's language! > > I think we agree much more than we disagree, and before I turn to Andy's > very timely link to the "Fate of a Man", this may be a nice tutorial on > terminology, at least for me. > > My only problem had been seeing what to me had looked like an all too > empiricist treatment of the notion of perception in your prior post(s) > (including some older posts on micro-genesis). But I think you still agree > that part of what it takes to become an experienced chess player is being > able to ATTEND (and *attention* may be a better term than perception) to > the pieces and their position in the board in front of her in much closer > detail than the child who merely plays "with" the pieces. Thus the > "perception" in the expert may be said to be much more rich and *concrete* > than what one "perceives" by merely attending to (abstracting) color and > shape relations. But I keep thinking that perception is not the right word > here, is it? Certainly not one "element" (I use your wording below) in the > unit. But this may just be a wording problem. > > I really like your very important observation that chess produces > life-long learners, whereas the child that merely plays "with" the chess > pieces will soon find the game uninteresting. But again I don't think that > the key here is an opposition between perceiving and semiosis, but perhaps > between habit and conscious awareness (which at the end may be just > different words for saying the same thing). As a habit, the task of > grouping pieces by color involves a person-environment relation in which > the *need* for consciousness (and thereby interest!) to awaken is lesser, > thereby offering less possibilities for development. I think it is this > that you would phrase as "the environment seems to dominate". The way > habits are formed in chess, however, are such that they require of > consciousness for the operation to continue (which you may phrase as > "personality dominates more"). The relation between habit and awareness is > transformed in the higher-order activity (or form of human consciousness) > that is chess-playing. Same thing, different words? > > Alfredo > > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of David Kellogg > Sent: 13 January 2017 01:02 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > Alfredo: > > Let's apply your reasoning to the distinction between non-language, > proto-language, and language proper. Imagine a nursery in which there are > three beds, one with a child who is only week old and who responds with > pleasure to a nipple and with pain to being shaken or dropped, one with a > child who is about ten months old and has worked out a system of squeaks > and directed cries in order to get attention and deliver an affective > response, and one with a child who is nearly two and can ask for objects, > evaluate them, and reject them. As you say, perception and semiosis are at > work in each situation. But contrary to what you say, they are not equally > at work, and the outcomes are very different. > > There is a good reason why children develop: it's in their interests, both > in the long term sense in that it allows a much wider variety of outcomes > and in the short term sense in that it allows an escape from ennui. A child > who plays the "game" of putting black pieces on black squares and white > pieces on white squares will find this game very dull in a matter of hours. > A child who plays the game of chess will, in many cases, find a lifetime > vocation. Yes, there are "structures" that include perception and semiosis > in both cases, but the precise make-up isn't insignificant or irrelevant. > > One important reason why perezhivanie is such an important unit of > structure is that it at last allows us to assign real, concrete, specific > values to the influence of its two elements, personality and environment. > These vary from period to period--for example, in periods of crisis, the > personality always appears to play a leading role (e.g. proto-language in > the Crisis at One, negativism in the Crisis at Three, "acting out" in the > Crisis at Seven). During stable periods, the environment always appears to > dominate (e.g. speech proper in early childhood, play in preschool, and > thinking but not thinking-about-thinking in school age). > > Some "child-centred" pedagogies would like to treat childhood as one long > crisis. I think this is a disservice to the child, because it is precisely > during the stable periods that the critical neoformations (e.g. > protospeech) find a supporting but absolutely crucial role. The child > doesn't forget the expressiveness of intonation and stress learned in > proto-language, any more than the child who plays chess no longer > distinguishes white squares from black ones. > > David Kellogg > Macquarie University > > > > On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 7:41 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > wrote: > > > David, I admire much of what you write in your first three examples in > > your prior post. But I am reacting to your latter post on Chess. It is > the > > second or third time that you bring the CHESS example to bear in xmca, > and > > I always feel uneasy about it. > > > > I see the point that there are different developmental stages and that > > these can be best categorised according to the type of generalisation > that > > the child can engage into. Obviously, treating a piece of marble "as if" > it > > was a piece in the game of chess involves a different type of > > generalization than treating the same piece of marble as if it was a > piece > > in the game of "let's put the black pieces in black squares and white > > pieces in white squares". But I do not think that my 20 months daughter > > will put black pieces on black squares in any systematic manner simply > > because she can PERCEIVE and act upon the difference between black and > > white; and indeed I do not think that my 7 years old first daughter will > do > > any of these things with the chess pieces, considering she has never > > learned to play chess. Indeed, why would any child do that? I do strongly > > believe that to get any of my daughters to arrange the pieces by color, > > there would have first to be a TEACHING/LEARNING situation, which itself > > would involve establishing a semantic field, a field that perhaps out of > my > > ignorance I would call semiotic (sign). > > > > In my view, in both cases there are rules and therefore imagination, if > > we listen to Vygotsky's writings on play, and perhaps, as Vygotsky notes, > > there may be a difference in the "moral attitude", but I would be > cautious > > by gross divisions between perceptual and semantic structures. Yes,there > > are different levels, types, or stages in the way semantic fields are > > organised, and that playing the chess pieces as pieces of the CHESS game > > involves a qualitative leap compared to playing them as pieces in the > game > > of putting them together by shape or color; but there is a game going on > in > > both cases, and therefore a perceptual as much as a semiotic structure > > being at play. These are different semiotic contexts, as you say at the > end > > of your e-mail, but I do think that your assertion that in playing with > the > > chess pieces by color "the structure would be visual but not semiotic" > can > > be problematic and may lead to what I consider an incorrect view of the > > relation between higher and lower functions in development. > > > > Alfredo > > ________________________________________ > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > on behalf of David Kellogg > > Sent: 11 January 2017 04:50 > > To: Andy Blunden; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > > > Vygotsky's got a terrific metaphor for how "perezhivanie" is > internalized: > > it is like internalizing the rules of the game of chess. > > > > The child who doesn't know how to play chess simply plays WITH the pieces > > instead of playing them. She or he might try to create a piece-board > > structure by putting black pieces on black squares and white pieces on > > white squares, but the structure is a visual one and not a semiotic one; > > it's about color and not about meaning. The child who DOES know how to > play > > chess plays the pieces instead of playing with them. She or he too > creates > > "structures" but this time they are semiotic ones: a black knight in a > > completely different column and a completely different row, can capture a > > white pawn. > > > > The board is the same and so are the kids; the children may have very > > similar biological and very similar cultural endowments, but they do not > > have the same semiotic context at all. Hence different perezhivanie and > > different personalities. > > > > David Kellogg > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 11:54 AM, Andy Blunden > wrote: > > > > > How to understand the personality? ... i.e., the *development* of the > > > personality? > > > > > > The subject's inheritance, and The subject's experiences > > (/perezhivaniya/) > > > > > > ... just think of how you'd go about writing a good biography or > > > Bildungsroman. > > > > > > Andy > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > Andy Blunden > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > > On 11/01/2017 10:24 AM, David Kellogg wrote: > > > > > >> Andy: > > >> > > >> A good paradox! Word meaning is a unit, but the spoken word itself is > > >> just an element--a thing. We can see that this is, on the face of it, > > >> impossible: within a single holistic analysis, an element can be a > part > > of > > >> a unit, but a unit can never be a part of an element. So what you are > > >> referring to when you say that the word is a thing is the "sonic" or > > >> "phasal" quality of the word: its "acoustic" properties, its > > "phonetics". > > >> > > >> But not its phonology. The word that Vygotsky uses for "phoneme" > refers > > >> to the 1929 work of the Prague Circle, originally the Moscow Circle. > He > > is > > >> a LITTLE coy about this, because the founders, Jakobson and > Trubetskoy, > > >> were not very popular with the authorities and Vygotsky already had > > plenty > > >> of heterodox acquaintances to worry about. Nevertheless, whenever > > Vygotsky > > >> says "phoneme", we know he really means what Jakobson and Trubetskoy > > called > > >> "morphophonemes". We know this because the examples he actually > > >> gives--Russian case endings--are morpho-phonemes and not simply > > phonemes: > > >> so for example in English the sound /s/ is a simple phoneme when I say > > the > > >> word "self" but if I say "Andy's" the sound /s/ is a morpho-phoneme: a > > >> difference in sounding that makes a difference in meaning. The system > > (that > > >> is, the paradigmatic menu) of these differences in soundings are what > > the > > >> Moscow and Prague Circles called "phonology" (as OPPOSED to > phonetics), > > and > > >> this is the kind of "phoneme" that Vygotsky is really talking about. > > >> > > >> Still, you can see that it is not what he is talking about when he > says > > >> word meaning, because these units are still nowhere near big enough to > > >> describe the kinds of changes which must occur when verbal thinking > > >> develops. I feel the same way about a lot of the examples offered of > > >> "perezhivanie", including Marc's. If MacDuff's grief or Carla's > epiphany > > >> about the misbehavior of her kids being due to "outside influences" > > really > > >> is the unit of personality and experience that Vygotsky wants us to > use > > >> when we analyse the ontogenesis of personality, then it is no more > > >> appropriate than using the morpho-phoneme to analyse the whole of > verbal > > >> thinking. Just as evolution (of species) requires very different units > > from > > >> history (of classes), development, whether we are talking about verbal > > >> thinking or the personality as a whole, is going to require very > > different > > >> units from learning, whether we are talking about MacDuff or Carla. > The > > >> units must be able to develop; that is, the relationship of the > elements > > >> within them must be susceptible to many changes over time. > > >> > > >> Let me give three examples of how this happens in different > > >> "perezhivanie". They are not mine; they are Vygotsky's, and they are > all > > >> from the Pedological Lectures. > > >> > > >> First, the Crisis at One. Neither the biological nor the social > > endowment > > >> of the child greatly changes in the acquisition of speech; > nevertheless, > > >> the relationship between the personality and the environment, of which > > both > > >> personality moments and environmental ones are constituent elements, > is > > >> entirely transformed. Here we are not talking about phonemes, or even > > >> morpho-phonemes: we are talking about "wordings"--whole utterances. In > > >> Melbourne I presented some data that demonstrated this beautifully--a > > >> child's first word is actually an attempt to imitate a whole > > conversation. > > >> > > >> Second, the Crisis at Three. Vygotsky spends a lot of time discussing > > the > > >> "Seven Stars"--the symptoms of the "Terrible Twos" and "Threenagehood" > > >> noted by harried parents everywhere. But by the end of his analysis > it's > > >> clear that what really happens is a new relationship between wish and > > will: > > >> in extreme cases, the child actually wishes for one thing (e.g. > > compromise) > > >> and wills the opposite (the everlasting "No!"). Again, neither the > > >> personality moments as such nor the environmental ones change, but > > there is > > >> a separation and a sorting which allows the subordination of wish to > > will > > >> that we see in play. This isn't the kind of "aha" moment that Marc is > > >> offering us at all: Vygotsky actually calls it the "antipode" of > future > > >> will, because instead of enabling will it actually paralyzes it. But > it > > is > > >> indubitably a key moment in the development of the relation of > > personality > > >> to environmental moments that we see in "perizhivanie". > > >> > > >> Thirdly, the Crisis at Seven. I think Gonzalez Rey makes a total hash > of > > >> this, and I get very cross when I read his article. It is not true > that > > the > > >> essence of perizhivanie remained a mystery to Vygotsky simply because > > he no > > >> longer subscribes to "the aesthetic reaction" and "catharsis" and > other > > >> notions that he toyed with in Psych of Art (he's no longer doing > > >> experiments on changes in breathing rate when people read the works of > > >> Bunin either!). It might be true that he never offered a system of > facts > > >> and methodological procedures for perezivanie, but that was only > because > > >> one already existed, for example in the work of Wallon and Stern and > > >> others. It is demonstrably not true that when Vygotsky says that the > > speech > > >> environment of those around him does not change when the child learns > to > > >> talk at one, he is not "profoundly contradictory with the concept of > > >> sense": when you read the quotation in context, it is very clear that > > what > > >> he is referring to are the kinds of absolute indicators used by > Zalkind: > > >> how often the parents read the newspapers, the dialect they speak, and > > >> their educational background. These do not change, and if the child > > wants > > >> to make sense, these are the factors the child will have to relate to. > > >> > > >> Vygotsky gives the example of a child who is severely retarded. The > > child > > >> wants to play with other children and is rejected. The child walks > down > > the > > >> street and the other children follow, laughing. The child is shrieked > > at, > > >> insulted, but as soon as the humiliation stops, the child is perfectly > > >> happy with himself. Vygotsky points out that the child is not able to > > >> "co-generalize" the "perizhivanie" of the humiliations: each is > > unpleasant, > > >> but they are entirely separate and cannot be connected with any > internal > > >> sense of inferiority. A normal child, however, is able to > "internalize" > > >> these humiliations and consequently develops a sense of inferiority. > We > > can > > >> see that what has happened is the insertion of what Vygotsky calls an > > >> "intellectual" moment: an inner layer, which is what distinguishes > later > > >> Chaplin movies from earlier ones (again, Vygotsky's example, not > mine!) > > and > > >> what brings about the "loss of directness and naivete" that we see in > > >> pre-schoolers. > > >> > > >> I think that the reason people find "perizhivanie" so hard to work > with > > >> is the same reason that they find "word meaning" hard to work with: it > > >> develops. The feeling of drinking milk as the infant drinks it is > > >> perizhivanie, and the thought of being humiliated when you are mulling > > it > > >> over and contemplating revenge is also perizhivanie, and only a > profound > > >> analysis which includes ontogenetic development and not just learning > > will > > >> show the inner link between them. It's for that reason that I think > that > > >> "activity" is not a useful unit of analysis and I am much more > inclined > > to > > >> use your word "project", so long as it can include what Vygotsky calls > > >> "inner activeness". > > >> > > >> Vygotsky says: > > >> > > >> > > >> ????? ? ?????????, ?????????? ? ?. ?., ? ???? ???? ? ?????????? > > >> ???????????, ??? ?????????? ???????????? ??????????????? ????????? > > >> ??????????????? ?? ??????? ? ??????? ?????????????. ??? ??? ????? > ????? > > >> ?????????? ?????????? ? ???????? ???????? ??????????? ? ???, ???, ? ?? > > >> ????? ??? ? ?????????? ???????? ??? ?????????? ???????????? > ???????????? > > >> ???????????????? ????? ? ?????????, ??????? ???????????, ? ???????? > > >> ???????? ?? ????? ???????????? ?????????????? ???????????, > ???????????? > > >> ??????????? ?????????? ?????????? ?? ????????? ? ??????? ????????????. > > ??? > > >> ??? ???????, ??????? ????? ??????????, ? ?? ????? ????? ?? ?????? ??? > > ????? > > >> ???-??????, ???, ? ???????? ????????? ?????????????? ??????? ? > > ?????????? > > >> ????????????. > > >> > > >> When I think, remember, etc. I am dealing withinner activeness; this > > >> psychological process of inner activity is not directly linked to any > > >> external activity. The new form of inner activeness in the School Age > > >> consists of this: that while during the preschool years these inner > > >> activities demonstrated an immediate link with action, with external > > >> activeness, in the school years we have a relative autonomy which > > emerges, > > >> inner activeness which is relatively independent of external > activities. > > >> Here is already a child who can think, at the same time when he is > > doing or > > >> seeing something, one in whom has emerged a differentiation of inner > and > > >> outer activities. > > >> > > >> David Kellogg > > >> Macquarie University > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 10:07 AM, Andy Blunden > > >> ablunden@mira.net>> wrote: > > >> > > >> David: "Are words really units?" > > >> > > >> Well, firstly, "units" is a *relative* term. That is, > > >> the question is: are words units of something, some > > >> complex process subject to analysis. And which? > > >> > > >> Secondly, according to Vygotsky, "no." The concept > > >> Vygotsky proposes as a unit is "word meaning" which he > > >> says is a unity of sound and meaning. The sound is an > > >> artefact, which, detached from its meaningful > > >> utterance in a transactional context is just a thing, > > >> viz., a word. Whereas "word meaning" is an > > >> arrtefact-mediated action, a unit of human social > > >> activity. > > >> > > >> It is true that words can be countable or mass > > >> according to context, but I wasn't talking about words > > >> was I? I was talking about word meaning. > > >> > > >> Andy > > >> > > >> ------------------------------------------------------------ > > >> Andy Blunden > > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy > > >> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective- > > decision-making > > >> > >> decision-making> > > >> > > >> On 8/01/2017 7:59 AM, David Kellogg wrote: > > >> > > >> Are words really units? When we look at their > > >> ideational meaning (that is, > > >> their logical and experiential content--their > > >> capacity for representing and > > >> linking together human experiences) they seem to > > >> fall into two very > > >> different categories: lexical words like > > >> "perezhivanie" or "sense" or > > >> "personality" of "individual" and grammatical > > >> words like "of", or "might", > > >> or "is". The lexical words seem to behave like > > >> units--they are bounded, > > >> discrete, and, as Andy would say, "countable" (the > > >> problem is that almost > > >> all nouns are both countable and uncountable > > >> depending on the context you > > >> put them in, so this distinction is really not as > > >> essential as Andy seems > > >> to assume). But the more grammatical words seem to > > >> be elements of some > > >> larger unit, which we can call wording. > > >> > > >> Veresov and Fleer come up against this problem > > >> with "edintsvo" and > > >> "edintsa". Of course, as they say, the two words > > >> are distinct. But this > > >> doesn't necessarily mean that the former always > > >> corresponds to "unity" in > > >> English and the latter is always "unit". If you > > >> look at the paragraph they > > >> translate on 330, you can see that Vygotsky starts > > >> with an idea that is > > >> quite "synoptic" and is well expressed by "unit". > > >> But in the last sentence > > >> there is a sense that "perezhivanie" is a > > >> meta-stable unit--one that > > >> remains self-similar only through a process of > > >> thorough change, like a > > >> bicycle whose every part is replaced--and in > > >> English is it is better to > > >> express this idea with "unity". The problem is > > >> that the differences between > > >> "edintsvo" and "edintsva" in Russian is a matter > > >> of gender (I think) and > > >> not simply abstractness, and as a result the > > >> English version, which cannot > > >> use the resource of gender,has to rely on > > >> abstractness, so the words > > >> "unity" and "unit" are somewhat more distinct and > > >> less linked than > > >> "edintsvo" and "edintsva". > > >> > > >> There are other problems that are similar. When > > >> Gonzalez Rey uses the word > > >> "final moment" to refer to the final period of > > >> Vygotsky's thinking, he > > >> leaves the anglophone reader the impression that > > >> he is referring to > > >> Vygotsky's deathbed thoughts. On the other hand, > > >> when Veresov and Fleer use > > >> "factor" to translate the same Russian word that > > >> Gonzalez Rey is using, > > >> they are giving us something more quantitative > > >> than Vygotsky intended, and > > >> their translation of "dalee nerazloshim'im > > >> chastyami etava edinstva" > > >> into "vital and further indivisible part of the > > >> whole" is quite opaque in > > >> English (notice that here Veresov and Fleer use > > >> "whole" to translate > > >> "edinstva" rather than "unit"!) At some point you > > >> have to accept that you > > >> can change Russian words into English words as if > > >> you were exchanging > > >> rubles for dollars, but you still won't be able to > > >> buy a samovar at Walmart. > > >> > > >> David Kellogg > > >> Macquarie University > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 5:21 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > > >> > > > >> wrote: > > >> > > >> Larry, all, > > >> > > >> our arguments in the 2014 address a science > > >> education literature in which > > >> the constructivist perspective is the leading > > >> perspective; We note that the > > >> assertion that people learn from experience is > > >> everywhere taken for granted > > >> but nowhere accounted for. We resort to > > >> pragmatist and phenomenological > > >> literature along with Vygotsky's insights to > > >> point out the need to account > > >> for learning as something that cannot be the > > >> result of an individual's > > >> construction; in experience there is always > > >> something in excess of what you > > >> intended, and this is a basic feature of > > >> doing, of performing. I take that > > >> to be your "trans" in the trans/zhivanie word, > > >> Larry, which already is > > >> denoted in the word PERezhivanie. > > >> > > >> But I do not wish to move our discussion too > > >> far away from Marc's paper > > >> and the Perezhivanie special issue. We also > > >> risk disengaging many that have > > >> not have the privilege we've had to have the > > >> time to read so many articles > > >> in just few days into the new year. I think we > > >> are a point in the > > >> discussion where a pretty clear point of > > >> agreement/disagreement, and > > >> therefore of possibility for growth, has been > > >> reached with regard to the > > >> view of perezhivanie as "an experience" and as > > >> the "working over it". I > > >> think that to allow as many as possible to > > >> follow, and hopefully also > > >> engage, I think it will be helpful to bring > > >> the diverse perspectives and > > >> theoretical accounts to matter in accounting > > >> for some actual material. And > > >> there are a number of cases described in the > > >> articles, including Marc's > > >> case of a teacher, as well as everyday facts, > > >> such as those brought by > > >> Beth, and in Beth's article... > > >> > > >> I take the task for myself too, but Saturday > > >> morning need to attend to > > >> other things! > > >> A > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> ________________________________________ > > >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >> > > >> > >> > > > >> on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com > > >> > > >> > >> > > > >> Sent: 07 January 2017 18:26 > > >> To: Andy Blunden; Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended > > >> Mind, Culture, Activity; > > >> Larry Purss > > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and > > >> Perezhivanie! > > >> > > >> Andy, Peter, i hope the intention to move > > >> beyond politeness to struggle > > >> with this topic materializes. > > >> In this vein i want to introduce exploration > > >> of the 'excess' of actual > > >> over intended meaning as he sketched his > > >> introduction to 'experience'. > > >> > > >> Citing Dewey, Alfredo says that this excess of > > >> actual learning over > > >> intended learning INCLUDES what Dewey refers > > >> to as 'attitudes' and these > > >> 'attitudes' are FUNDAMENTALLY what count in > > >> the future. > > >> Alfredo and Roth then add this summary > > >> statement : > > >> > > >> There is therefore, a need to theorize > > >> experience in terms that do not > > >> assume control and rationality as the sine qua > > >> non of learning. It also > > >> implies a need to develop analytical accounts > > >> that retain the 'uncertainty' > > >> that is an 'integral part' of human experience. > > >> > > >> Where are Alfredo and Roth leading us with > > >> this sketch of experience? To > > >> highlight 'attitudes' that occur in the excess > > >> of actual over intended > > >> learning? The word 'attitudes' generates > > >> images of (atmosphere) and (moods) > > >> that 'flow' like cascading waterfalls that can > > >> be imaged as (force) or as > > >> (receptive). Attitudes that flow to places > > >> where they are received within a > > >> certain attitude of care and concern. Not as > > >> forceful an image as moving > > >> only with control and rationality. Describing > > >> 'weaker' thought that > > >> remains uncertain but that also opens us to > > >> the other's peril and plight. > > >> Possibly a post-analytic motion that exceeds > > >> the intended by living-through > > >> the actual that develops 'attitudes' that are > > >> fundamentally what count for > > >> the future. > > >> > > >> > > >> Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > >> > > >> From: Andy Blunden > > >> Sent: January 7, 2017 5:00 AM > > >> To: Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, > > >> Activity > > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and > > >> Perezhivanie! > > >> > > >> OK Peter, what you say is all very true I am > > >> sure, but it > > >> entails conflating activity and action (as > > >> mass nouns) and > > >> context and mediation, and makes the required > > >> distinction > > >> much like one could find multiple meanings for > > >> the word > > >> "and" by listing the different phrases and > > >> clauses which can > > >> be linked by "and." > > >> > > >> Andy > > >> > > >> ------------------------------ > > ------------------------------ > > >> Andy Blunden > > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy > > >> > > >> http://www.brill.com/products/ > > book/origins-collective-decisi > > >> on-making > > >> > >> decision-making> > > >> > > >> On 7/01/2017 11:42 PM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > > >> > > >> Let me try to illustrate. > > >> > > >> Reading as mediated action: The > > >> cultural-historical > > >> context of reading mediates how one's > > >> attention and > > >> response are channeled in socially > > >> constructed ways. So, > > >> in one setting, say at home or reading in > > >> the company of > > >> friends, a novel might bring a reader to > > >> tears, or invite > > >> readers to share personal stories that > > >> parallel those of > > >> the plot lines, or laugh out loud. But > > >> another setting, a > > >> formal school or university class, would > > >> have historical > > >> values and practices that mute emotional > > >> and personal > > >> responses, and promote a more sober, > > >> analytic way of > > >> reading and talking that fits with > > >> specific historical > > >> critical conventions and genres, and > > >> discourages others. > > >> > > >> Reading as mediating action: The act of > > >> reading can be > > >> transformational. In reading about an > > >> talking about a > > >> character's actions, a reader might > > >> reconsider a value > > >> system, become more sympathetic to real > > >> people who > > >> resemble oppressed characters, etc. In > > >> other words, > > >> reading a text may serve a mediational > > >> process in which > > >> textual ideas and exemplars enable a > > >> reader to think > > >> differently. > > >> > > >> *From:*Andy Blunden > > >> [mailto:ablunden@mira.net > > >> ] > > >> *Sent:* Saturday, January 7, 2017 6:28 AM > > >> *To:* Peter Smagorinsky > >> >; eXtended Mind, > > >> Culture, Activity > >> > > > >> *Subject:* Re: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year > > >> and Perezhivanie! > > >> > > >> Can you explain in a paragraph or two,. > > >> Peter, rather than > > >> asking us all to read 10,000 words to > > >> extract an answer? > > >> > > >> Andy > > >> > > >> ------------------------------ > > >> ------------------------------ > > >> > > >> Andy Blunden > > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy > > >> > > >> > > >> http://www.brill.com/products/ > > >> book/origins-collective-decision-making > > >> collective- > > >> decision-making> > > >> > > >> > > >> On 7/01/2017 11:23 PM, Peter Smagorinsky > > >> wrote: > > >> > > >> Andy and others, I tried to work out > > >> the mediated/mediating question > > >> > > >> in the area of reading....see if this helps. > > >> > > >> Smagorinsky, P., & O'Donnell-Allen, > > >> C. (1998). Reading as mediated > > >> > > >> and mediating action: Composing meaning for > > >> literature through multimedia > > >> interpretive texts. Reading Research > > >> Quarterly, 33, 198-226. Available > > >> athttp://www.petersmagorinsky. > net/About/PDF/RRQ/RRQ1998.pdf > > >> net/About/PDF/RRQ/RRQ1998.pdf> > > >> > > >> -----Original Message----- > > >> > > >> From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >> > > >> > >> .ucsd.edu > > >> > > > >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ > > >> > > >> > > >> mailman.ucsd.edu ] On > > >> Behalf Of Andy Blunden > > >> > > >> Sent: Friday, January 6, 2017 7:12 PM > > >> > > >> To:xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >> > > >> > >> > > > >> > > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year > > >> and Perezhivanie! > > >> > > >> I have never understood this supposed > > >> distinction, Alfredo, between > > >> > > >> "mediated activity" and "mediating activity" > > >> given that all activity is > > >> mediated and all activity mediates. > > >> > > >> Also, could you spell out what you > > >> mean by the "tension" > > >> > > >> between perezhivanie as meaning and > > >> perezhivanie as struggle. > > >> > > >> Andy > > >> > > >> ------------------------------ > > >> ------------------------------ > > >> > > >> Andy Blunden > > >> > > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> http://www.brill.com/products/ > book/origins-collective- > > >> collective- > > > > > >> > > >> decision-making > > >> > > >> On 5/01/2017 6:26 PM, Alfredo Jornet > > >> Gil wrote: > > >> > > >> Thanks Marc for your careful > > >> response. > > >> > > >> I am familiar to Vygotsky's > > >> notion of cultural mediation and I > > >> > > >> am aware and acknowledge that it was > > >> elaborated as a means to overcome > > >> dualism, and that it is not analog to a > > >> computational approach. > > >> > > >> When I brought the computing > > >> analogy, I did so with regard not > > >> > > >> to the concept of cultural mediation in > > >> general, but to the way it can be > > >> (and is) deployed analytically. I react to > > >> what it seems to me a dichotomy > > >> between a "meaning" as something that is > > >> static (thereby a form of > > >> "representation" or reflection of the relation > > >> with the environment instead > > >> of?refraction)?? and the > > >> experiencing-as-struggling, which is described > > >> as?transformation or change. If so, mediation > > >> here would seem to be part of > > >> a methodological device that first dissects "a > > >> type of meaning" from "a > > >> type of activity" (or a given state from the > > >> process that changes that > > >> state), and then unites it by adding the term > > >> "mediation." And this may be > > >> my misreading, but in that (mis)reading (which > > >> perhaps is mostly due to the > > >> fact that in your empirical illustration only > > >> the initial and end product, > > >> i.e., perezhivanie, are described, but not the > > >> experiencing-as-struggle, > > >> that is, the moving between the two), > > >> mediation here seems to do as > > >> analytical concept precisely what you were > > >> afraid our monism was doing: > > >> explaining nothing. Only the end products but > > >> not the process of producing > > >> perezhivanie are revealed. This may be > > >> problematic if one attends to what > > >> Veresov argues in the paper I shared > > >> yesterday, where he defends the notion > > >> of mediation but also specifies that Vygotsky > > >> speaks of *mediating > > >> activity* (as opposed to *mediated* activity). > > >> That is, not mediation by > > >> signs as products, but mediating activity as > > >> the activity of producing > > >> signs (which again is an activity of producing > > >> social relations, perhaps > > >> what you refer as "holistic meanings"?). What > > >> do you think? > > >> > > >> I did not think you were trying > > >> to deny the influence of > > >> > > >> Spinoza, and I do not think we ever said that > > >> Perezhivanie was primarily a > > >> move from Cartesian Dualism to Monism, as you > > >> suggest in your post. I copy > > >> and paste from my prior post: "The fact is > > >> that Vygotsky was building a > > >> theory on the unity of the affect and the > > >> intellect that was to be grounded > > >> on Spinoza, and what we try to do is to > > >> explore how perezhivanie, as a > > >> concept being developed during the same period > > >> (but not finalised or > > >> totally settled!), could be seen from the > > >> perspective of the Spinozist > > >> Vygotsky." > > >> > > >> I totally believe that bringing > > >> the distinction between > > >> > > >> perezhivanie as meaning, and perezhivanie as > > >> struggle, is totally relevant, > > >> and Beth Ferholt's vignettes of Where the Wild > > >> Things Are do indeed > > >> illustrate this. We really need to address > > >> this tension, which as Beth's > > >> examples and as our own everyday experience > > >> shows, is a tension that > > >> matters not just to books and to theories but > > >> to living persons (children, > > >> teachers), a tension that moreover is present > > >> and mentioned in all the > > >> articles of the symposium. The papers offer > > >> different proposals, and I > > >> think is so great we have the chance to > > >> discuss them! I too, as you, am > > >> very interesting in hearing others about the > > >> questions you had concerning > > >> sense and meaning. > > >> > > >> Alfredo > > >> > > >> From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >> > > >> xmca-l-bounces@mailman > > >> .ucsd.edu > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> > > > >> xmca-l-bounces@mailman > > >> .ucsd.edu > > >> > > > >> on behalf of Marc > > >> > > >> Clara > > >> > > >> > >> > > > >> > >> > > > >> > > >> Sent: 04 January 2017 22:31 > > >> > > >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > >> > > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New > > >> Year and Perezhivanie! > > >> > > >> Thank you very much, Alfredo, for > > >> sharing this excellent paper by > > >> > > >> Veresov, and thanks also for your > > >> responses, which really helped > > >> > > >> me to > > >> > > >> better understand your points. My > > >> main doubt about your proposal > > >> > > >> was/is caused by the statement > > >> that the idea of cultural > > >> > > >> mediation/mediator implies a > > >> cartesian dualism. This shocks me > > >> > > >> because, to me, the idea of > > >> cultural mediation is absolutely > > >> > > >> crucial > > >> > > >> (in fact, the keystone) for the > > >> construction of a monist (and > > >> > > >> scientific) psychology that does > > >> not forget mind -that is, a > > >> > > >> cultural > > >> > > >> psychology. From your response, > > >> however, I realized that we may > > >> > > >> be > > >> > > >> approaching the idea of mediation > > >> in different ways. I talk of > > >> > > >> mediation and mediators in a > > >> quite restricted way. The starting > > >> > > >> point > > >> > > >> of my understanding of mediation > > >> is a dialectical relationship > > >> > > >> (organic, transactional) between > > >> the subject and the world > > >> > > >> (Vygotsky departs from the scheme > > >> stimulus-response, from reflexology). > > >> > > >> This relationship, that Vygotsky > > >> calls primitive psychological > > >> > > >> functions, would be basically > > >> biological. However, in human > > >> > > >> beings > > >> > > >> this relationship is mediated by > > >> cultural means: signs and > > >> > > >> tools; or > > >> > > >> primary, secondary and terciary > > >> artifacts. These cultural means > > >> > > >> reorganize the primitive > > >> functions (dialectic S-O relationship), > > >> > > >> which > > >> > > >> become then higher psychological > > >> functions (S-M-O) (see for > > >> > > >> example, > > >> > > >> The problem of the cultural > > >> development of the child, in The > > >> > > >> Vygotsky > > >> > > >> Reader). Now, the subject, the > > >> cultural mediators, and the > > >> > > >> object form > > >> > > >> an inseparable dialectical unit, > > >> so that the subject acts on > > >> > > >> (transforms) the object through > > >> the prism of the cultural > > >> > > >> mediators, > > >> > > >> the object acts on (transforms) > > >> the subject also through the > > >> > > >> prism of > > >> > > >> the cultural mediators, and the > > >> cultural means are themselves > > >> > > >> also > > >> > > >> transformed as a consequence of > > >> their mediation in this > > >> > > >> continuous > > >> > > >> dynamic dialectical tension. > > >> Here, for me, it is important the > > >> > > >> idea > > >> > > >> that the cultural means are as > > >> material (if we assume a > > >> > > >> materialist > > >> > > >> monism) as all the rest of the > > >> world; in fact, are parts of the > > >> > > >> material world which become signs > > >> or tools (and can be therefore > > >> > > >> socially distributed). This > > >> permits the introduction of the > > >> > > >> scientific > > >> > > >> study of mind-consciousness (as > > >> mediating systems of signs), > > >> > > >> because > > >> > > >> mind is not anymore something > > >> immaterial and unobservable, but > > >> > > >> it is > > >> > > >> as material and observable as the > > >> rest of the natural world. It > > >> > > >> is > > >> > > >> from this view that, for me, the > > >> idea of cultural mediation is > > >> > > >> the > > >> > > >> keystone of a monist psychology > > >> that includes mind. Thus, when I > > >> > > >> speak > > >> > > >> of mediators, I refer to the > > >> cultural means which mediate in the > > >> > > >> S-O > > >> > > >> dialectics; I am especially > > >> interested in signs/secondary > > >> > > >> artifacts. > > >> > > >> Here, it is perhaps necessary to > > >> insist that when I talk of > > >> > > >> studying > > >> > > >> mediators (and their semantic > > >> structure), this doesn't mean that > > >> > > >> they > > >> > > >> are taken out from the activity > > >> (the flux of live) in which they > > >> > > >> mediate (since out of activity > > >> they are not signs anymore); > > >> > > >> here, I > > >> > > >> think Vygotsky tries again to > > >> overcome another old dichotomy, the > > >> > > >> functionalism-structuralism one. > > >> I hope that all this makes also > > >> > > >> clear the difference between this view and > > >> that of computational > > >> psychologies (which in general are profoundly > > >> and explicitly dualist and > > >> not dialectic). > > >> > > >> Back to perezhivanie, I'm not > > >> obviously trying to deny the > > >> > > >> influence > > >> > > >> of Spinoza on Vygotsky's thinking > > >> (this is explicit in Vygotsky's > > >> > > >> writings, especially in "The > > >> teaching about emotions", in the > > >> > > >> Vol.6 of > > >> > > >> the Collected Works). But I have > > >> doubts that Vygotsky's > > >> > > >> introduction > > >> > > >> of the concept of perezhivanie is > > >> to be regarded primarily as a > > >> > > >> movement towards monism (from a > > >> previous cartesian dualism), and > > >> > > >> that > > >> > > >> this movement questions the > > >> concept of cultural mediation. > > >> > > >> Instead, > > >> > > >> and I think that this is in line > > >> with some of Gonzalez-Rey > > >> > > >> observations in his paper, my > > >> impression is that the > > >> > > >> introduction of > > >> > > >> the concept of perezhivanie > > >> responds more to a movement (a > > >> > > >> further > > >> > > >> step) towards holism (something > > >> that, in my understanding, can > > >> > > >> also be > > >> > > >> found in Spinoza). Thus, I think > > >> that the word meaning is still > > >> > > >> the > > >> > > >> unit of analysis in the last > > >> Vygotsky -and therefore, the idea of > > >> > > >> cultural mediation is still > > >> crucial (in fact, in The problem of > > >> > > >> the > > >> > > >> environment, he connects the > > >> concept of perezhivanie, which has > > >> > > >> just > > >> > > >> introduced, to the development of > > >> word meaning [p.345-346, also > > >> > > >> cited > > >> > > >> in my paper]). However, in my > > >> view, in the last Vygotsky the > > >> > > >> focus is > > >> > > >> not anymore primarily on the > > >> word-meaning as formed for things > > >> > > >> (or > > >> > > >> collections of things, as in the > > >> ontogenetic research with > > >> > > >> Sakharov), but the focus is now in the > > >> formation of meaning for holistic > > >> situations. > > >> > > >> Best regards, > > >> > > >> Marc. > > >> > > >> 2017-01-03 19:16 GMT+01:00 > > >> Alfredo Jornet Gil< > > >> > > >> a.j.gil@iped.uio.no > > >> > > > >> > >> >: > > >> > > >> Hi Marc, all, > > >> > > >> thanks for joining and for > > >> your interesting work, which I > > >> > > >> follow > > >> > > >> since I became aware of it. I > > >> appreciate the way in your > > >> > > >> paper you > > >> > > >> show careful and honest > > >> attention to the texts of the authors > > >> > > >> involved, but perhaps most of > > >> all I appreciate that the > > >> > > >> paper makes > > >> > > >> the transformational > > >> dimension related to struggle and change > > >> > > >> salient, a dimension all > > >> papers deemed central to > > >> > > >> perezhivanie. And I > > >> > > >> have learned more about > > >> Vasilyuk by reading your paper. But > > >> > > >> I also > > >> > > >> see that we have approached > > >> the question of perezhivanie > > >> > > >> differently > > >> > > >> and I think that addressing > > >> the questions that you raise > > >> > > >> concerning > > >> > > >> our article may be a good way > > >> to both respond and discuss > > >> > > >> your paper. > > >> > > >> I am aware that our use of > > >> the term monism may be > > >> > > >> problematic to > > >> > > >> some, and N. Veresov, who has > > >> recently written about this > > >> > > >> (see > > >> > > >> attached article), warns > > >> against the dangers of simply > > >> > > >> moving from > > >> > > >> dualism into an > > >> undifferentiating monism that relativizes > > >> > > >> everything, > > >> > > >> making development > > >> un-studiable. This seems to be the way in > > >> > > >> which > > >> > > >> you have understood our > > >> argument, and of course this is not > > >> > > >> what we are or want to be doing. > > >> > > >> Probably many will think that > > >> *dialectical materialism* > > >> > > >> rather than > > >> > > >> monism is the proper term, > > >> and I could agree with them; we > > >> > > >> do in fact > > >> > > >> use dialectical materialism > > >> there and elsewhere. Yet, we > > >> > > >> wanted to > > >> > > >> emphasise the Spinozist > > >> influence (an influence that also > > >> > > >> runs > > >> > > >> through Marx) and so we found > > >> it appropriate to use the term > > >> > > >> monism, > > >> > > >> a term that Vygotsky uses > > >> before arguing that Spinoza > > >> > > >> "develops an essentially materialistic view" > > >> > > >> (Collected Works, Vol. 6, p. > > >> 124). For us, the aim is > > >> > > >> working out > > >> > > >> ways to empirically examine > > >> and formulate problems in ways > > >> > > >> that do > > >> > > >> not reify a mind-body dualism. > > >> > > >> Although overcoming dualism > > >> is foundational to the CHAT > > >> > > >> paradigm, I > > >> > > >> would however not say that > > >> Vygotsky did get to solve all of > > >> > > >> the > > >> > > >> problems that Cartesian > > >> dualism had created for psychology, > > >> > > >> even > > >> > > >> though he recognised those > > >> problems brilliantly as early as > > >> > > >> in the > > >> > > >> "Crisis". It should suffice > > >> to cite Vygotsky's own remarks, > > >> > > >> which we quote in the paper (and which A.N. > > >> > > >> Leont'ev mentions in the > > >> introduction to the collected > > >> > > >> works), where > > >> > > >> Vygotsky explicitly critiques > > >> some of his own prior ideas > > >> > > >> for failing > > >> > > >> to overcome dualism. We agree > > >> with those who, like F. G. > > >> > > >> Rey, see > > >> > > >> Vygotsky's project as a > > >> developing rather than as a > > >> > > >> finalised one. > > >> > > >> The fact is that Vygotsky was > > >> building a theory on the unity > > >> > > >> of the > > >> > > >> affect and the intellect that > > >> was to be grounded on Spinoza, > > >> > > >> and what > > >> > > >> we try to do is to explore > > >> how perezhivanie, as a concept > > >> > > >> being > > >> > > >> developed during the same > > >> period (but not finalised or > > >> > > >> totally > > >> > > >> settled!), could be seen from > > >> the perspective of the > > >> > > >> Spinozist Vygotsky. > > >> > > >> As you note, in our article > > >> we argue that, if one takes the > > >> > > >> Spinozist > > >> > > >> one-substance approach, > > >> classical concepts used in > > >> > > >> non-classical > > >> > > >> psychology, at least in the > > >> way they are commonly used in > > >> > > >> the current > > >> > > >> literature, should be > > >> revised. One such concept is > > >> > > >> mediation. And I > > >> > > >> personally do not have much > > >> of a problem when mediation is > > >> > > >> used to > > >> > > >> denote the fundamental fact > > >> that every thing exists always > > >> > > >> through > > >> > > >> *another*, never in and of > > >> itself. But I do think that it is > > >> > > >> problematic to identify > > >> MEDIATORS, such as "a meaning", as a > > >> > > >> means to > > >> > > >> account for or explain > > >> developmental processes and learning > > >> > > >> events, > > >> > > >> precisely because it is > > >> there, at least in my view, that > > >> > > >> dualism creeps in. > > >> > > >> For example, I find it > > >> paradoxical that you are concerned > > >> > > >> that our > > >> > > >> monist approach risks turning > > >> perezhivanie into a useless > > >> > > >> category > > >> > > >> because it may be used to > > >> explain everything and nothing, > > >> > > >> and yet you > > >> > > >> do not seem to have a problem > > >> using the term mediation to > > >> > > >> account for > > >> > > >> the transformation of > > >> perezhivanie without clearly > > >> > > >> elaborating on how > > >> > > >> mediation does change > > >> anything or what it looks like as a > > >> > > >> real > > >> > > >> process. How is it different > > >> saying that a perezhivanie > > >> > > >> mediates the > > >> > > >> experiencing-as-struggle from > > >> simply saying that it > > >> > > >> "affects" or > > >> > > >> "determines" it? Indeed, if > > >> perezhivanie mediates > > >> > > >> experiencing-as-struggle, > > >> does not experiencing-as-struglgle > > >> > > >> too > > >> > > >> mediate perezhivanie? And do > > >> not both may be said to mediate > > >> > > >> development, or development mediate them? Is > > >> not this explaining everything > > >> and nothing? > > >> > > >> I do believe you can argue > > >> that there is a difference between > > >> > > >> mediation and classical > > >> psychology's cause-effect relations, > > >> > > >> but to > > >> > > >> show this you need to dig > > >> into the dialectical underpinnings > > >> > > >> of the > > >> > > >> theory. In your paper, you > > >> offer a nice analysis of a lovely > > >> > > >> case of > > >> > > >> a teacher who, in dealing > > >> with a challenge with one of her > > >> > > >> students, > > >> > > >> changes her perezhivanie. I > > >> think you can rightly argue that > > >> > > >> there is > > >> > > >> a semiotic transformation, > > >> and I fully support your > > >> > > >> statement that by > > >> > > >> studying discourse we can > > >> empirically approach questions of > > >> > > >> psychological development. > > >> The contradictions you show as > > >> > > >> being > > >> > > >> involved and resolved > > >> resonate really well with what I > > >> > > >> experience as > > >> > > >> a parent or as a teacher in > > >> the classroom. Yet, without > > >> > > >> unpacking > > >> > > >> what this "mediation" taking > > >> place between one perezhivanie > > >> > > >> and the > > >> > > >> next one means as a concrete > > >> and real, the same analysis > > >> > > >> could be done taking an information processing > > >> approach: > > >> > > >> there is an situation that is > > >> processed (represented?) in > > >> > > >> one way, > > >> > > >> which then leads to a > > >> (cognitive) dissonance, and then there > > >> > > >> is a > > >> > > >> cognitive resolution by means > > >> of which the situation is > > >> > > >> presented > > >> > > >> differently in consciousness > > >> (indeed, when seen in this way, > > >> > > >> the term > > >> > > >> perezhivanie and the term > > >> "representation" become almost > > >> > > >> indistinguishable). How is > > >> mediation, as an analytical > > >> > > >> concept, > > >> > > >> helping here? And most > > >> importantly to the question of > > >> > > >> perezhivanie, > > >> > > >> how is this analysis going to > > >> show the internal connection > > >> > > >> between > > >> > > >> intellect and affect that > > >> Vygotsky formulates as > > >> > > >> constitutive of the notion of perezhivanie? > > >> > > >> I believe that the key lies > > >> in understanding what Vygotsky > > >> > > >> means when > > >> > > >> he says that perezhivanie is > > >> a unit of analysis. I will not > > >> > > >> repeat > > >> > > >> here what already is written > > >> in at least a couple of the > > >> > > >> articles in > > >> > > >> the special issue (Blunden, > > >> ours), that is the difference > > >> > > >> between > > >> > > >> analysis by elements and unit > > >> analysis (Vygotsky 1987). A > > >> > > >> unit > > >> > > >> analysis approach is > > >> consistent with Spinoza, for whom > > >> > > >> cause-effect > > >> > > >> explanations were not > > >> adequate, requiring instead an > > >> > > >> understanding of > > >> > > >> self-development, > > >> perezhivanie as a kernel cell for the > > >> > > >> development > > >> > > >> of personality. And I think > > >> you may be after this in your > > >> > > >> article in > > > > > > > > > From lpscholar2@gmail.com Mon Jan 16 09:00:33 2017 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2017 09:00:33 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! In-Reply-To: References: <1483344752182.40904@iped.uio.no> <1483467423798.57819@iped.uio.no> <1483601196884.31418@iped.uio.no> <5df5e870-3ef8-70d6-0c17-f8647ba17e62@mira.net> <587124d9.d957620a.4a5a8.bd56@mx.google.com> <1483820996800.91513@iped.uio.no> <1484253698990.7728@iped.uio.no> <1484328718783.79382@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <587cfc5a.4e38630a.aa4eb.5a5d@mx.google.com> David addressing Alfredo. A wonderful metaphor and nod to Alfredo helping us move from small prey to a substantial prey worth pursuing. David, you describe the process of development as moving through the stage of adapting the environment to human needs. (a possible perezhivanie relation?). However, is it possible we are now developing beyond this notion of adapting the environment FOR human needs and becoming aware of the vice versa movement. The movement of adapting human needs to environmental needs. Still within conscious awareness requiring our focused (and possibly also unfocused) attention but less human centric, more focused upon the ?relation? honouring and possibly experiencing as ?sacred? the ?relation? and through the ?relation? experiencing the environmental ?element? of perizhivanie as living vitality. This focus on the ?relation? shifting focus away from human needs or environmental needs as either/or as ?things? that exist outside of each other that must be ?connected?. There is no actual separation except imaginally and this is the ?heart? of the matter. The place of not only compassion as such but the heart as the place of CARE AND CONCERN. More active than compassion but not human centric only. CARE AND CONCERN for the ?relation? whether imagined as subject, object, subject&object, or the relation existing prior to this subject/object differentiation. Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: David Kellogg Sent: January 16, 2017 2:56 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! Alfredo: Well, I think that you are doing the really difficult and beautiful work, filling in Mike's ten league boots and keeping the cats in a coherent herd. Contrary to the popular expression, though, it is possible to herd cats. Lions, for example, herd themselves, apparently because the prey they consume is too large to consume individually before it goes bad, and if they work in a pride, they don't have to work every day. House cats, on the other hand, feed on small prey in individual portions and so they are notoriously selfish and competitive. It seems to me that with the "perezhivanie" symposium, we have at last begun to hunt lion-sized prey. Perhaps I am still doing mousework, though: I think we actually disagree more than we agree. Unlike Andy, I am very willing to embrace both the label "structuralist" and the label "functionalist", so long as I can embrace them together, and add the label developmentalist: structures are as they are because they function as they do, but sometimes they function as they do for historical, developmental reasons rather than obvious and immediate ones. In the second chapter of HDHMF, Vygotsky invokes what he calls the "Jennings" principle: that is, that functions are always "functions of structure": organisms do what they are allowed to do by their organic structure and no more. For example, cats cannot herd themselves because their prey is too small. But he points out that a) organic structure is itself a product of doing things over thousands and millions of years, b) structures can be "borrowed" to do more than they are adapted for (what S.J. Gould called "exaptation") and c) none of this applies to "artificial organs", such as tools and signs, because mediational means are precisely structures "borrowed" from the environment to do more than they are adapted for. One of these supra-adaptive functions is to adapt the environment to human needs instead of vice versa. This by definition cannot be something that a tool or a sign is adapted for; you don't get tools or signs simply by adapting to the environment: you only get them by imagining how the environment can be made different and acting accordingly. Both tools and signs are the product of some quantum of conscious awareness, and neither is a creation of habit. And that is why, again quite unlike Andy, I am also happy to embrace the label of semiotic as opposed to activity theoretic. I think that although both tools and signs involve an idealization of the environment, they do not do so equally. Signs, for example, include conscious attentive idealization of the self as well (the self as part of the environment, as part of perizhivanie--as Vygotsky points out, what endures from the crisis at seven is the "self" in self-esteem and the "self" in "self respect", not the self of posing, mannerism and acting out). The flaw in Greimas is that he is uninterested this functional, this developmental aspect of structural semantics, and it is precisely this that allows us to distinguish, at three, between the child who is interested in changing the chess board as environment by playing with the pieces and the child who is interested in changing the semiotic structure of the board by playing the game, and to distinguish, at seven, between the child who is disappointed with the inferior affordances for constructing himself as a first person shooter that a chess board offers and the child who is excited by the superior affordances for constructing himself as a future grand master. . I was very interested in what you said about attention versus perception. They are developmentally linked, in Vygotsky, but functionally and thus structurally quite distinct. Volitional attention is so much a part of adult life we sometimes have to work at nonvolitional attention (!). But volitional perception occurs only in rare circumstances, e.g. the Edgar Rubin vases, Necker's cube, etc. I find myself straining to see every passing mouse as a zebra. David Kellogg Macquarie University . On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 2:31 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > Thanks, David, for such a beautiful and clarifying post. You have such a > brilliant manner to language Vygotsky in Vygotsky's language! > > I think we agree much more than we disagree, and before I turn to Andy's > very timely link to the "Fate of a Man", this may be a nice tutorial on > terminology, at least for me. > > My only problem had been seeing what to me had looked like an all too > empiricist treatment of the notion of perception in your prior post(s) > (including some older posts on micro-genesis). But I think you still agree > that part of what it takes to become an experienced chess player is being > able to ATTEND (and *attention* may be a better term than perception) to > the pieces and their position in the board in front of her in much closer > detail than the child who merely plays "with" the pieces. Thus the > "perception" in the expert may be said to be much more rich and *concrete* > than what one "perceives" by merely attending to (abstracting) color and > shape relations. But I keep thinking that perception is not the right word > here, is it? Certainly not one "element" (I use your wording below) in the > unit. But this may just be a wording problem. > > I really like your very important observation that chess produces > life-long learners, whereas the child that merely plays "with" the chess > pieces will soon find the game uninteresting. But again I don't think that > the key here is an opposition between perceiving and semiosis, but perhaps > between habit and conscious awareness (which at the end may be just > different words for saying the same thing). As a habit, the task of > grouping pieces by color involves a person-environment relation in which > the *need* for consciousness (and thereby interest!) to awaken is lesser, > thereby offering less possibilities for development. I think it is this > that you would phrase as "the environment seems to dominate". The way > habits are formed in chess, however, are such that they require of > consciousness for the operation to continue (which you may phrase as > "personality dominates more"). The relation between habit and awareness is > transformed in the higher-order activity (or form of human consciousness) > that is chess-playing. Same thing, different words? > > Alfredo > > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of David Kellogg > Sent: 13 January 2017 01:02 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > Alfredo: > > Let's apply your reasoning to the distinction between non-language, > proto-language, and language proper. Imagine a nursery in which there are > three beds, one with a child who is only week old and who responds with > pleasure to a nipple and with pain to being shaken or dropped, one with a > child who is about ten months old and has worked out a system of squeaks > and directed cries in order to get attention and deliver an affective > response, and one with a child who is nearly two and can ask for objects, > evaluate them, and reject them. As you say, perception and semiosis are at > work in each situation. But contrary to what you say, they are not equally > at work, and the outcomes are very different. > > There is a good reason why children develop: it's in their interests, both > in the long term sense in that it allows a much wider variety of outcomes > and in the short term sense in that it allows an escape from ennui. A child > who plays the "game" of putting black pieces on black squares and white > pieces on white squares will find this game very dull in a matter of hours. > A child who plays the game of chess will, in many cases, find a lifetime > vocation. Yes, there are "structures" that include perception and semiosis > in both cases, but the precise make-up isn't insignificant or irrelevant. > > One important reason why perezhivanie is such an important unit of > structure is that it at last allows us to assign real, concrete, specific > values to the influence of its two elements, personality and environment. > These vary from period to period--for example, in periods of crisis, the > personality always appears to play a leading role (e.g. proto-language in > the Crisis at One, negativism in the Crisis at Three, "acting out" in the > Crisis at Seven). During stable periods, the environment always appears to > dominate (e.g. speech proper in early childhood, play in preschool, and > thinking but not thinking-about-thinking in school age). > > Some "child-centred" pedagogies would like to treat childhood as one long > crisis. I think this is a disservice to the child, because it is precisely > during the stable periods that the critical neoformations (e.g. > protospeech) find a supporting but absolutely crucial role. The child > doesn't forget the expressiveness of intonation and stress learned in > proto-language, any more than the child who plays chess no longer > distinguishes white squares from black ones. > > David Kellogg > Macquarie University > > > > On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 7:41 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > wrote: > > > David, I admire much of what you write in your first three examples in > > your prior post. But I am reacting to your latter post on Chess. It is > the > > second or third time that you bring the CHESS example to bear in xmca, > and > > I always feel uneasy about it. > > > > I see the point that there are different developmental stages and that > > these can be best categorised according to the type of generalisation > that > > the child can engage into. Obviously, treating a piece of marble "as if" > it > > was a piece in the game of chess involves a different type of > > generalization than treating the same piece of marble as if it was a > piece > > in the game of "let's put the black pieces in black squares and white > > pieces in white squares". But I do not think that my 20 months daughter > > will put black pieces on black squares in any systematic manner simply > > because she can PERCEIVE and act upon the difference between black and > > white; and indeed I do not think that my 7 years old first daughter will > do > > any of these things with the chess pieces, considering she has never > > learned to play chess. Indeed, why would any child do that? I do strongly > > believe that to get any of my daughters to arrange the pieces by color, > > there would have first to be a TEACHING/LEARNING situation, which itself > > would involve establishing a semantic field, a field that perhaps out of > my > > ignorance I would call semiotic (sign). > > > > In my view, in both cases there are rules and therefore imagination, if > > we listen to Vygotsky's writings on play, and perhaps, as Vygotsky notes, > > there may be a difference in the "moral attitude", but I would be > cautious > > by gross divisions between perceptual and semantic structures. Yes,there > > are different levels, types, or stages in the way semantic fields are > > organised, and that playing the chess pieces as pieces of the CHESS game > > involves a qualitative leap compared to playing them as pieces in the > game > > of putting them together by shape or color; but there is a game going on > in > > both cases, and therefore a perceptual as much as a semiotic structure > > being at play. These are different semiotic contexts, as you say at the > end > > of your e-mail, but I do think that your assertion that in playing with > the > > chess pieces by color "the structure would be visual but not semiotic" > can > > be problematic and may lead to what I consider an incorrect view of the > > relation between higher and lower functions in development. > > > > Alfredo > > ________________________________________ > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > on behalf of David Kellogg > > Sent: 11 January 2017 04:50 > > To: Andy Blunden; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > > > Vygotsky's got a terrific metaphor for how "perezhivanie" is > internalized: > > it is like internalizing the rules of the game of chess. > > > > The child who doesn't know how to play chess simply plays WITH the pieces > > instead of playing them. She or he might try to create a piece-board > > structure by putting black pieces on black squares and white pieces on > > white squares, but the structure is a visual one and not a semiotic one; > > it's about color and not about meaning. The child who DOES know how to > play > > chess plays the pieces instead of playing with them. She or he too > creates > > "structures" but this time they are semiotic ones: a black knight in a > > completely different column and a completely different row, can capture a > > white pawn. > > > > The board is the same and so are the kids; the children may have very > > similar biological and very similar cultural endowments, but they do not > > have the same semiotic context at all. Hence different perezhivanie and > > different personalities. > > > > David Kellogg > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 11:54 AM, Andy Blunden > wrote: > > > > > How to understand the personality? ... i.e., the *development* of the > > > personality? > > > > > > The subject's inheritance, and The subject's experiences > > (/perezhivaniya/) > > > > > > ... just think of how you'd go about writing a good biography or > > > Bildungsroman. > > > > > > Andy > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > Andy Blunden > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > > On 11/01/2017 10:24 AM, David Kellogg wrote: > > > > > >> Andy: > > >> > > >> A good paradox! Word meaning is a unit, but the spoken word itself is > > >> just an element--a thing. We can see that this is, on the face of it, > > >> impossible: within a single holistic analysis, an element can be a > part > > of > > >> a unit, but a unit can never be a part of an element. So what you are > > >> referring to when you say that the word is a thing is the "sonic" or > > >> "phasal" quality of the word: its "acoustic" properties, its > > "phonetics". > > >> > > >> But not its phonology. The word that Vygotsky uses for "phoneme" > refers > > >> to the 1929 work of the Prague Circle, originally the Moscow Circle. > He > > is > > >> a LITTLE coy about this, because the founders, Jakobson and > Trubetskoy, > > >> were not very popular with the authorities and Vygotsky already had > > plenty > > >> of heterodox acquaintances to worry about. Nevertheless, whenever > > Vygotsky > > >> says "phoneme", we know he really means what Jakobson and Trubetskoy > > called > > >> "morphophonemes". We know this because the examples he actually > > >> gives--Russian case endings--are morpho-phonemes and not simply > > phonemes: > > >> so for example in English the sound /s/ is a simple phoneme when I say > > the > > >> word "self" but if I say "Andy's" the sound /s/ is a morpho-phoneme: a > > >> difference in sounding that makes a difference in meaning. The system > > (that > > >> is, the paradigmatic menu) of these differences in soundings are what > > the > > >> Moscow and Prague Circles called "phonology" (as OPPOSED to > phonetics), > > and > > >> this is the kind of "phoneme" that Vygotsky is really talking about. > > >> > > >> Still, you can see that it is not what he is talking about when he > says > > >> word meaning, because these units are still nowhere near big enough to > > >> describe the kinds of changes which must occur when verbal thinking > > >> develops. I feel the same way about a lot of the examples offered of > > >> "perezhivanie", including Marc's. If MacDuff's grief or Carla's > epiphany > > >> about the misbehavior of her kids being due to "outside influences" > > really > > >> is the unit of personality and experience that Vygotsky wants us to > use > > >> when we analyse the ontogenesis of personality, then it is no more > > >> appropriate than using the morpho-phoneme to analyse the whole of > verbal > > >> thinking. Just as evolution (of species) requires very different units > > from > > >> history (of classes), development, whether we are talking about verbal > > >> thinking or the personality as a whole, is going to require very > > different > > >> units from learning, whether we are talking about MacDuff or Carla. > The > > >> units must be able to develop; that is, the relationship of the > elements > > >> within them must be susceptible to many changes over time. > > >> > > >> Let me give three examples of how this happens in different > > >> "perezhivanie". They are not mine; they are Vygotsky's, and they are > all > > >> from the Pedological Lectures. > > >> > > >> First, the Crisis at One. Neither the biological nor the social > > endowment > > >> of the child greatly changes in the acquisition of speech; > nevertheless, > > >> the relationship between the personality and the environment, of which > > both > > >> personality moments and environmental ones are constituent elements, > is > > >> entirely transformed. Here we are not talking about phonemes, or even > > >> morpho-phonemes: we are talking about "wordings"--whole utterances. In > > >> Melbourne I presented some data that demonstrated this beautifully--a > > >> child's first word is actually an attempt to imitate a whole > > conversation. > > >> > > >> Second, the Crisis at Three. Vygotsky spends a lot of time discussing > > the > > >> "Seven Stars"--the symptoms of the "Terrible Twos" and "Threenagehood" > > >> noted by harried parents everywhere. But by the end of his analysis > it's > > >> clear that what really happens is a new relationship between wish and > > will: > > >> in extreme cases, the child actually wishes for one thing (e.g. > > compromise) > > >> and wills the opposite (the everlasting "No!"). Again, neither the > > >> personality moments as such nor the environmental ones change, but > > there is > > >> a separation and a sorting which allows the subordination of wish to > > will > > >> that we see in play. This isn't the kind of "aha" moment that Marc is > > >> offering us at all: Vygotsky actually calls it the "antipode" of > future > > >> will, because instead of enabling will it actually paralyzes it. But > it > > is > > >> indubitably a key moment in the development of the relation of > > personality > > >> to environmental moments that we see in "perizhivanie". > > >> > > >> Thirdly, the Crisis at Seven. I think Gonzalez Rey makes a total hash > of > > >> this, and I get very cross when I read his article. It is not true > that > > the > > >> essence of perizhivanie remained a mystery to Vygotsky simply because > > he no > > >> longer subscribes to "the aesthetic reaction" and "catharsis" and > other > > >> notions that he toyed with in Psych of Art (he's no longer doing > > >> experiments on changes in breathing rate when people read the works of > > >> Bunin either!). It might be true that he never offered a system of > facts > > >> and methodological procedures for perezivanie, but that was only > because > > >> one already existed, for example in the work of Wallon and Stern and > > >> others. It is demonstrably not true that when Vygotsky says that the > > speech > > >> environment of those around him does not change when the child learns > to > > >> talk at one, he is not "profoundly contradictory with the concept of > > >> sense": when you read the quotation in context, it is very clear that > > what > > >> he is referring to are the kinds of absolute indicators used by > Zalkind: > > >> how often the parents read the newspapers, the dialect they speak, and > > >> their educational background. These do not change, and if the child > > wants > > >> to make sense, these are the factors the child will have to relate to. > > >> > > >> Vygotsky gives the example of a child who is severely retarded. The > > child > > >> wants to play with other children and is rejected. The child walks > down > > the > > >> street and the other children follow, laughing. The child is shrieked > > at, > > >> insulted, but as soon as the humiliation stops, the child is perfectly > > >> happy with himself. Vygotsky points out that the child is not able to > > >> "co-generalize" the "perizhivanie" of the humiliations: each is > > unpleasant, > > >> but they are entirely separate and cannot be connected with any > internal > > >> sense of inferiority. A normal child, however, is able to > "internalize" > > >> these humiliations and consequently develops a sense of inferiority. > We > > can > > >> see that what has happened is the insertion of what Vygotsky calls an > > >> "intellectual" moment: an inner layer, which is what distinguishes > later > > >> Chaplin movies from earlier ones (again, Vygotsky's example, not > mine!) > > and > > >> what brings about the "loss of directness and naivete" that we see in > > >> pre-schoolers. > > >> > > >> I think that the reason people find "perizhivanie" so hard to work > with > > >> is the same reason that they find "word meaning" hard to work with: it > > >> develops. The feeling of drinking milk as the infant drinks it is > > >> perizhivanie, and the thought of being humiliated when you are mulling > > it > > >> over and contemplating revenge is also perizhivanie, and only a > profound > > >> analysis which includes ontogenetic development and not just learning > > will > > >> show the inner link between them. It's for that reason that I think > that > > >> "activity" is not a useful unit of analysis and I am much more > inclined > > to > > >> use your word "project", so long as it can include what Vygotsky calls > > >> "inner activeness". > > >> > > >> Vygotsky says: > > >> > > >> > > >> ????? ? ?????????, ?????????? ? ?. ?., ? ???? ???? ? ?????????? > > >> ???????????, ??? ?????????? ???????????? ??????????????? ????????? > > >> ??????????????? ?? ??????? ? ??????? ?????????????. ??? ??? ????? > ????? > > >> ?????????? ?????????? ? ???????? ???????? ??????????? ? ???, ???, ? ?? > > >> ????? ??? ? ?????????? ???????? ??? ?????????? ???????????? > ???????????? > > >> ???????????????? ????? ? ?????????, ??????? ???????????, ? ???????? > > >> ???????? ?? ????? ???????????? ?????????????? ???????????, > ???????????? > > >> ??????????? ?????????? ?????????? ?? ????????? ? ??????? ????????????. > > ??? > > >> ??? ???????, ??????? ????? ??????????, ? ?? ????? ????? ?? ?????? ??? > > ????? > > >> ???-??????, ???, ? ???????? ????????? ?????????????? ??????? ? > > ?????????? > > >> ????????????. > > >> > > >> When I think, remember, etc. I am dealing withinner activeness; this > > >> psychological process of inner activity is not directly linked to any > > >> external activity. The new form of inner activeness in the School Age > > >> consists of this: that while during the preschool years these inner > > >> activities demonstrated an immediate link with action, with external > > >> activeness, in the school years we have a relative autonomy which > > emerges, > > >> inner activeness which is relatively independent of external > activities. > > >> Here is already a child who can think, at the same time when he is > > doing or > > >> seeing something, one in whom has emerged a differentiation of inner > and > > >> outer activities. > > >> > > >> David Kellogg > > >> Macquarie University > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 10:07 AM, Andy Blunden > > >> ablunden@mira.net>> wrote: > > >> > > >> David: "Are words really units?" > > >> > > >> Well, firstly, "units" is a *relative* term. That is, > > >> the question is: are words units of something, some > > >> complex process subject to analysis. And which? > > >> > > >> Secondly, according to Vygotsky, "no." The concept > > >> Vygotsky proposes as a unit is "word meaning" which he > > >> says is a unity of sound and meaning. The sound is an > > >> artefact, which, detached from its meaningful > > >> utterance in a transactional context is just a thing, > > >> viz., a word. Whereas "word meaning" is an > > >> arrtefact-mediated action, a unit of human social > > >> activity. > > >> > > >> It is true that words can be countable or mass > > >> according to context, but I wasn't talking about words > > >> was I? I was talking about word meaning. > > >> > > >> Andy > > >> > > >> ------------------------------------------------------------ > > >> Andy Blunden > > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy > > >> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective- > > decision-making > > >> > >> decision-making> > > >> > > >> On 8/01/2017 7:59 AM, David Kellogg wrote: > > >> > > >> Are words really units? When we look at their > > >> ideational meaning (that is, > > >> their logical and experiential content--their > > >> capacity for representing and > > >> linking together human experiences) they seem to > > >> fall into two very > > >> different categories: lexical words like > > >> "perezhivanie" or "sense" or > > >> "personality" of "individual" and grammatical > > >> words like "of", or "might", > > >> or "is". The lexical words seem to behave like > > >> units--they are bounded, > > >> discrete, and, as Andy would say, "countable" (the > > >> problem is that almost > > >> all nouns are both countable and uncountable > > >> depending on the context you > > >> put them in, so this distinction is really not as > > >> essential as Andy seems > > >> to assume). But the more grammatical words seem to > > >> be elements of some > > >> larger unit, which we can call wording. > > >> > > >> Veresov and Fleer come up against this problem > > >> with "edintsvo" and > > >> "edintsa". Of course, as they say, the two words > > >> are distinct. But this > > >> doesn't necessarily mean that the former always > > >> corresponds to "unity" in > > >> English and the latter is always "unit". If you > > >> look at the paragraph they > > >> translate on 330, you can see that Vygotsky starts > > >> with an idea that is > > >> quite "synoptic" and is well expressed by "unit". > > >> But in the last sentence > > >> there is a sense that "perezhivanie" is a > > >> meta-stable unit--one that > > >> remains self-similar only through a process of > > >> thorough change, like a > > >> bicycle whose every part is replaced--and in > > >> English is it is better to > > >> express this idea with "unity". The problem is > > >> that the differences between > > >> "edintsvo" and "edintsva" in Russian is a matter > > >> of gender (I think) and > > >> not simply abstractness, and as a result the > > >> English version, which cannot > > >> use the resource of gender,has to rely on > > >> abstractness, so the words > > >> "unity" and "unit" are somewhat more distinct and > > >> less linked than > > >> "edintsvo" and "edintsva". > > >> > > >> There are other problems that are similar. When > > >> Gonzalez Rey uses the word > > >> "final moment" to refer to the final period of > > >> Vygotsky's thinking, he > > >> leaves the anglophone reader the impression that > > >> he is referring to > > >> Vygotsky's deathbed thoughts. On the other hand, > > >> when Veresov and Fleer use > > >> "factor" to translate the same Russian word that > > >> Gonzalez Rey is using, > > >> they are giving us something more quantitative > > >> than Vygotsky intended, and > > >> their translation of "dalee nerazloshim'im > > >> chastyami etava edinstva" > > >> into "vital and further indivisible part of the > > >> whole" is quite opaque in > > >> English (notice that here Veresov and Fleer use > > >> "whole" to translate > > >> "edinstva" rather than "unit"!) At some point you > > >> have to accept that you > > >> can change Russian words into English words as if > > >> you were exchanging > > >> rubles for dollars, but you still won't be able to > > >> buy a samovar at Walmart. > > >> > > >> David Kellogg > > >> Macquarie University > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 5:21 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > > >> > > > >> wrote: > > >> > > >> Larry, all, > > >> > > >> our arguments in the 2014 address a science > > >> education literature in which > > >> the constructivist perspective is the leading > > >> perspective; We note that the > > >> assertion that people learn from experience is > > >> everywhere taken for granted > > >> but nowhere accounted for. We resort to > > >> pragmatist and phenomenological > > >> literature along with Vygotsky's insights to > > >> point out the need to account > > >> for learning as something that cannot be the > > >> result of an individual's > > >> construction; in experience there is always > > >> something in excess of what you > > >> intended, and this is a basic feature of > > >> doing, of performing. I take that > > >> to be your "trans" in the trans/zhivanie word, > > >> Larry, which already is > > >> denoted in the word PERezhivanie. > > >> > > >> But I do not wish to move our discussion too > > >> far away from Marc's paper > > >> and the Perezhivanie special issue. We also > > >> risk disengaging many that have > > >> not have the privilege we've had to have the > > >> time to read so many articles > > >> in just few days into the new year. I think we > > >> are a point in the > > >> discussion where a pretty clear point of > > >> agreement/disagreement, and > > >> therefore of possibility for growth, has been > > >> reached with regard to the > > >> view of perezhivanie as "an experience" and as > > >> the "working over it". I > > >> think that to allow as many as possible to > > >> follow, and hopefully also > > >> engage, I think it will be helpful to bring > > >> the diverse perspectives and > > >> theoretical accounts to matter in accounting > > >> for some actual material. And > > >> there are a number of cases described in the > > >> articles, including Marc's > > >> case of a teacher, as well as everyday facts, > > >> such as those brought by > > >> Beth, and in Beth's article... > > >> > > >> I take the task for myself too, but Saturday > > >> morning need to attend to > > >> other things! > > >> A > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> ________________________________________ > > >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >> > > >> > >> > > > >> on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com > > >> > > >> > >> > > > >> Sent: 07 January 2017 18:26 > > >> To: Andy Blunden; Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended > > >> Mind, Culture, Activity; > > >> Larry Purss > > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and > > >> Perezhivanie! > > >> > > >> Andy, Peter, i hope the intention to move > > >> beyond politeness to struggle > > >> with this topic materializes. > > >> In this vein i want to introduce exploration > > >> of the 'excess' of actual > > >> over intended meaning as he sketched his > > >> introduction to 'experience'. > > >> > > >> Citing Dewey, Alfredo says that this excess of > > >> actual learning over > > >> intended learning INCLUDES what Dewey refers > > >> to as 'attitudes' and these > > >> 'attitudes' are FUNDAMENTALLY what count in > > >> the future. > > >> Alfredo and Roth then add this summary > > >> statement : > > >> > > >> There is therefore, a need to theorize > > >> experience in terms that do not > > >> assume control and rationality as the sine qua > > >> non of learning. It also > > >> implies a need to develop analytical accounts > > >> that retain the 'uncertainty' > > >> that is an 'integral part' of human experience. > > >> > > >> Where are Alfredo and Roth leading us with > > >> this sketch of experience? To > > >> highlight 'attitudes' that occur in the excess > > >> of actual over intended > > >> learning? The word 'attitudes' generates > > >> images of (atmosphere) and (moods) > > >> that 'flow' like cascading waterfalls that can > > >> be imaged as (force) or as > > >> (receptive). Attitudes that flow to places > > >> where they are received within a > > >> certain attitude of care and concern. Not as > > >> forceful an image as moving > > >> only with control and rationality. Describing > > >> 'weaker' thought that > > >> remains uncertain but that also opens us to > > >> the other's peril and plight. > > >> Possibly a post-analytic motion that exceeds > > >> the intended by living-through > > >> the actual that develops 'attitudes' that are > > >> fundamentally what count for > > >> the future. > > >> > > >> > > >> Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > >> > > >> From: Andy Blunden > > >> Sent: January 7, 2017 5:00 AM > > >> To: Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, > > >> Activity > > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and > > >> Perezhivanie! > > >> > > >> OK Peter, what you say is all very true I am > > >> sure, but it > > >> entails conflating activity and action (as > > >> mass nouns) and > > >> context and mediation, and makes the required > > >> distinction > > >> much like one could find multiple meanings for > > >> the word > > >> "and" by listing the different phrases and > > >> clauses which can > > >> be linked by "and." > > >> > > >> Andy > > >> > > >> ------------------------------ > > ------------------------------ > > >> Andy Blunden > > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy > > >> > > >> http://www.brill.com/products/ > > book/origins-collective-decisi > > >> on-making > > >> > >> decision-making> > > >> > > >> On 7/01/2017 11:42 PM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > > >> > > >> Let me try to illustrate. > > >> > > >> Reading as mediated action: The > > >> cultural-historical > > >> context of reading mediates how one's > > >> attention and > > >> response are channeled in socially > > >> constructed ways. So, > > >> in one setting, say at home or reading in > > >> the company of > > >> friends, a novel might bring a reader to > > >> tears, or invite > > >> readers to share personal stories that > > >> parallel those of > > >> the plot lines, or laugh out loud. But > > >> another setting, a > > >> formal school or university class, would > > >> have historical > > >> values and practices that mute emotional > > >> and personal > > >> responses, and promote a more sober, > > >> analytic way of > > >> reading and talking that fits with > > >> specific historical > > >> critical conventions and genres, and > > >> discourages others. > > >> > > >> Reading as mediating action: The act of > > >> reading can be > > >> transformational. In reading about an > > >> talking about a > > >> character's actions, a reader might > > >> reconsider a value > > >> system, become more sympathetic to real > > >> people who > > >> resemble oppressed characters, etc. In > > >> other words, > > >> reading a text may serve a mediational > > >> process in which > > >> textual ideas and exemplars enable a > > >> reader to think > > >> differently. > > >> > > >> *From:*Andy Blunden > > >> [mailto:ablunden@mira.net > > >> ] > > >> *Sent:* Saturday, January 7, 2017 6:28 AM > > >> *To:* Peter Smagorinsky > >> >; eXtended Mind, > > >> Culture, Activity > >> > > > >> *Subject:* Re: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year > > >> and Perezhivanie! > > >> > > >> Can you explain in a paragraph or two,. > > >> Peter, rather than > > >> asking us all to read 10,000 words to > > >> extract an answer? > > >> > > >> Andy > > >> > > >> ------------------------------ > > >> ------------------------------ > > >> > > >> Andy Blunden > > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy > > >> > > >> > > >> http://www.brill.com/products/ > > >> book/origins-collective-decision-making > > >> collective- > > >> decision-making> > > >> > > >> > > >> On 7/01/2017 11:23 PM, Peter Smagorinsky > > >> wrote: > > >> > > >> Andy and others, I tried to work out > > >> the mediated/mediating question > > >> > > >> in the area of reading....see if this helps. > > >> > > >> Smagorinsky, P., & O'Donnell-Allen, > > >> C. (1998). Reading as mediated > > >> > > >> and mediating action: Composing meaning for > > >> literature through multimedia > > >> interpretive texts. Reading Research > > >> Quarterly, 33, 198-226. Available > > >> athttp://www.petersmagorinsky. > net/About/PDF/RRQ/RRQ1998.pdf > > >> net/About/PDF/RRQ/RRQ1998.pdf> > > >> > > >> -----Original Message----- > > >> > > >> From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >> > > >> > >> .ucsd.edu > > >> > > > >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ > > >> > > >> > > >> mailman.ucsd.edu ] On > > >> Behalf Of Andy Blunden > > >> > > >> Sent: Friday, January 6, 2017 7:12 PM > > >> > > >> To:xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >> > > >> > >> > > > >> > > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year > > >> and Perezhivanie! > > >> > > >> I have never understood this supposed > > >> distinction, Alfredo, between > > >> > > >> "mediated activity" and "mediating activity" > > >> given that all activity is > > >> mediated and all activity mediates. > > >> > > >> Also, could you spell out what you > > >> mean by the "tension" > > >> > > >> between perezhivanie as meaning and > > >> perezhivanie as struggle. > > >> > > >> Andy > > >> > > >> ------------------------------ > > >> ------------------------------ > > >> > > >> Andy Blunden > > >> > > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> http://www.brill.com/products/ > book/origins-collective- > > >> collective- > > > > > >> > > >> decision-making > > >> > > >> On 5/01/2017 6:26 PM, Alfredo Jornet > > >> Gil wrote: > > >> > > >> Thanks Marc for your careful > > >> response. > > >> > > >> I am familiar to Vygotsky's > > >> notion of cultural mediation and I > > >> > > >> am aware and acknowledge that it was > > >> elaborated as a means to overcome > > >> dualism, and that it is not analog to a > > >> computational approach. > > >> > > >> When I brought the computing > > >> analogy, I did so with regard not > > >> > > >> to the concept of cultural mediation in > > >> general, but to the way it can be > > >> (and is) deployed analytically. I react to > > >> what it seems to me a dichotomy > > >> between a "meaning" as something that is > > >> static (thereby a form of > > >> "representation" or reflection of the relation > > >> with the environment instead > > >> of?refraction)?? and the > > >> experiencing-as-struggling, which is described > > >> as?transformation or change. If so, mediation > > >> here would seem to be part of > > >> a methodological device that first dissects "a > > >> type of meaning" from "a > > >> type of activity" (or a given state from the > > >> process that changes that > > >> state), and then unites it by adding the term > > >> "mediation." And this may be > > >> my misreading, but in that (mis)reading (which > > >> perhaps is mostly due to the > > >> fact that in your empirical illustration only > > >> the initial and end product, > > >> i.e., perezhivanie, are described, but not the > > >> experiencing-as-struggle, > > >> that is, the moving between the two), > > >> mediation here seems to do as > > >> analytical concept precisely what you were > > >> afraid our monism was doing: > > >> explaining nothing. Only the end products but > > >> not the process of producing > > >> perezhivanie are revealed. This may be > > >> problematic if one attends to what > > >> Veresov argues in the paper I shared > > >> yesterday, where he defends the notion > > >> of mediation but also specifies that Vygotsky > > >> speaks of *mediating > > >> activity* (as opposed to *mediated* activity). > > >> That is, not mediation by > > >> signs as products, but mediating activity as > > >> the activity of producing > > >> signs (which again is an activity of producing > > >> social relations, perhaps > > >> what you refer as "holistic meanings"?). What > > >> do you think? > > >> > > >> I did not think you were trying > > >> to deny the influence of > > >> > > >> Spinoza, and I do not think we ever said that > > >> Perezhivanie was primarily a > > >> move from Cartesian Dualism to Monism, as you > > >> suggest in your post. I copy > > >> and paste from my prior post: "The fact is > > >> that Vygotsky was building a > > >> theory on the unity of the affect and the > > >> intellect that was to be grounded > > >> on Spinoza, and what we try to do is to > > >> explore how perezhivanie, as a > > >> concept being developed during the same period > > >> (but not finalised or > > >> totally settled!), could be seen from the > > >> perspective of the Spinozist > > >> Vygotsky." > > >> > > >> I totally believe that bringing > > >> the distinction between > > >> > > >> perezhivanie as meaning, and perezhivanie as > > >> struggle, is totally relevant, > > >> and Beth Ferholt's vignettes of Where the Wild > > >> Things Are do indeed > > >> illustrate this. We really need to address > > >> this tension, which as Beth's > > >> examples and as our own everyday experience > > >> shows, is a tension that > > >> matters not just to books and to theories but > > >> to living persons (children, > > >> teachers), a tension that moreover is present > > >> and mentioned in all the > > >> articles of the symposium. The papers offer > > >> different proposals, and I > > >> think is so great we have the chance to > > >> discuss them! I too, as you, am > > >> very interesting in hearing others about the > > >> questions you had concerning > > >> sense and meaning. > > >> > > >> Alfredo > > >> > > >> From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >> > > >> xmca-l-bounces@mailman > > >> .ucsd.edu > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> > > > >> xmca-l-bounces@mailman > > >> .ucsd.edu > > >> > > > >> on behalf of Marc > > >> > > >> Clara > > >> > > >> > >> > > > >> > >> > > > >> > > >> Sent: 04 January 2017 22:31 > > >> > > >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > >> > > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New > > >> Year and Perezhivanie! > > >> > > >> Thank you very much, Alfredo, for > > >> sharing this excellent paper by > > >> > > >> Veresov, and thanks also for your > > >> responses, which really helped > > >> > > >> me to > > >> > > >> better understand your points. My > > >> main doubt about your proposal > > >> > > >> was/is caused by the statement > > >> that the idea of cultural > > >> > > >> mediation/mediator implies a > > >> cartesian dualism. This shocks me > > >> > > >> because, to me, the idea of > > >> cultural mediation is absolutely > > >> > > >> crucial > > >> > > >> (in fact, the keystone) for the > > >> construction of a monist (and > > >> > > >> scientific) psychology that does > > >> not forget mind -that is, a > > >> > > >> cultural > > >> > > >> psychology. From your response, > > >> however, I realized that we may > > >> > > >> be > > >> > > >> approaching the idea of mediation > > >> in different ways. I talk of > > >> > > >> mediation and mediators in a > > >> quite restricted way. The starting > > >> > > >> point > > >> > > >> of my understanding of mediation > > >> is a dialectical relationship > > >> > > >> (organic, transactional) between > > >> the subject and the world > > >> > > >> (Vygotsky departs from the scheme > > >> stimulus-response, from reflexology). > > >> > > >> This relationship, that Vygotsky > > >> calls primitive psychological > > >> > > >> functions, would be basically > > >> biological. However, in human > > >> > > >> beings > > >> > > >> this relationship is mediated by > > >> cultural means: signs and > > >> > > >> tools; or > > >> > > >> primary, secondary and terciary > > >> artifacts. These cultural means > > >> > > >> reorganize the primitive > > >> functions (dialectic S-O relationship), > > >> > > >> which > > >> > > >> become then higher psychological > > >> functions (S-M-O) (see for > > >> > > >> example, > > >> > > >> The problem of the cultural > > >> development of the child, in The > > >> > > >> Vygotsky > > >> > > >> Reader). Now, the subject, the > > >> cultural mediators, and the > > >> > > >> object form > > >> > > >> an inseparable dialectical unit, > > >> so that the subject acts on > > >> > > >> (transforms) the object through > > >> the prism of the cultural > > >> > > >> mediators, > > >> > > >> the object acts on (transforms) > > >> the subject also through the > > >> > > >> prism of > > >> > > >> the cultural mediators, and the > > >> cultural means are themselves > > >> > > >> also > > >> > > >> transformed as a consequence of > > >> their mediation in this > > >> > > >> continuous > > >> > > >> dynamic dialectical tension. > > >> Here, for me, it is important the > > >> > > >> idea > > >> > > >> that the cultural means are as > > >> material (if we assume a > > >> > > >> materialist > > >> > > >> monism) as all the rest of the > > >> world; in fact, are parts of the > > >> > > >> material world which become signs > > >> or tools (and can be therefore > > >> > > >> socially distributed). This > > >> permits the introduction of the > > >> > > >> scientific > > >> > > >> study of mind-consciousness (as > > >> mediating systems of signs), > > >> > > >> because > > >> > > >> mind is not anymore something > > >> immaterial and unobservable, but > > >> > > >> it is > > >> > > >> as material and observable as the > > >> rest of the natural world. It > > >> > > >> is > > >> > > >> from this view that, for me, the > > >> idea of cultural mediation is > > >> > > >> the > > >> > > >> keystone of a monist psychology > > >> that includes mind. Thus, when I > > >> > > >> speak > > >> > > >> of mediators, I refer to the > > >> cultural means which mediate in the > > >> > > >> S-O > > >> > > >> dialectics; I am especially > > >> interested in signs/secondary > > >> > > >> artifacts. > > >> > > >> Here, it is perhaps necessary to > > >> insist that when I talk of > > >> > > >> studying > > >> > > >> mediators (and their semantic > > >> structure), this doesn't mean that > > >> > > >> they > > >> > > >> are taken out from the activity > > >> (the flux of live) in which they > > >> > > >> mediate (since out of activity > > >> they are not signs anymore); > > >> > > >> here, I > > >> > > >> think Vygotsky tries again to > > >> overcome another old dichotomy, the > > >> > > >> functionalism-structuralism one. > > >> I hope that all this makes also > > >> > > >> clear the difference between this view and > > >> that of computational > > >> psychologies (which in general are profoundly > > >> and explicitly dualist and > > >> not dialectic). > > >> > > >> Back to perezhivanie, I'm not > > >> obviously trying to deny the > > >> > > >> influence > > >> > > >> of Spinoza on Vygotsky's thinking > > >> (this is explicit in Vygotsky's > > >> > > >> writings, especially in "The > > >> teaching about emotions", in the > > >> > > >> Vol.6 of > > >> > > >> the Collected Works). But I have > > >> doubts that Vygotsky's > > >> > > >> introduction > > >> > > >> of the concept of perezhivanie is > > >> to be regarded primarily as a > > >> > > >> movement towards monism (from a > > >> previous cartesian dualism), and > > >> > > >> that > > >> > > >> this movement questions the > > >> concept of cultural mediation. > > >> > > >> Instead, > > >> > > >> and I think that this is in line > > >> with some of Gonzalez-Rey > > >> > > >> observations in his paper, my > > >> impression is that the > > >> > > >> introduction of > > >> > > >> the concept of perezhivanie > > >> responds more to a movement (a > > >> > > >> further > > >> > > >> step) towards holism (something > > >> that, in my understanding, can > > >> > > >> also be > > >> > > >> found in Spinoza). Thus, I think > > >> that the word meaning is still > > >> > > >> the > > >> > > >> unit of analysis in the last > > >> Vygotsky -and therefore, the idea of > > >> > > >> cultural mediation is still > > >> crucial (in fact, in The problem of > > >> > > >> the > > >> > > >> environment, he connects the > > >> concept of perezhivanie, which has > > >> > > >> just > > >> > > >> introduced, to the development of > > >> word meaning [p.345-346, also > > >> > > >> cited > > >> > > >> in my paper]). However, in my > > >> view, in the last Vygotsky the > > >> > > >> focus is > > >> > > >> not anymore primarily on the > > >> word-meaning as formed for things > > >> > > >> (or > > >> > > >> collections of things, as in the > > >> ontogenetic research with > > >> > > >> Sakharov), but the focus is now in the > > >> formation of meaning for holistic > > >> situations. > > >> > > >> Best regards, > > >> > > >> Marc. > > >> > > >> 2017-01-03 19:16 GMT+01:00 > > >> Alfredo Jornet Gil< > > >> > > >> a.j.gil@iped.uio.no > > >> > > > >> > >> >: > > >> > > >> Hi Marc, all, > > >> > > >> thanks for joining and for > > >> your interesting work, which I > > >> > > >> follow > > >> > > >> since I became aware of it. I > > >> appreciate the way in your > > >> > > >> paper you > > >> > > >> show careful and honest > > >> attention to the texts of the authors > > >> > > >> involved, but perhaps most of > > >> all I appreciate that the > > >> > > >> paper makes > > >> > > >> the transformational > > >> dimension related to struggle and change > > >> > > >> salient, a dimension all > > >> papers deemed central to > > >> > > >> perezhivanie. And I > > >> > > >> have learned more about > > >> Vasilyuk by reading your paper. But > > >> > > >> I also > > >> > > >> see that we have approached > > >> the question of perezhivanie > > >> > > >> differently > > >> > > >> and I think that addressing > > >> the questions that you raise > > >> > > >> concerning > > >> > > >> our article may be a good way > > >> to both respond and discuss > > >> > > >> your paper. > > >> > > >> I am aware that our use of > > >> the term monism may be > > >> > > >> problematic to > > >> > > >> some, and N. Veresov, who has > > >> recently written about this > > >> > > >> (see > > >> > > >> attached article), warns > > >> against the dangers of simply > > >> > > >> moving from > > >> > > >> dualism into an > > >> undifferentiating monism that relativizes > > >> > > >> everything, > > >> > > >> making development > > >> un-studiable. This seems to be the way in > > >> > > >> which > > >> > > >> you have understood our > > >> argument, and of course this is not > > >> > > >> what we are or want to be doing. > > >> > > >> Probably many will think that > > >> *dialectical materialism* > > >> > > >> rather than > > >> > > >> monism is the proper term, > > >> and I could agree with them; we > > >> > > >> do in fact > > >> > > >> use dialectical materialism > > >> there and elsewhere. Yet, we > > >> > > >> wanted to > > >> > > >> emphasise the Spinozist > > >> influence (an influence that also > > >> > > >> runs > > >> > > >> through Marx) and so we found > > >> it appropriate to use the term > > >> > > >> monism, > > >> > > >> a term that Vygotsky uses > > >> before arguing that Spinoza > > >> > > >> "develops an essentially materialistic view" > > >> > > >> (Collected Works, Vol. 6, p. > > >> 124). For us, the aim is > > >> > > >> working out > > >> > > >> ways to empirically examine > > >> and formulate problems in ways > > >> > > >> that do > > >> > > >> not reify a mind-body dualism. > > >> > > >> Although overcoming dualism > > >> is foundational to the CHAT > > >> > > >> paradigm, I > > >> > > >> would however not say that > > >> Vygotsky did get to solve all of > > >> > > >> the > > >> > > >> problems that Cartesian > > >> dualism had created for psychology, > > >> > > >> even > > >> > > >> though he recognised those > > >> problems brilliantly as early as > > >> > > >> in the > > >> > > >> "Crisis". It should suffice > > >> to cite Vygotsky's own remarks, > > >> > > >> which we quote in the paper (and which A.N. > > >> > > >> Leont'ev mentions in the > > >> introduction to the collected > > >> > > >> works), where > > >> > > >> Vygotsky explicitly critiques > > >> some of his own prior ideas > > >> > > >> for failing > > >> > > >> to overcome dualism. We agree > > >> with those who, like F. G. > > >> > > >> Rey, see > > >> > > >> Vygotsky's project as a > > >> developing rather than as a > > >> > > >> finalised one. > > >> > > >> The fact is that Vygotsky was > > >> building a theory on the unity > > >> > > >> of the > > >> > > >> affect and the intellect that > > >> was to be grounded on Spinoza, > > >> > > >> and what > > >> > > >> we try to do is to explore > > >> how perezhivanie, as a concept > > >> > > >> being > > >> > > >> developed during the same > > >> period (but not finalised or > > >> > > >> totally > > >> > > >> settled!), could be seen from > > >> the perspective of the > > >> > > >> Spinozist Vygotsky. > > >> > > >> As you note, in our article > > >> we argue that, if one takes the > > >> > > >> Spinozist > > >> > > >> one-substance approach, > > >> classical concepts used in > > >> > > >> non-classical > > >> > > >> psychology, at least in the > > >> way they are commonly used in > > >> > > >> the current > > >> > > >> literature, should be > > >> revised. One such concept is > > >> > > >> mediation. And I > > >> > > >> personally do not have much > > >> of a problem when mediation is > > >> > > >> used to > > >> > > >> denote the fundamental fact > > >> that every thing exists always > > >> > > >> through > > >> > > >> *another*, never in and of > > >> itself. But I do think that it is > > >> > > >> problematic to identify > > >> MEDIATORS, such as "a meaning", as a > > >> > > >> means to > > >> > > >> account for or explain > > >> developmental processes and learning > > >> > > >> events, > > >> > > >> precisely because it is > > >> there, at least in my view, that > > >> > > >> dualism creeps in. > > >> > > >> For example, I find it > > >> paradoxical that you are concerned > > >> > > >> that our > > >> > > >> monist approach risks turning > > >> perezhivanie into a useless > > >> > > >> category > > >> > > >> because it may be used to > > >> explain everything and nothing, > > >> > > >> and yet you > > >> > > >> do not seem to have a problem > > >> using the term mediation to > > >> > > >> account for > > >> > > >> the transformation of > > >> perezhivanie without clearly > > >> > > >> elaborating on how > > >> > > >> mediation does change > > >> anything or what it looks like as a > > >> > > >> real > > >> > > >> process. How is it different > > >> saying that a perezhivanie > > >> > > >> mediates the > > >> > > >> experiencing-as-struggle from > > >> simply saying that it > > >> > > >> "affects" or > > >> > > >> "determines" it? Indeed, if > > >> perezhivanie mediates > > >> > > >> experiencing-as-struggle, > > >> does not experiencing-as-struglgle > > >> > > >> too > > >> > > >> mediate perezhivanie? And do > > >> not both may be said to mediate > > >> > > >> development, or development mediate them? Is > > >> not this explaining everything > > >> and nothing? > > >> > > >> I do believe you can argue > > >> that there is a difference between > > >> > > >> mediation and classical > > >> psychology's cause-effect relations, > > >> > > >> but to > > >> > > >> show this you need to dig > > >> into the dialectical underpinnings > > >> > > >> of the > > >> > > >> theory. In your paper, you > > >> offer a nice analysis of a lovely > > >> > > >> case of > > >> > > >> a teacher who, in dealing > > >> with a challenge with one of her > > >> > > >> students, > > >> > > >> changes her perezhivanie. I > > >> think you can rightly argue that > > >> > > >> there is > > >> > > >> a semiotic transformation, > > >> and I fully support your > > >> > > >> statement that by > > >> > > >> studying discourse we can > > >> empirically approach questions of > > >> > > >> psychological development. > > >> The contradictions you show as > > >> > > >> being > > >> > > >> involved and resolved > > >> resonate really well with what I > > >> > > >> experience as > > >> > > >> a parent or as a teacher in > > >> the classroom. Yet, without > > >> > > >> unpacking > > >> > > >> what this "mediation" taking > > >> place between one perezhivanie > > >> > > >> and the > > >> > > >> next one means as a concrete > > >> and real, the same analysis > > >> > > >> could be done taking an information processing > > >> approach: > > >> > > >> there is an situation that is > > >> processed (represented?) in > > >> > > >> one way, > > >> > > >> which then leads to a > > >> (cognitive) dissonance, and then there > > >> > > >> is a > > >> > > >> cognitive resolution by means > > >> of which the situation is > > >> > > >> presented > > >> > > >> differently in consciousness > > >> (indeed, when seen in this way, > > >> > > >> the term > > >> > > >> perezhivanie and the term > > >> "representation" become almost > > >> > > >> indistinguishable). How is > > >> mediation, as an analytical > > >> > > >> concept, > > >> > > >> helping here? And most > > >> importantly to the question of > > >> > > >> perezhivanie, > > >> > > >> how is this analysis going to > > >> show the internal connection > > >> > > >> between > > >> > > >> intellect and affect that > > >> Vygotsky formulates as > > >> > > >> constitutive of the notion of perezhivanie? > > >> > > >> I believe that the key lies > > >> in understanding what Vygotsky > > >> > > >> means when > > >> > > >> he says that perezhivanie is > > >> a unit of analysis. I will not > > >> > > >> repeat > > >> > > >> here what already is written > > >> in at least a couple of the > > >> > > >> articles in > > >> > > >> the special issue (Blunden, > > >> ours), that is the difference > > >> > > >> between > > >> > > >> analysis by elements and unit > > >> analysis (Vygotsky 1987). A > > >> > > >> unit > > >> > > >> analysis approach is > > >> consistent with Spinoza, for whom > > >> > > >> cause-effect > > >> > > >> explanations were not > > >> adequate, requiring instead an > > >> > > >> understanding of > > >> > > >> self-development, > > >> perezhivanie as a kernel cell for the > > >> > > >> development > > >> > > >> of personality. And I think > > >> you may be after this in your > > >> > > >> article in > > > > > > > > > From lpscholar2@gmail.com Mon Jan 16 10:22:29 2017 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2017 10:22:29 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! In-Reply-To: References: <1483344752182.40904@iped.uio.no> <1483467423798.57819@iped.uio.no> <1483601196884.31418@iped.uio.no> <5df5e870-3ef8-70d6-0c17-f8647ba17e62@mira.net> <587124d9.d957620a.4a5a8.bd56@mx.google.com> <1483820996800.91513@iped.uio.no> <1484253698990.7728@iped.uio.no> <1484328718783.79382@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <587d0f8f.0f7d630a.cec6b.bddc@mx.google.com> David, After reading your post on structure, function, and development i came across this paragraph on page 3 of Beth and Monica?s contribution to this special issue of MCA. It is exploring ?romantic science? as a relation of?: Classical aim of explaining ?facts? Romantic aim of preserving the manifold richness of the ?subject?. As i listen to Vygotsky i also here the cadence of David Kellogg. Here is Vygotsky?s paragraph?: It is useful to distinguish (as many authors do) the static scheme of the construction of the narrative, which we may call its ANATOMY from the dynamic scheme, which we may call its PHYSIOLOGY. We have already said that each story has a SPECIFIC structure that differs from the structure of the material upon which it is based. It is also obvious that every poetic technique of ?treating? the material is purposeful, it is introduced with some goal or other, and it ?governs? some SPECIFIC function of the story. By studying the teleology of ?the? technique (?the? function of EACH stylistic element, the purposeful direction, the teleological ?significance? of EACH component) we shall understand the very ?essence of? the story and WITNESS how a lifeless construction is TRANSformed into a ?living? organism. (Vygotsky, pp. 149-150). Now the reverse may also occur as the living organism of ?the? story becomes lifeless (meaning withdraws). But my turn is up. I hear echo?s of David?s response in the above passage as we traverse ?perezhivanie?. Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: David Kellogg Sent: January 16, 2017 2:56 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! Alfredo: Well, I think that you are doing the really difficult and beautiful work, filling in Mike's ten league boots and keeping the cats in a coherent herd. Contrary to the popular expression, though, it is possible to herd cats. Lions, for example, herd themselves, apparently because the prey they consume is too large to consume individually before it goes bad, and if they work in a pride, they don't have to work every day. House cats, on the other hand, feed on small prey in individual portions and so they are notoriously selfish and competitive. It seems to me that with the "perezhivanie" symposium, we have at last begun to hunt lion-sized prey. Perhaps I am still doing mousework, though: I think we actually disagree more than we agree. Unlike Andy, I am very willing to embrace both the label "structuralist" and the label "functionalist", so long as I can embrace them together, and add the label developmentalist: structures are as they are because they function as they do, but sometimes they function as they do for historical, developmental reasons rather than obvious and immediate ones. In the second chapter of HDHMF, Vygotsky invokes what he calls the "Jennings" principle: that is, that functions are always "functions of structure": organisms do what they are allowed to do by their organic structure and no more. For example, cats cannot herd themselves because their prey is too small. But he points out that a) organic structure is itself a product of doing things over thousands and millions of years, b) structures can be "borrowed" to do more than they are adapted for (what S.J. Gould called "exaptation") and c) none of this applies to "artificial organs", such as tools and signs, because mediational means are precisely structures "borrowed" from the environment to do more than they are adapted for. One of these supra-adaptive functions is to adapt the environment to human needs instead of vice versa. This by definition cannot be something that a tool or a sign is adapted for; you don't get tools or signs simply by adapting to the environment: you only get them by imagining how the environment can be made different and acting accordingly. Both tools and signs are the product of some quantum of conscious awareness, and neither is a creation of habit. And that is why, again quite unlike Andy, I am also happy to embrace the label of semiotic as opposed to activity theoretic. I think that although both tools and signs involve an idealization of the environment, they do not do so equally. Signs, for example, include conscious attentive idealization of the self as well (the self as part of the environment, as part of perizhivanie--as Vygotsky points out, what endures from the crisis at seven is the "self" in self-esteem and the "self" in "self respect", not the self of posing, mannerism and acting out). The flaw in Greimas is that he is uninterested this functional, this developmental aspect of structural semantics, and it is precisely this that allows us to distinguish, at three, between the child who is interested in changing the chess board as environment by playing with the pieces and the child who is interested in changing the semiotic structure of the board by playing the game, and to distinguish, at seven, between the child who is disappointed with the inferior affordances for constructing himself as a first person shooter that a chess board offers and the child who is excited by the superior affordances for constructing himself as a future grand master. . I was very interested in what you said about attention versus perception. They are developmentally linked, in Vygotsky, but functionally and thus structurally quite distinct. Volitional attention is so much a part of adult life we sometimes have to work at nonvolitional attention (!). But volitional perception occurs only in rare circumstances, e.g. the Edgar Rubin vases, Necker's cube, etc. I find myself straining to see every passing mouse as a zebra. David Kellogg Macquarie University . On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 2:31 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > Thanks, David, for such a beautiful and clarifying post. You have such a > brilliant manner to language Vygotsky in Vygotsky's language! > > I think we agree much more than we disagree, and before I turn to Andy's > very timely link to the "Fate of a Man", this may be a nice tutorial on > terminology, at least for me. > > My only problem had been seeing what to me had looked like an all too > empiricist treatment of the notion of perception in your prior post(s) > (including some older posts on micro-genesis). But I think you still agree > that part of what it takes to become an experienced chess player is being > able to ATTEND (and *attention* may be a better term than perception) to > the pieces and their position in the board in front of her in much closer > detail than the child who merely plays "with" the pieces. Thus the > "perception" in the expert may be said to be much more rich and *concrete* > than what one "perceives" by merely attending to (abstracting) color and > shape relations. But I keep thinking that perception is not the right word > here, is it? Certainly not one "element" (I use your wording below) in the > unit. But this may just be a wording problem. > > I really like your very important observation that chess produces > life-long learners, whereas the child that merely plays "with" the chess > pieces will soon find the game uninteresting. But again I don't think that > the key here is an opposition between perceiving and semiosis, but perhaps > between habit and conscious awareness (which at the end may be just > different words for saying the same thing). As a habit, the task of > grouping pieces by color involves a person-environment relation in which > the *need* for consciousness (and thereby interest!) to awaken is lesser, > thereby offering less possibilities for development. I think it is this > that you would phrase as "the environment seems to dominate". The way > habits are formed in chess, however, are such that they require of > consciousness for the operation to continue (which you may phrase as > "personality dominates more"). The relation between habit and awareness is > transformed in the higher-order activity (or form of human consciousness) > that is chess-playing. Same thing, different words? > > Alfredo > > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of David Kellogg > Sent: 13 January 2017 01:02 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > Alfredo: > > Let's apply your reasoning to the distinction between non-language, > proto-language, and language proper. Imagine a nursery in which there are > three beds, one with a child who is only week old and who responds with > pleasure to a nipple and with pain to being shaken or dropped, one with a > child who is about ten months old and has worked out a system of squeaks > and directed cries in order to get attention and deliver an affective > response, and one with a child who is nearly two and can ask for objects, > evaluate them, and reject them. As you say, perception and semiosis are at > work in each situation. But contrary to what you say, they are not equally > at work, and the outcomes are very different. > > There is a good reason why children develop: it's in their interests, both > in the long term sense in that it allows a much wider variety of outcomes > and in the short term sense in that it allows an escape from ennui. A child > who plays the "game" of putting black pieces on black squares and white > pieces on white squares will find this game very dull in a matter of hours. > A child who plays the game of chess will, in many cases, find a lifetime > vocation. Yes, there are "structures" that include perception and semiosis > in both cases, but the precise make-up isn't insignificant or irrelevant. > > One important reason why perezhivanie is such an important unit of > structure is that it at last allows us to assign real, concrete, specific > values to the influence of its two elements, personality and environment. > These vary from period to period--for example, in periods of crisis, the > personality always appears to play a leading role (e.g. proto-language in > the Crisis at One, negativism in the Crisis at Three, "acting out" in the > Crisis at Seven). During stable periods, the environment always appears to > dominate (e.g. speech proper in early childhood, play in preschool, and > thinking but not thinking-about-thinking in school age). > > Some "child-centred" pedagogies would like to treat childhood as one long > crisis. I think this is a disservice to the child, because it is precisely > during the stable periods that the critical neoformations (e.g. > protospeech) find a supporting but absolutely crucial role. The child > doesn't forget the expressiveness of intonation and stress learned in > proto-language, any more than the child who plays chess no longer > distinguishes white squares from black ones. > > David Kellogg > Macquarie University > > > > On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 7:41 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > wrote: > > > David, I admire much of what you write in your first three examples in > > your prior post. But I am reacting to your latter post on Chess. It is > the > > second or third time that you bring the CHESS example to bear in xmca, > and > > I always feel uneasy about it. > > > > I see the point that there are different developmental stages and that > > these can be best categorised according to the type of generalisation > that > > the child can engage into. Obviously, treating a piece of marble "as if" > it > > was a piece in the game of chess involves a different type of > > generalization than treating the same piece of marble as if it was a > piece > > in the game of "let's put the black pieces in black squares and white > > pieces in white squares". But I do not think that my 20 months daughter > > will put black pieces on black squares in any systematic manner simply > > because she can PERCEIVE and act upon the difference between black and > > white; and indeed I do not think that my 7 years old first daughter will > do > > any of these things with the chess pieces, considering she has never > > learned to play chess. Indeed, why would any child do that? I do strongly > > believe that to get any of my daughters to arrange the pieces by color, > > there would have first to be a TEACHING/LEARNING situation, which itself > > would involve establishing a semantic field, a field that perhaps out of > my > > ignorance I would call semiotic (sign). > > > > In my view, in both cases there are rules and therefore imagination, if > > we listen to Vygotsky's writings on play, and perhaps, as Vygotsky notes, > > there may be a difference in the "moral attitude", but I would be > cautious > > by gross divisions between perceptual and semantic structures. Yes,there > > are different levels, types, or stages in the way semantic fields are > > organised, and that playing the chess pieces as pieces of the CHESS game > > involves a qualitative leap compared to playing them as pieces in the > game > > of putting them together by shape or color; but there is a game going on > in > > both cases, and therefore a perceptual as much as a semiotic structure > > being at play. These are different semiotic contexts, as you say at the > end > > of your e-mail, but I do think that your assertion that in playing with > the > > chess pieces by color "the structure would be visual but not semiotic" > can > > be problematic and may lead to what I consider an incorrect view of the > > relation between higher and lower functions in development. > > > > Alfredo > > ________________________________________ > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > on behalf of David Kellogg > > Sent: 11 January 2017 04:50 > > To: Andy Blunden; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > > > Vygotsky's got a terrific metaphor for how "perezhivanie" is > internalized: > > it is like internalizing the rules of the game of chess. > > > > The child who doesn't know how to play chess simply plays WITH the pieces > > instead of playing them. She or he might try to create a piece-board > > structure by putting black pieces on black squares and white pieces on > > white squares, but the structure is a visual one and not a semiotic one; > > it's about color and not about meaning. The child who DOES know how to > play > > chess plays the pieces instead of playing with them. She or he too > creates > > "structures" but this time they are semiotic ones: a black knight in a > > completely different column and a completely different row, can capture a > > white pawn. > > > > The board is the same and so are the kids; the children may have very > > similar biological and very similar cultural endowments, but they do not > > have the same semiotic context at all. Hence different perezhivanie and > > different personalities. > > > > David Kellogg > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 11:54 AM, Andy Blunden > wrote: > > > > > How to understand the personality? ... i.e., the *development* of the > > > personality? > > > > > > The subject's inheritance, and The subject's experiences > > (/perezhivaniya/) > > > > > > ... just think of how you'd go about writing a good biography or > > > Bildungsroman. > > > > > > Andy > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > Andy Blunden > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > > On 11/01/2017 10:24 AM, David Kellogg wrote: > > > > > >> Andy: > > >> > > >> A good paradox! Word meaning is a unit, but the spoken word itself is > > >> just an element--a thing. We can see that this is, on the face of it, > > >> impossible: within a single holistic analysis, an element can be a > part > > of > > >> a unit, but a unit can never be a part of an element. So what you are > > >> referring to when you say that the word is a thing is the "sonic" or > > >> "phasal" quality of the word: its "acoustic" properties, its > > "phonetics". > > >> > > >> But not its phonology. The word that Vygotsky uses for "phoneme" > refers > > >> to the 1929 work of the Prague Circle, originally the Moscow Circle. > He > > is > > >> a LITTLE coy about this, because the founders, Jakobson and > Trubetskoy, > > >> were not very popular with the authorities and Vygotsky already had > > plenty > > >> of heterodox acquaintances to worry about. Nevertheless, whenever > > Vygotsky > > >> says "phoneme", we know he really means what Jakobson and Trubetskoy > > called > > >> "morphophonemes". We know this because the examples he actually > > >> gives--Russian case endings--are morpho-phonemes and not simply > > phonemes: > > >> so for example in English the sound /s/ is a simple phoneme when I say > > the > > >> word "self" but if I say "Andy's" the sound /s/ is a morpho-phoneme: a > > >> difference in sounding that makes a difference in meaning. The system > > (that > > >> is, the paradigmatic menu) of these differences in soundings are what > > the > > >> Moscow and Prague Circles called "phonology" (as OPPOSED to > phonetics), > > and > > >> this is the kind of "phoneme" that Vygotsky is really talking about. > > >> > > >> Still, you can see that it is not what he is talking about when he > says > > >> word meaning, because these units are still nowhere near big enough to > > >> describe the kinds of changes which must occur when verbal thinking > > >> develops. I feel the same way about a lot of the examples offered of > > >> "perezhivanie", including Marc's. If MacDuff's grief or Carla's > epiphany > > >> about the misbehavior of her kids being due to "outside influences" > > really > > >> is the unit of personality and experience that Vygotsky wants us to > use > > >> when we analyse the ontogenesis of personality, then it is no more > > >> appropriate than using the morpho-phoneme to analyse the whole of > verbal > > >> thinking. Just as evolution (of species) requires very different units > > from > > >> history (of classes), development, whether we are talking about verbal > > >> thinking or the personality as a whole, is going to require very > > different > > >> units from learning, whether we are talking about MacDuff or Carla. > The > > >> units must be able to develop; that is, the relationship of the > elements > > >> within them must be susceptible to many changes over time. > > >> > > >> Let me give three examples of how this happens in different > > >> "perezhivanie". They are not mine; they are Vygotsky's, and they are > all > > >> from the Pedological Lectures. > > >> > > >> First, the Crisis at One. Neither the biological nor the social > > endowment > > >> of the child greatly changes in the acquisition of speech; > nevertheless, > > >> the relationship between the personality and the environment, of which > > both > > >> personality moments and environmental ones are constituent elements, > is > > >> entirely transformed. Here we are not talking about phonemes, or even > > >> morpho-phonemes: we are talking about "wordings"--whole utterances. In > > >> Melbourne I presented some data that demonstrated this beautifully--a > > >> child's first word is actually an attempt to imitate a whole > > conversation. > > >> > > >> Second, the Crisis at Three. Vygotsky spends a lot of time discussing > > the > > >> "Seven Stars"--the symptoms of the "Terrible Twos" and "Threenagehood" > > >> noted by harried parents everywhere. But by the end of his analysis > it's > > >> clear that what really happens is a new relationship between wish and > > will: > > >> in extreme cases, the child actually wishes for one thing (e.g. > > compromise) > > >> and wills the opposite (the everlasting "No!"). Again, neither the > > >> personality moments as such nor the environmental ones change, but > > there is > > >> a separation and a sorting which allows the subordination of wish to > > will > > >> that we see in play. This isn't the kind of "aha" moment that Marc is > > >> offering us at all: Vygotsky actually calls it the "antipode" of > future > > >> will, because instead of enabling will it actually paralyzes it. But > it > > is > > >> indubitably a key moment in the development of the relation of > > personality > > >> to environmental moments that we see in "perizhivanie". > > >> > > >> Thirdly, the Crisis at Seven. I think Gonzalez Rey makes a total hash > of > > >> this, and I get very cross when I read his article. It is not true > that > > the > > >> essence of perizhivanie remained a mystery to Vygotsky simply because > > he no > > >> longer subscribes to "the aesthetic reaction" and "catharsis" and > other > > >> notions that he toyed with in Psych of Art (he's no longer doing > > >> experiments on changes in breathing rate when people read the works of > > >> Bunin either!). It might be true that he never offered a system of > facts > > >> and methodological procedures for perezivanie, but that was only > because > > >> one already existed, for example in the work of Wallon and Stern and > > >> others. It is demonstrably not true that when Vygotsky says that the > > speech > > >> environment of those around him does not change when the child learns > to > > >> talk at one, he is not "profoundly contradictory with the concept of > > >> sense": when you read the quotation in context, it is very clear that > > what > > >> he is referring to are the kinds of absolute indicators used by > Zalkind: > > >> how often the parents read the newspapers, the dialect they speak, and > > >> their educational background. These do not change, and if the child > > wants > > >> to make sense, these are the factors the child will have to relate to. > > >> > > >> Vygotsky gives the example of a child who is severely retarded. The > > child > > >> wants to play with other children and is rejected. The child walks > down > > the > > >> street and the other children follow, laughing. The child is shrieked > > at, > > >> insulted, but as soon as the humiliation stops, the child is perfectly > > >> happy with himself. Vygotsky points out that the child is not able to > > >> "co-generalize" the "perizhivanie" of the humiliations: each is > > unpleasant, > > >> but they are entirely separate and cannot be connected with any > internal > > >> sense of inferiority. A normal child, however, is able to > "internalize" > > >> these humiliations and consequently develops a sense of inferiority. > We > > can > > >> see that what has happened is the insertion of what Vygotsky calls an > > >> "intellectual" moment: an inner layer, which is what distinguishes > later > > >> Chaplin movies from earlier ones (again, Vygotsky's example, not > mine!) > > and > > >> what brings about the "loss of directness and naivete" that we see in > > >> pre-schoolers. > > >> > > >> I think that the reason people find "perizhivanie" so hard to work > with > > >> is the same reason that they find "word meaning" hard to work with: it > > >> develops. The feeling of drinking milk as the infant drinks it is > > >> perizhivanie, and the thought of being humiliated when you are mulling > > it > > >> over and contemplating revenge is also perizhivanie, and only a > profound > > >> analysis which includes ontogenetic development and not just learning > > will > > >> show the inner link between them. It's for that reason that I think > that > > >> "activity" is not a useful unit of analysis and I am much more > inclined > > to > > >> use your word "project", so long as it can include what Vygotsky calls > > >> "inner activeness". > > >> > > >> Vygotsky says: > > >> > > >> > > >> ????? ? ?????????, ?????????? ? ?. ?., ? ???? ???? ? ?????????? > > >> ???????????, ??? ?????????? ???????????? ??????????????? ????????? > > >> ??????????????? ?? ??????? ? ??????? ?????????????. ??? ??? ????? > ????? > > >> ?????????? ?????????? ? ???????? ???????? ??????????? ? ???, ???, ? ?? > > >> ????? ??? ? ?????????? ???????? ??? ?????????? ???????????? > ???????????? > > >> ???????????????? ????? ? ?????????, ??????? ???????????, ? ???????? > > >> ???????? ?? ????? ???????????? ?????????????? ???????????, > ???????????? > > >> ??????????? ?????????? ?????????? ?? ????????? ? ??????? ????????????. > > ??? > > >> ??? ???????, ??????? ????? ??????????, ? ?? ????? ????? ?? ?????? ??? > > ????? > > >> ???-??????, ???, ? ???????? ????????? ?????????????? ??????? ? > > ?????????? > > >> ????????????. > > >> > > >> When I think, remember, etc. I am dealing withinner activeness; this > > >> psychological process of inner activity is not directly linked to any > > >> external activity. The new form of inner activeness in the School Age > > >> consists of this: that while during the preschool years these inner > > >> activities demonstrated an immediate link with action, with external > > >> activeness, in the school years we have a relative autonomy which > > emerges, > > >> inner activeness which is relatively independent of external > activities. > > >> Here is already a child who can think, at the same time when he is > > doing or > > >> seeing something, one in whom has emerged a differentiation of inner > and > > >> outer activities. > > >> > > >> David Kellogg > > >> Macquarie University > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 10:07 AM, Andy Blunden > > >> ablunden@mira.net>> wrote: > > >> > > >> David: "Are words really units?" > > >> > > >> Well, firstly, "units" is a *relative* term. That is, > > >> the question is: are words units of something, some > > >> complex process subject to analysis. And which? > > >> > > >> Secondly, according to Vygotsky, "no." The concept > > >> Vygotsky proposes as a unit is "word meaning" which he > > >> says is a unity of sound and meaning. The sound is an > > >> artefact, which, detached from its meaningful > > >> utterance in a transactional context is just a thing, > > >> viz., a word. Whereas "word meaning" is an > > >> arrtefact-mediated action, a unit of human social > > >> activity. > > >> > > >> It is true that words can be countable or mass > > >> according to context, but I wasn't talking about words > > >> was I? I was talking about word meaning. > > >> > > >> Andy > > >> > > >> ------------------------------------------------------------ > > >> Andy Blunden > > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy > > >> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective- > > decision-making > > >> > >> decision-making> > > >> > > >> On 8/01/2017 7:59 AM, David Kellogg wrote: > > >> > > >> Are words really units? When we look at their > > >> ideational meaning (that is, > > >> their logical and experiential content--their > > >> capacity for representing and > > >> linking together human experiences) they seem to > > >> fall into two very > > >> different categories: lexical words like > > >> "perezhivanie" or "sense" or > > >> "personality" of "individual" and grammatical > > >> words like "of", or "might", > > >> or "is". The lexical words seem to behave like > > >> units--they are bounded, > > >> discrete, and, as Andy would say, "countable" (the > > >> problem is that almost > > >> all nouns are both countable and uncountable > > >> depending on the context you > > >> put them in, so this distinction is really not as > > >> essential as Andy seems > > >> to assume). But the more grammatical words seem to > > >> be elements of some > > >> larger unit, which we can call wording. > > >> > > >> Veresov and Fleer come up against this problem > > >> with "edintsvo" and > > >> "edintsa". Of course, as they say, the two words > > >> are distinct. But this > > >> doesn't necessarily mean that the former always > > >> corresponds to "unity" in > > >> English and the latter is always "unit". If you > > >> look at the paragraph they > > >> translate on 330, you can see that Vygotsky starts > > >> with an idea that is > > >> quite "synoptic" and is well expressed by "unit". > > >> But in the last sentence > > >> there is a sense that "perezhivanie" is a > > >> meta-stable unit--one that > > >> remains self-similar only through a process of > > >> thorough change, like a > > >> bicycle whose every part is replaced--and in > > >> English is it is better to > > >> express this idea with "unity". The problem is > > >> that the differences between > > >> "edintsvo" and "edintsva" in Russian is a matter > > >> of gender (I think) and > > >> not simply abstractness, and as a result the > > >> English version, which cannot > > >> use the resource of gender,has to rely on > > >> abstractness, so the words > > >> "unity" and "unit" are somewhat more distinct and > > >> less linked than > > >> "edintsvo" and "edintsva". > > >> > > >> There are other problems that are similar. When > > >> Gonzalez Rey uses the word > > >> "final moment" to refer to the final period of > > >> Vygotsky's thinking, he > > >> leaves the anglophone reader the impression that > > >> he is referring to > > >> Vygotsky's deathbed thoughts. On the other hand, > > >> when Veresov and Fleer use > > >> "factor" to translate the same Russian word that > > >> Gonzalez Rey is using, > > >> they are giving us something more quantitative > > >> than Vygotsky intended, and > > >> their translation of "dalee nerazloshim'im > > >> chastyami etava edinstva" > > >> into "vital and further indivisible part of the > > >> whole" is quite opaque in > > >> English (notice that here Veresov and Fleer use > > >> "whole" to translate > > >> "edinstva" rather than "unit"!) At some point you > > >> have to accept that you > > >> can change Russian words into English words as if > > >> you were exchanging > > >> rubles for dollars, but you still won't be able to > > >> buy a samovar at Walmart. > > >> > > >> David Kellogg > > >> Macquarie University > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 5:21 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > > >> > > > >> wrote: > > >> > > >> Larry, all, > > >> > > >> our arguments in the 2014 address a science > > >> education literature in which > > >> the constructivist perspective is the leading > > >> perspective; We note that the > > >> assertion that people learn from experience is > > >> everywhere taken for granted > > >> but nowhere accounted for. We resort to > > >> pragmatist and phenomenological > > >> literature along with Vygotsky's insights to > > >> point out the need to account > > >> for learning as something that cannot be the > > >> result of an individual's > > >> construction; in experience there is always > > >> something in excess of what you > > >> intended, and this is a basic feature of > > >> doing, of performing. I take that > > >> to be your "trans" in the trans/zhivanie word, > > >> Larry, which already is > > >> denoted in the word PERezhivanie. > > >> > > >> But I do not wish to move our discussion too > > >> far away from Marc's paper > > >> and the Perezhivanie special issue. We also > > >> risk disengaging many that have > > >> not have the privilege we've had to have the > > >> time to read so many articles > > >> in just few days into the new year. I think we > > >> are a point in the > > >> discussion where a pretty clear point of > > >> agreement/disagreement, and > > >> therefore of possibility for growth, has been > > >> reached with regard to the > > >> view of perezhivanie as "an experience" and as > > >> the "working over it". I > > >> think that to allow as many as possible to > > >> follow, and hopefully also > > >> engage, I think it will be helpful to bring > > >> the diverse perspectives and > > >> theoretical accounts to matter in accounting > > >> for some actual material. And > > >> there are a number of cases described in the > > >> articles, including Marc's > > >> case of a teacher, as well as everyday facts, > > >> such as those brought by > > >> Beth, and in Beth's article... > > >> > > >> I take the task for myself too, but Saturday > > >> morning need to attend to > > >> other things! > > >> A > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> ________________________________________ > > >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >> > > >> > >> > > > >> on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com > > >> > > >> > >> > > > >> Sent: 07 January 2017 18:26 > > >> To: Andy Blunden; Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended > > >> Mind, Culture, Activity; > > >> Larry Purss > > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and > > >> Perezhivanie! > > >> > > >> Andy, Peter, i hope the intention to move > > >> beyond politeness to struggle > > >> with this topic materializes. > > >> In this vein i want to introduce exploration > > >> of the 'excess' of actual > > >> over intended meaning as he sketched his > > >> introduction to 'experience'. > > >> > > >> Citing Dewey, Alfredo says that this excess of > > >> actual learning over > > >> intended learning INCLUDES what Dewey refers > > >> to as 'attitudes' and these > > >> 'attitudes' are FUNDAMENTALLY what count in > > >> the future. > > >> Alfredo and Roth then add this summary > > >> statement : > > >> > > >> There is therefore, a need to theorize > > >> experience in terms that do not > > >> assume control and rationality as the sine qua > > >> non of learning. It also > > >> implies a need to develop analytical accounts > > >> that retain the 'uncertainty' > > >> that is an 'integral part' of human experience. > > >> > > >> Where are Alfredo and Roth leading us with > > >> this sketch of experience? To > > >> highlight 'attitudes' that occur in the excess > > >> of actual over intended > > >> learning? The word 'attitudes' generates > > >> images of (atmosphere) and (moods) > > >> that 'flow' like cascading waterfalls that can > > >> be imaged as (force) or as > > >> (receptive). Attitudes that flow to places > > >> where they are received within a > > >> certain attitude of care and concern. Not as > > >> forceful an image as moving > > >> only with control and rationality. Describing > > >> 'weaker' thought that > > >> remains uncertain but that also opens us to > > >> the other's peril and plight. > > >> Possibly a post-analytic motion that exceeds > > >> the intended by living-through > > >> the actual that develops 'attitudes' that are > > >> fundamentally what count for > > >> the future. > > >> > > >> > > >> Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > >> > > >> From: Andy Blunden > > >> Sent: January 7, 2017 5:00 AM > > >> To: Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, > > >> Activity > > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and > > >> Perezhivanie! > > >> > > >> OK Peter, what you say is all very true I am > > >> sure, but it > > >> entails conflating activity and action (as > > >> mass nouns) and > > >> context and mediation, and makes the required > > >> distinction > > >> much like one could find multiple meanings for > > >> the word > > >> "and" by listing the different phrases and > > >> clauses which can > > >> be linked by "and." > > >> > > >> Andy > > >> > > >> ------------------------------ > > ------------------------------ > > >> Andy Blunden > > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy > > >> > > >> http://www.brill.com/products/ > > book/origins-collective-decisi > > >> on-making > > >> > >> decision-making> > > >> > > >> On 7/01/2017 11:42 PM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > > >> > > >> Let me try to illustrate. > > >> > > >> Reading as mediated action: The > > >> cultural-historical > > >> context of reading mediates how one's > > >> attention and > > >> response are channeled in socially > > >> constructed ways. So, > > >> in one setting, say at home or reading in > > >> the company of > > >> friends, a novel might bring a reader to > > >> tears, or invite > > >> readers to share personal stories that > > >> parallel those of > > >> the plot lines, or laugh out loud. But > > >> another setting, a > > >> formal school or university class, would > > >> have historical > > >> values and practices that mute emotional > > >> and personal > > >> responses, and promote a more sober, > > >> analytic way of > > >> reading and talking that fits with > > >> specific historical > > >> critical conventions and genres, and > > >> discourages others. > > >> > > >> Reading as mediating action: The act of > > >> reading can be > > >> transformational. In reading about an > > >> talking about a > > >> character's actions, a reader might > > >> reconsider a value > > >> system, become more sympathetic to real > > >> people who > > >> resemble oppressed characters, etc. In > > >> other words, > > >> reading a text may serve a mediational > > >> process in which > > >> textual ideas and exemplars enable a > > >> reader to think > > >> differently. > > >> > > >> *From:*Andy Blunden > > >> [mailto:ablunden@mira.net > > >> ] > > >> *Sent:* Saturday, January 7, 2017 6:28 AM > > >> *To:* Peter Smagorinsky > >> >; eXtended Mind, > > >> Culture, Activity > >> > > > >> *Subject:* Re: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year > > >> and Perezhivanie! > > >> > > >> Can you explain in a paragraph or two,. > > >> Peter, rather than > > >> asking us all to read 10,000 words to > > >> extract an answer? > > >> > > >> Andy > > >> > > >> ------------------------------ > > >> ------------------------------ > > >> > > >> Andy Blunden > > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy > > >> > > >> > > >> http://www.brill.com/products/ > > >> book/origins-collective-decision-making > > >> collective- > > >> decision-making> > > >> > > >> > > >> On 7/01/2017 11:23 PM, Peter Smagorinsky > > >> wrote: > > >> > > >> Andy and others, I tried to work out > > >> the mediated/mediating question > > >> > > >> in the area of reading....see if this helps. > > >> > > >> Smagorinsky, P., & O'Donnell-Allen, > > >> C. (1998). Reading as mediated > > >> > > >> and mediating action: Composing meaning for > > >> literature through multimedia > > >> interpretive texts. Reading Research > > >> Quarterly, 33, 198-226. Available > > >> athttp://www.petersmagorinsky. > net/About/PDF/RRQ/RRQ1998.pdf > > >> net/About/PDF/RRQ/RRQ1998.pdf> > > >> > > >> -----Original Message----- > > >> > > >> From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >> > > >> > >> .ucsd.edu > > >> > > > >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ > > >> > > >> > > >> mailman.ucsd.edu ] On > > >> Behalf Of Andy Blunden > > >> > > >> Sent: Friday, January 6, 2017 7:12 PM > > >> > > >> To:xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >> > > >> > >> > > > >> > > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year > > >> and Perezhivanie! > > >> > > >> I have never understood this supposed > > >> distinction, Alfredo, between > > >> > > >> "mediated activity" and "mediating activity" > > >> given that all activity is > > >> mediated and all activity mediates. > > >> > > >> Also, could you spell out what you > > >> mean by the "tension" > > >> > > >> between perezhivanie as meaning and > > >> perezhivanie as struggle. > > >> > > >> Andy > > >> > > >> ------------------------------ > > >> ------------------------------ > > >> > > >> Andy Blunden > > >> > > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> http://www.brill.com/products/ > book/origins-collective- > > >> collective- > > > > > >> > > >> decision-making > > >> > > >> On 5/01/2017 6:26 PM, Alfredo Jornet > > >> Gil wrote: > > >> > > >> Thanks Marc for your careful > > >> response. > > >> > > >> I am familiar to Vygotsky's > > >> notion of cultural mediation and I > > >> > > >> am aware and acknowledge that it was > > >> elaborated as a means to overcome > > >> dualism, and that it is not analog to a > > >> computational approach. > > >> > > >> When I brought the computing > > >> analogy, I did so with regard not > > >> > > >> to the concept of cultural mediation in > > >> general, but to the way it can be > > >> (and is) deployed analytically. I react to > > >> what it seems to me a dichotomy > > >> between a "meaning" as something that is > > >> static (thereby a form of > > >> "representation" or reflection of the relation > > >> with the environment instead > > >> of?refraction)?? and the > > >> experiencing-as-struggling, which is described > > >> as?transformation or change. If so, mediation > > >> here would seem to be part of > > >> a methodological device that first dissects "a > > >> type of meaning" from "a > > >> type of activity" (or a given state from the > > >> process that changes that > > >> state), and then unites it by adding the term > > >> "mediation." And this may be > > >> my misreading, but in that (mis)reading (which > > >> perhaps is mostly due to the > > >> fact that in your empirical illustration only > > >> the initial and end product, > > >> i.e., perezhivanie, are described, but not the > > >> experiencing-as-struggle, > > >> that is, the moving between the two), > > >> mediation here seems to do as > > >> analytical concept precisely what you were > > >> afraid our monism was doing: > > >> explaining nothing. Only the end products but > > >> not the process of producing > > >> perezhivanie are revealed. This may be > > >> problematic if one attends to what > > >> Veresov argues in the paper I shared > > >> yesterday, where he defends the notion > > >> of mediation but also specifies that Vygotsky > > >> speaks of *mediating > > >> activity* (as opposed to *mediated* activity). > > >> That is, not mediation by > > >> signs as products, but mediating activity as > > >> the activity of producing > > >> signs (which again is an activity of producing > > >> social relations, perhaps > > >> what you refer as "holistic meanings"?). What > > >> do you think? > > >> > > >> I did not think you were trying > > >> to deny the influence of > > >> > > >> Spinoza, and I do not think we ever said that > > >> Perezhivanie was primarily a > > >> move from Cartesian Dualism to Monism, as you > > >> suggest in your post. I copy > > >> and paste from my prior post: "The fact is > > >> that Vygotsky was building a > > >> theory on the unity of the affect and the > > >> intellect that was to be grounded > > >> on Spinoza, and what we try to do is to > > >> explore how perezhivanie, as a > > >> concept being developed during the same period > > >> (but not finalised or > > >> totally settled!), could be seen from the > > >> perspective of the Spinozist > > >> Vygotsky." > > >> > > >> I totally believe that bringing > > >> the distinction between > > >> > > >> perezhivanie as meaning, and perezhivanie as > > >> struggle, is totally relevant, > > >> and Beth Ferholt's vignettes of Where the Wild > > >> Things Are do indeed > > >> illustrate this. We really need to address > > >> this tension, which as Beth's > > >> examples and as our own everyday experience > > >> shows, is a tension that > > >> matters not just to books and to theories but > > >> to living persons (children, > > >> teachers), a tension that moreover is present > > >> and mentioned in all the > > >> articles of the symposium. The papers offer > > >> different proposals, and I > > >> think is so great we have the chance to > > >> discuss them! I too, as you, am > > >> very interesting in hearing others about the > > >> questions you had concerning > > >> sense and meaning. > > >> > > >> Alfredo > > >> > > >> From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >> > > >> xmca-l-bounces@mailman > > >> .ucsd.edu > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> > > > >> xmca-l-bounces@mailman > > >> .ucsd.edu > > >> > > > >> on behalf of Marc > > >> > > >> Clara > > >> > > >> > >> > > > >> > >> > > > >> > > >> Sent: 04 January 2017 22:31 > > >> > > >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > >> > > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New > > >> Year and Perezhivanie! > > >> > > >> Thank you very much, Alfredo, for > > >> sharing this excellent paper by > > >> > > >> Veresov, and thanks also for your > > >> responses, which really helped > > >> > > >> me to > > >> > > >> better understand your points. My > > >> main doubt about your proposal > > >> > > >> was/is caused by the statement > > >> that the idea of cultural > > >> > > >> mediation/mediator implies a > > >> cartesian dualism. This shocks me > > >> > > >> because, to me, the idea of > > >> cultural mediation is absolutely > > >> > > >> crucial > > >> > > >> (in fact, the keystone) for the > > >> construction of a monist (and > > >> > > >> scientific) psychology that does > > >> not forget mind -that is, a > > >> > > >> cultural > > >> > > >> psychology. From your response, > > >> however, I realized that we may > > >> > > >> be > > >> > > >> approaching the idea of mediation > > >> in different ways. I talk of > > >> > > >> mediation and mediators in a > > >> quite restricted way. The starting > > >> > > >> point > > >> > > >> of my understanding of mediation > > >> is a dialectical relationship > > >> > > >> (organic, transactional) between > > >> the subject and the world > > >> > > >> (Vygotsky departs from the scheme > > >> stimulus-response, from reflexology). > > >> > > >> This relationship, that Vygotsky > > >> calls primitive psychological > > >> > > >> functions, would be basically > > >> biological. However, in human > > >> > > >> beings > > >> > > >> this relationship is mediated by > > >> cultural means: signs and > > >> > > >> tools; or > > >> > > >> primary, secondary and terciary > > >> artifacts. These cultural means > > >> > > >> reorganize the primitive > > >> functions (dialectic S-O relationship), > > >> > > >> which > > >> > > >> become then higher psychological > > >> functions (S-M-O) (see for > > >> > > >> example, > > >> > > >> The problem of the cultural > > >> development of the child, in The > > >> > > >> Vygotsky > > >> > > >> Reader). Now, the subject, the > > >> cultural mediators, and the > > >> > > >> object form > > >> > > >> an inseparable dialectical unit, > > >> so that the subject acts on > > >> > > >> (transforms) the object through > > >> the prism of the cultural > > >> > > >> mediators, > > >> > > >> the object acts on (transforms) > > >> the subject also through the > > >> > > >> prism of > > >> > > >> the cultural mediators, and the > > >> cultural means are themselves > > >> > > >> also > > >> > > >> transformed as a consequence of > > >> their mediation in this > > >> > > >> continuous > > >> > > >> dynamic dialectical tension. > > >> Here, for me, it is important the > > >> > > >> idea > > >> > > >> that the cultural means are as > > >> material (if we assume a > > >> > > >> materialist > > >> > > >> monism) as all the rest of the > > >> world; in fact, are parts of the > > >> > > >> material world which become signs > > >> or tools (and can be therefore > > >> > > >> socially distributed). This > > >> permits the introduction of the > > >> > > >> scientific > > >> > > >> study of mind-consciousness (as > > >> mediating systems of signs), > > >> > > >> because > > >> > > >> mind is not anymore something > > >> immaterial and unobservable, but > > >> > > >> it is > > >> > > >> as material and observable as the > > >> rest of the natural world. It > > >> > > >> is > > >> > > >> from this view that, for me, the > > >> idea of cultural mediation is > > >> > > >> the > > >> > > >> keystone of a monist psychology > > >> that includes mind. Thus, when I > > >> > > >> speak > > >> > > >> of mediators, I refer to the > > >> cultural means which mediate in the > > >> > > >> S-O > > >> > > >> dialectics; I am especially > > >> interested in signs/secondary > > >> > > >> artifacts. > > >> > > >> Here, it is perhaps necessary to > > >> insist that when I talk of > > >> > > >> studying > > >> > > >> mediators (and their semantic > > >> structure), this doesn't mean that > > >> > > >> they > > >> > > >> are taken out from the activity > > >> (the flux of live) in which they > > >> > > >> mediate (since out of activity > > >> they are not signs anymore); > > >> > > >> here, I > > >> > > >> think Vygotsky tries again to > > >> overcome another old dichotomy, the > > >> > > >> functionalism-structuralism one. > > >> I hope that all this makes also > > >> > > >> clear the difference between this view and > > >> that of computational > > >> psychologies (which in general are profoundly > > >> and explicitly dualist and > > >> not dialectic). > > >> > > >> Back to perezhivanie, I'm not > > >> obviously trying to deny the > > >> > > >> influence > > >> > > >> of Spinoza on Vygotsky's thinking > > >> (this is explicit in Vygotsky's > > >> > > >> writings, especially in "The > > >> teaching about emotions", in the > > >> > > >> Vol.6 of > > >> > > >> the Collected Works). But I have > > >> doubts that Vygotsky's > > >> > > >> introduction > > >> > > >> of the concept of perezhivanie is > > >> to be regarded primarily as a > > >> > > >> movement towards monism (from a > > >> previous cartesian dualism), and > > >> > > >> that > > >> > > >> this movement questions the > > >> concept of cultural mediation. > > >> > > >> Instead, > > >> > > >> and I think that this is in line > > >> with some of Gonzalez-Rey > > >> > > >> observations in his paper, my > > >> impression is that the > > >> > > >> introduction of > > >> > > >> the concept of perezhivanie > > >> responds more to a movement (a > > >> > > >> further > > >> > > >> step) towards holism (something > > >> that, in my understanding, can > > >> > > >> also be > > >> > > >> found in Spinoza). Thus, I think > > >> that the word meaning is still > > >> > > >> the > > >> > > >> unit of analysis in the last > > >> Vygotsky -and therefore, the idea of > > >> > > >> cultural mediation is still > > >> crucial (in fact, in The problem of > > >> > > >> the > > >> > > >> environment, he connects the > > >> concept of perezhivanie, which has > > >> > > >> just > > >> > > >> introduced, to the development of > > >> word meaning [p.345-346, also > > >> > > >> cited > > >> > > >> in my paper]). However, in my > > >> view, in the last Vygotsky the > > >> > > >> focus is > > >> > > >> not anymore primarily on the > > >> word-meaning as formed for things > > >> > > >> (or > > >> > > >> collections of things, as in the > > >> ontogenetic research with > > >> > > >> Sakharov), but the focus is now in the > > >> formation of meaning for holistic > > >> situations. > > >> > > >> Best regards, > > >> > > >> Marc. > > >> > > >> 2017-01-03 19:16 GMT+01:00 > > >> Alfredo Jornet Gil< > > >> > > >> a.j.gil@iped.uio.no > > >> > > > >> > >> >: > > >> > > >> Hi Marc, all, > > >> > > >> thanks for joining and for > > >> your interesting work, which I > > >> > > >> follow > > >> > > >> since I became aware of it. I > > >> appreciate the way in your > > >> > > >> paper you > > >> > > >> show careful and honest > > >> attention to the texts of the authors > > >> > > >> involved, but perhaps most of > > >> all I appreciate that the > > >> > > >> paper makes > > >> > > >> the transformational > > >> dimension related to struggle and change > > >> > > >> salient, a dimension all > > >> papers deemed central to > > >> > > >> perezhivanie. And I > > >> > > >> have learned more about > > >> Vasilyuk by reading your paper. But > > >> > > >> I also > > >> > > >> see that we have approached > > >> the question of perezhivanie > > >> > > >> differently > > >> > > >> and I think that addressing > > >> the questions that you raise > > >> > > >> concerning > > >> > > >> our article may be a good way > > >> to both respond and discuss > > >> > > >> your paper. > > >> > > >> I am aware that our use of > > >> the term monism may be > > >> > > >> problematic to > > >> > > >> some, and N. Veresov, who has > > >> recently written about this > > >> > > >> (see > > >> > > >> attached article), warns > > >> against the dangers of simply > > >> > > >> moving from > > >> > > >> dualism into an > > >> undifferentiating monism that relativizes > > >> > > >> everything, > > >> > > >> making development > > >> un-studiable. This seems to be the way in > > >> > > >> which > > >> > > >> you have understood our > > >> argument, and of course this is not > > >> > > >> what we are or want to be doing. > > >> > > >> Probably many will think that > > >> *dialectical materialism* > > >> > > >> rather than > > >> > > >> monism is the proper term, > > >> and I could agree with them; we > > >> > > >> do in fact > > >> > > >> use dialectical materialism > > >> there and elsewhere. Yet, we > > >> > > >> wanted to > > >> > > >> emphasise the Spinozist > > >> influence (an influence that also > > >> > > >> runs > > >> > > >> through Marx) and so we found > > >> it appropriate to use the term > > >> > > >> monism, > > >> > > >> a term that Vygotsky uses > > >> before arguing that Spinoza > > >> > > >> "develops an essentially materialistic view" > > >> > > >> (Collected Works, Vol. 6, p. > > >> 124). For us, the aim is > > >> > > >> working out > > >> > > >> ways to empirically examine > > >> and formulate problems in ways > > >> > > >> that do > > >> > > >> not reify a mind-body dualism. > > >> > > >> Although overcoming dualism > > >> is foundational to the CHAT > > >> > > >> paradigm, I > > >> > > >> would however not say that > > >> Vygotsky did get to solve all of > > >> > > >> the > > >> > > >> problems that Cartesian > > >> dualism had created for psychology, > > >> > > >> even > > >> > > >> though he recognised those > > >> problems brilliantly as early as > > >> > > >> in the > > >> > > >> "Crisis". It should suffice > > >> to cite Vygotsky's own remarks, > > >> > > >> which we quote in the paper (and which A.N. > > >> > > >> Leont'ev mentions in the > > >> introduction to the collected > > >> > > >> works), where > > >> > > >> Vygotsky explicitly critiques > > >> some of his own prior ideas > > >> > > >> for failing > > >> > > >> to overcome dualism. We agree > > >> with those who, like F. G. > > >> > > >> Rey, see > > >> > > >> Vygotsky's project as a > > >> developing rather than as a > > >> > > >> finalised one. > > >> > > >> The fact is that Vygotsky was > > >> building a theory on the unity > > >> > > >> of the > > >> > > >> affect and the intellect that > > >> was to be grounded on Spinoza, > > >> > > >> and what > > >> > > >> we try to do is to explore > > >> how perezhivanie, as a concept > > >> > > >> being > > >> > > >> developed during the same > > >> period (but not finalised or > > >> > > >> totally > > >> > > >> settled!), could be seen from > > >> the perspective of the > > >> > > >> Spinozist Vygotsky. > > >> > > >> As you note, in our article > > >> we argue that, if one takes the > > >> > > >> Spinozist > > >> > > >> one-substance approach, > > >> classical concepts used in > > >> > > >> non-classical > > >> > > >> psychology, at least in the > > >> way they are commonly used in > > >> > > >> the current > > >> > > >> literature, should be > > >> revised. One such concept is > > >> > > >> mediation. And I > > >> > > >> personally do not have much > > >> of a problem when mediation is > > >> > > >> used to > > >> > > >> denote the fundamental fact > > >> that every thing exists always > > >> > > >> through > > >> > > >> *another*, never in and of > > >> itself. But I do think that it is > > >> > > >> problematic to identify > > >> MEDIATORS, such as "a meaning", as a > > >> > > >> means to > > >> > > >> account for or explain > > >> developmental processes and learning > > >> > > >> events, > > >> > > >> precisely because it is > > >> there, at least in my view, that > > >> > > >> dualism creeps in. > > >> > > >> For example, I find it > > >> paradoxical that you are concerned > > >> > > >> that our > > >> > > >> monist approach risks turning > > >> perezhivanie into a useless > > >> > > >> category > > >> > > >> because it may be used to > > >> explain everything and nothing, > > >> > > >> and yet you > > >> > > >> do not seem to have a problem > > >> using the term mediation to > > >> > > >> account for > > >> > > >> the transformation of > > >> perezhivanie without clearly > > >> > > >> elaborating on how > > >> > > >> mediation does change > > >> anything or what it looks like as a > > >> > > >> real > > >> > > >> process. How is it different > > >> saying that a perezhivanie > > >> > > >> mediates the > > >> > > >> experiencing-as-struggle from > > >> simply saying that it > > >> > > >> "affects" or > > >> > > >> "determines" it? Indeed, if > > >> perezhivanie mediates > > >> > > >> experiencing-as-struggle, > > >> does not experiencing-as-struglgle > > >> > > >> too > > >> > > >> mediate perezhivanie? And do > > >> not both may be said to mediate > > >> > > >> development, or development mediate them? Is > > >> not this explaining everything > > >> and nothing? > > >> > > >> I do believe you can argue > > >> that there is a difference between > > >> > > >> mediation and classical > > >> psychology's cause-effect relations, > > >> > > >> but to > > >> > > >> show this you need to dig > > >> into the dialectical underpinnings > > >> > > >> of the > > >> > > >> theory. In your paper, you > > >> offer a nice analysis of a lovely > > >> > > >> case of > > >> > > >> a teacher who, in dealing > > >> with a challenge with one of her > > >> > > >> students, > > >> > > >> changes her perezhivanie. I > > >> think you can rightly argue that > > >> > > >> there is > > >> > > >> a semiotic transformation, > > >> and I fully support your > > >> > > >> statement that by > > >> > > >> studying discourse we can > > >> empirically approach questions of > > >> > > >> psychological development. > > >> The contradictions you show as > > >> > > >> being > > >> > > >> involved and resolved > > >> resonate really well with what I > > >> > > >> experience as > > >> > > >> a parent or as a teacher in > > >> the classroom. Yet, without > > >> > > >> unpacking > > >> > > >> what this "mediation" taking > > >> place between one perezhivanie > > >> > > >> and the > > >> > > >> next one means as a concrete > > >> and real, the same analysis > > >> > > >> could be done taking an information processing > > >> approach: > > >> > > >> there is an situation that is > > >> processed (represented?) in > > >> > > >> one way, > > >> > > >> which then leads to a > > >> (cognitive) dissonance, and then there > > >> > > >> is a > > >> > > >> cognitive resolution by means > > >> of which the situation is > > >> > > >> presented > > >> > > >> differently in consciousness > > >> (indeed, when seen in this way, > > >> > > >> the term > > >> > > >> perezhivanie and the term > > >> "representation" become almost > > >> > > >> indistinguishable). How is > > >> mediation, as an analytical > > >> > > >> concept, > > >> > > >> helping here? And most > > >> importantly to the question of > > >> > > >> perezhivanie, > > >> > > >> how is this analysis going to > > >> show the internal connection > > >> > > >> between > > >> > > >> intellect and affect that > > >> Vygotsky formulates as > > >> > > >> constitutive of the notion of perezhivanie? > > >> > > >> I believe that the key lies > > >> in understanding what Vygotsky > > >> > > >> means when > > >> > > >> he says that perezhivanie is > > >> a unit of analysis. I will not > > >> > > >> repeat > > >> > > >> here what already is written > > >> in at least a couple of the > > >> > > >> articles in > > >> > > >> the special issue (Blunden, > > >> ours), that is the difference > > >> > > >> between > > >> > > >> analysis by elements and unit > > >> analysis (Vygotsky 1987). A > > >> > > >> unit > > >> > > >> analysis approach is > > >> consistent with Spinoza, for whom > > >> > > >> cause-effect > > >> > > >> explanations were not > > >> adequate, requiring instead an > > >> > > >> understanding of > > >> > > >> self-development, > > >> perezhivanie as a kernel cell for the > > >> > > >> development > > >> > > >> of personality. And I think > > >> you may be after this in your > > >> > > >> article in > > > > > > > > > From marc.clara@gmail.com Tue Jan 17 10:14:19 2017 From: marc.clara@gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Marc_Clar=C3=A0?=) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2017 19:14:19 +0100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Fate of a Man In-Reply-To: References: <048522a2-cca0-3e56-cae2-f2142b9fbd5a@mira.net> <1484427999407.2877@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: Hi, all, and thank you, Andy, for sharing this amazing film, which I didn't know. I think it will be very useful to share and discuss our respective views on perezhivanie. In my view, the film could be analyzed in terms of perezhivanie in three different planes. First, we could consider the person who watches the film, and we could study how the meaning she forms for the film restructures her relationship with aspects of her real life -such as, for example, her own death or the death of a beloved one, etc. (perhaps this is a little bit like what Beth and Monica, or Veresov and Fleer, do with their study of playworlds?). In this plane, which would be perhaps the most naturalistic one, the film could be studied as an human-made cultural artifact which restuctures psychological functions; here, the meaning formed for the film by who watches it and uses it as mediator in her relation to her real life would be an m-perezhivanie. In a second plane, we could proceed as if the film was real life, and we could consider Sokolov telling his story to the man he meets by the river (a little bit like Carla telling her story to me). In this plane, Sokolov's narrative (i.e., what is showed to us as narrated flashback) could be considered as a cultural artifact that Sokolov uses to relate to all what happened to him. At this plane, the meaning of this narrative would be the m-perezhivanie that, in that moment, mediates the relationship between Sokolov and the war events he experienced years ago (but these events are still very present to him, so although relating to past events, there is here a Sokolov's activity [towards the past war events] which is in present -this echoes Christopher when, within our conversations, said: ?Part of this might also be a question of what it means to describe and represent one's own perezhivanie figuratively/narratively (whether to others, or to oneself), as opposed to living that perezhivanie. Especially if the attempt to capture/represent one's own perezhivanie is, perhaps, also central to the living of it?? In a third plane, we could proceed as if Sokolov's narration was not a retrospective narration, but the on-time sequence of events with on-time Sokolov's explanation of these events (in the moments in which the narrator voice is assumed within the flashback). In this plane, there are several interesting perezhivanie phenomena. Clearly, there is a Sokolov's activity of experiencing-as-struggle, which initiates when he realizes that all his family, except one son, had been killed 2 years ago. At this moment, his life becomes meaningless; the meaning (m-perezhivanie) he uses to relate to all his life (including the past) at this moment is expressed in his conversation with his oncle: ?it's got to be that this life of mine is nothing but a nightmare!?. In this moment, Sokolov's past in the prision camp becomes also meaningless: then, his link to life (the m-perezhivanie that made being alive meaningful to him) was meeting his family; but at that time his family was already dead, so when he discovers it, he realizes that this m-perezhivanie (the idea of meeting his family) was linking him to death, not to life, so all his efforts to surviving become meaningless: ?Every night, when I was a prisioner, I talked with them. Now it turns out that for two years I was talking with the dead??. In this conversation, however, his oncle offers him an alternative m-perezhivanie to relate to his life: he still has a son, so the m-perehivanie of meeting his family can still turns Sokolov's life meaningful: ?you've got to go on living. You have to find Anatoly. When the war is over, your son will get married, you will live with them. You will take up your carpentry again, play with your grandkids?. It takes some time to Sokolov to enter into this m-perezhivanie, but he does it and his life becomes meaningful again: ?and then, unexpectedly, I've got a gleam of sunlight?. But, then, Anatoly also dies. How to keep living? Here, Sokolov holds the m-perezhivanie that linked him to life until that moment, and therefore, he needs a son; pretending being the father of Vanya turns his life meaningful again. Another interesting thing, still at that level, is how Sokolov's relation with his own immediate death changes along the different occasions in which he faces it. I thing here there are examples of experiencing-as-contemplation -in my view, this is not experiencing-as-struggle because the situation of impossibility (the immediate death) is removed existentially (Sokolov's life is given back to him), so that there is not a permanent situation of impossibility which is initially meaningless and is turned into meaningful. In each occasion in which Sokolov is faced with his immediate death, the m-perezhivanie that mediates this relationship is different. When he is captured, his m-perezhivanie is expressed as: ?here's my death coming after me?. When he is conducted to meet the nazi official, the m-perezhivanie is expressed as: ?the end of your misery?, ?to my death and my release of this torment, I will drink?. In the first, the death is running after Sokolov; in the second, it is Sokolov happily going to meet death. Later, at the end of the film, he faces his immediate death again, and the m-perezhivanie is expressed as: ?I'm really worried that I might die in my sleep, and that would frighten my little son?. Well, just some thoughts after watching this wonderful film. Best regards, Marc. 2017-01-15 0:06 GMT+01:00 Christopher Schuck : > Yes, definitely that article! And specifically, when I used "pivoting" I > couldn't help but think of Beth's earlier example about how a child will > use a stick as a pivot for a horse. Perhaps a somewhat different > application but related, no? > > On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 4:06 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > wrote: > > > Chris, all, > > > > your post is totally relevant to Beth's and Monica's article in the > > special issue. They write about film and perezhivanie (quoting Sobchack) > > the following: > > > > The reason that film allows us to glimpse the future is that there is a > > connection between filmic time and ?real? time: ?The images of a film > exist > > in the world as a temporal flow, within finitude and situation. Indeed, > the > > fascination of the film is that it does not transcend our > lived-experience > > of temporality, but rather that it seems to partake of it, to share it? > > (1992, p. 60). > > > > And later > > > > "Specifically, the way that the flow of time becomes multidirectional is > > that ?rehearsals make it necessary to think of the future in such a way > as > > to create a past? (1985, p. 39). As Schechner ex-plains: ?In a very real > > way the future ? the project coming into existence through the process of > > rehearsal ? determines the past: what will be kept from earlier > rehearsals > > or from the ?source ma-terials? (1985, p. 39)." > > > > Alfredo > > > > > > ________________________________________ > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > on behalf of Christopher Schuck > > Sent: 14 January 2017 21:43 > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Fate of a Man > > > > But that's both the limitation and strength of art or fictional narrative > > as opposed to real life, isn't it? That art focuses our attention and > > highlights certain features in a way that is idealized and artificially > > "designed" to convey something more clearly and purely (but less > > organically and authentically) than it would be conveyed in the course of > > living it, or observing someone else living it? One way to get around > this > > would be, as David says, to analyze the film in terms of clues as to the > > stages of emergence. But maybe another way to use the film would be to > view > > it not so much as a complete, self-sufficient "example" of perezhivanie, > as > > a *tool *for pivoting back and forth between the concept of perezhivanie > as > > imaginatively constructed (through fiction), and the concept of > > perezhivanie as imaginatively constructed (through our real living > > experience and observation of it). So, it would be the *pivoting* between > > these two manifestations of the concept (designed vs. evolved, as David > put > > it) that reveals new insights about perezhivanie, rather than > understanding > > the concept from the film per se. > > > > On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 3:08 PM, David Kellogg > > wrote: > > > > > I think there's a good reason why Andy started a new thread on this: > > he's a > > > very tidy thinker (quite unlike yours truly) and he knows that one > reason > > > why xmca threads are seldom cumulative is that they digress to related > > > problems without solving the immmediate ones. > > > > > > Yes, of course, a film allows us to consider an example of > > "perezhivanie", > > > but it is a designed perezhivanie rather than an evolved one; it > doesn't > > > explicitly display the various stages of emergence required for a > genetic > > > analysis, unless we analyze it not as a complete and finished work of > art > > > but instead for clues as to the stages of its creation (the way that, > for > > > example, "Quietly Flows the Don" was analyzed to determine its > > > authenticity). > > > > > > I remember that In the original short story, the schnapps drinking > > > scene seemed like pure sleight of hand: an artistically gratuitous > > example > > > of what eventually gave Soviet social realism such a bad name. > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 10:04 PM, Carol Macdonald < > carolmacdon@gmail.com > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Fellow XMCa-ers > > > > > > > > I have watched it through now, thank you Andy, but right now only > > > empirical > > > > psychological categories come to mind. I will watch it again and in > > the > > > > meanwhile let my fellows with more recent experience of > /perezhivanie/ > > > take > > > > the discussion further. > > > > > > > > It is a kind of timeless story, and modern film techniques would > > perhaps > > > be > > > > more explicit. At the least I would say it has for me a Russian > > > > understanding of suffering, perhaps because of their unique > experience > > of > > > > it. But having said that, WWII must have generated other similar > > > > experiences, apart from the first part about Andrei's family dying in > > the > > > > famine. > > > > > > > > Carol > > > > > > > > On 14 January 2017 at 02:15, Andy Blunden wrote: > > > > > > > > > I watched it in two parts with subtitles: > > > > > > > > > > http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x16w7fg_destiny-of-a-man- > > > > > 1959-pt-1_creation > > > > > http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x16wat4_destiny-of-a-man- > > > > > 1959-pt-2_creation > > > > > > > > > > Andy > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > Andy Blunden > > > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > > > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective- > > decision-making > > > > > On 14/01/2017 2:35 AM, Beth Ferholt wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> > >Thank you for taking us to a shared example. I think that > > having a > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Carol A Macdonald Ph.D (Edin) > > > > Cultural Historical Activity Theory > > > > Honorary Research Fellow: Department of Linguistics, Unisa > > > > alternative email address: tmacdoca@unisa.ac.za > > > > > > > > > > From lpscholar2@gmail.com Tue Jan 17 12:09:45 2017 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2017 12:09:45 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Fw: author articles MCA Issue 4 Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: <587c5eeb.4379630a.d3d04.fbd3@mx.google.com> References: <1484327382734.77186@iped.uio.no> <1484524342219.11085@iped.uio.no> <587c5eeb.4379630a.d3d04.fbd3@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <587e7a32.514f620a.25cb3.6a39@mx.google.com> I was unsure where to post my reflection of Beth and Monica?s paper. I decided that this thread held all this month?s article?s as a place for rehearsals. Beth and Monica, in their section on PERFORMANCE reference Schechner and the workshop-rehearsal process in three stages. The first stage breaks down a performer?s resistance, making him a kind of tabula rasa. To do this requires the need for separation, for (sacred) or special space, and for a use of time different than that prevailing in the ordinary. My question is if this sacred or special place can be developed as a disposition such that a person comes to experience the ordinary as (extraordinary) in the way Cavell uses the term the extraordinary IN the ordinary. What Schechner describes as the 1st stage as the need for separation within a sacred or special place becomes a practice of living vitality immanent and prevailing IN the ordinary? A way of life Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: lpscholar2@gmail.com Sent: January 15, 2017 9:49 PM To: Alfredo Jornet Gil; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: RE: [Xmca-l] Fw: author articles MCA Issue 4 Perezhivanie Alfredo,? Thanks for sending the 87 pages that are exploring the multifaceted threads exploring perezhivanie. I believe we must also be closing in on another 87 pages generated in our discussions.? I have now printed out the 87 pages of the journal ?and also many pages of the XMCA threads. THIS rich resource opens up multiple doors to enter into. I assume these are first steps and each separate article feels like a doorway into this common theme moving through multiple traditions. Yes, a symposium and also a symphony of questions & listening being played. Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From: Alfredo Jornet Gil Sent: January 15, 2017 3:56 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Fw: author articles MCA Issue 4 Perezhivanie ?I meant to send this e-mail last week, but it seems it did not go through, I am trying again Alfredo ________________________________ From: Alfredo Jornet Gil Sent: 13 January 2017 18:09 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: author articles MCA Issue 4 Perezhivanie Hi all, as a complement to our ongoing perezhivanie discussion, and since the discussion has nicely taken the symposium form that also is present in the special issue, all the authors have now agreed that we share their author versions. These are the versions accepted for publication before the proofs. That means that the ?articles attached may differ slightly from the ones published, but they should be accurate enough to grant access to everyone who, like Larry and others, do not have institutional access to the T&F pages. Alfredo From boblake@georgiasouthern.edu Tue Jan 17 13:37:55 2017 From: boblake@georgiasouthern.edu (Robert Lake) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2017 16:37:55 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Fw: author articles MCA Issue 4 Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: <587e7a32.514f620a.25cb3.6a39@mx.google.com> References: <1484327382734.77186@iped.uio.no> <1484524342219.11085@iped.uio.no> <587c5eeb.4379630a.d3d04.fbd3@mx.google.com> <587e7a32.514f620a.25cb3.6a39@mx.google.com> Message-ID: Hi All, If you have Turner Classic Movies in your cable, Roku, Amazon Stick or Dish TV configuration you might want to look at *You Got to Move - Stories of Change in the South (*1985) ?. It is the story of Highlander Folk School and related activist movements from the 1930's to 1985 and will available on demand until Tuesday, Jan 24, 201 ?7. *Robert Lake* ? On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 3:09 PM, wrote: > I was unsure where to post my reflection of Beth and Monica?s paper. > I decided that this thread held all this month?s article?s as a place for > rehearsals. > > Beth and Monica, in their section on PERFORMANCE reference Schechner and > the workshop-rehearsal process in three stages. > The first stage breaks down a performer?s resistance, making him a kind of > tabula rasa. To do this requires the need for separation, for (sacred) or > special space, and for a use of time different than that prevailing in the > ordinary. > > My question is if this sacred or special place can be developed as a > disposition such that a person comes to experience the ordinary as > (extraordinary) in the way Cavell uses the term the extraordinary IN the > ordinary. > What Schechner describes as the 1st stage as the need for separation > within a sacred or special place becomes a practice of living vitality > immanent and prevailing IN the ordinary? > A way of life > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > From: lpscholar2@gmail.com > Sent: January 15, 2017 9:49 PM > To: Alfredo Jornet Gil; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: RE: [Xmca-l] Fw: author articles MCA Issue 4 Perezhivanie > > Alfredo, Thanks for sending the 87 pages that are exploring the > multifaceted threads exploring perezhivanie. I believe we must also be > closing in on another 87 pages generated in our discussions. I have now > printed out the 87 pages of the journal and also many pages of the XMCA > threads. > THIS rich resource opens up multiple doors to enter into. I assume these > are first steps and each separate article feels like a doorway into this > common theme moving through multiple traditions. > > Yes, a symposium and also a symphony of questions & listening being played. > > Sent from Mail for Windows 10 > > From: Alfredo Jornet Gil > Sent: January 15, 2017 3:56 PM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Fw: author articles MCA Issue 4 Perezhivanie > > ?I meant to send this e-mail last week, but it seems it did not go > through, I am trying again > > Alfredo > > ________________________________ > From: Alfredo Jornet Gil > Sent: 13 January 2017 18:09 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: author articles MCA Issue 4 Perezhivanie > > > Hi all, > > > as a complement to our ongoing perezhivanie discussion, and since the > discussion has nicely taken the symposium form that also is present in the > special issue, all the authors have now agreed that we share their author > versions. These are the versions accepted for publication before the > proofs. That means that the ?articles attached may differ slightly from the > ones published, but they should be accurate enough to grant access to > everyone who, like Larry and others, do not have institutional access to > the T&F pages. > > > Alfredo > > > > -- Robert Lake Ed.D. Associate Professor Social Foundations of Education Dept. of Curriculum, Foundations, and Reading Georgia Southern University P. O. Box 8144, Statesboro, GA 30460 Secretary/Treasurer-AERA- Paulo Freire Special Interest Group Webpage: https://georgiasouthern.academia.edu/RobertLake*Democracy must be born anew in every generation, and education is its midwife.* John Dewey-*Democracy and Education*,1916, p. 139 From dkellogg60@gmail.com Tue Jan 17 16:33:40 2017 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2017 11:33:40 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! In-Reply-To: <587cfc5a.4e38630a.aa4eb.5a5d@mx.google.com> References: <1483344752182.40904@iped.uio.no> <1483467423798.57819@iped.uio.no> <1483601196884.31418@iped.uio.no> <5df5e870-3ef8-70d6-0c17-f8647ba17e62@mira.net> <587124d9.d957620a.4a5a8.bd56@mx.google.com> <1483820996800.91513@iped.uio.no> <1484253698990.7728@iped.uio.no> <1484328718783.79382@iped.uio.no> <587cfc5a.4e38630a.aa4eb.5a5d@mx.google.com> Message-ID: Larry: I think that being a functionalist doesn't just mean that you like to get things done, or that you look to outcomes to explain structure instead of looking to structure to explain outcomes. Being a functionalist means that the key to the anatomy of the ape is in man--but not vice versa. This is because we share most of the bodily and even psychic functions that apes have, but not the other way around. The key to the anatomy of man is not even in man, but in artificial limbs and even artificial organs. And since the key to the anatomy of man is not in man, we can't expect to adapt nature to our present needs; the irrationality of the way the world economy is now run will not be solved simply by replacing the remnants of hunting and gathering (e.g. fly fishing) with husbandry and horticulture (e.g. farmed salmon). It seems to me that applying care and compassion to non-sentient and non-conscious nature only serves to destroy the real content of care and compassion applied to that part of nature that has become sentient and consciously aware (animals and humans). Looking to what already exists in our psychic make up as a model for what should exist in our relationship to the environment is a little like looking to child behaviour as a model for an adult relationship with society. I think that the society I have personally lived in which was closest to equilibrium with the environment was China in the early eighties, where the vast majority of the country was still practicing subsistence agriculture. We recycled everything and never dreamed of calling it that; we economized sheepishly rather than smugly (my wife still obeys the old adage: "Wear it three years new, three years old, and three years patched up and stictched together" which is saying a lot when you only have two or three changes of clothes). When Xi Jinping denounces "nativism" and "economic nationalism" and insists that China too has a right to the commodities that it produces for Western consumption, I absolutely agree. Perhaps the place we should look for "exaptations" that can save both our personalities and our environment is not in our evolved needs, but in yet to be designed quasi-needs. Artificial organs, after all, always suggest new and ever more artificial functions, like chess and language. As Ruqaiya Hasan used to say, the meaning of "not" is not in "not". David Kellogg Macquarie University On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 2:00 AM, wrote: > David addressing Alfredo. > > > > A wonderful metaphor and nod to Alfredo helping us move from small prey to > a substantial prey worth pursuing. > > > > David, you describe the process of development as moving through the stage > of adapting the environment to human needs. (a possible perezhivanie > relation?). > > > > However, is it possible we are now developing beyond this notion of > adapting the environment FOR human needs and becoming aware of the vice > versa movement. The movement of adapting human needs to environmental > needs. Still within conscious awareness requiring our focused (and possibly > also unfocused) attention but less human centric, more focused upon the > ?relation? honouring and possibly experiencing as ?sacred? the ?relation? > and through the ?relation? experiencing the environmental ?element? of > perizhivanie as living vitality. This focus on the ?relation? shifting > focus away from human needs or environmental needs as either/or as > ?things? that exist outside of each other that must be ?connected?. > > There is no actual separation except imaginally and this is the ?heart? of > the matter. The place of not only compassion as such but the heart as the > place of CARE AND CONCERN. More active than compassion but not human > centric only. CARE AND CONCERN for the ?relation? whether imagined as > subject, object, subject&object, or the relation existing prior to this > subject/object differentiation. > > > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > *From: *David Kellogg > *Sent: *January 16, 2017 2:56 AM > *To: *eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > *Subject: *[Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > > > Alfredo: > > > > Well, I think that you are doing the really difficult and beautiful work, > > filling in Mike's ten league boots and keeping the cats in a coherent herd. > > Contrary to the popular expression, though, it is possible to herd cats. > > Lions, for example, herd themselves, apparently because the prey they > > consume is too large to consume individually before it goes bad, and if > > they work in a pride, they don't have to work every day. House cats, on the > > other hand, feed on small prey in individual portions and so they are > > notoriously selfish and competitive. It seems to me that with the > > "perezhivanie" symposium, we have at last begun to hunt lion-sized prey. > > Perhaps I am still doing mousework, though: I think we actually disagree > > more than we agree. > > > > Unlike Andy, I am very willing to embrace both the label "structuralist" > > and the label "functionalist", so long as I can embrace them together, and > > add the label developmentalist: structures are as they are because they > > function as they do, but sometimes they function as they do for historical, > > developmental reasons rather than obvious and immediate ones. In the second > > chapter of HDHMF, Vygotsky invokes what he calls the "Jennings" principle: > > that is, that functions are always "functions of structure": organisms do > > what they are allowed to do by their organic structure and no more. For > > example, cats cannot herd themselves because their prey is too small. But > > he points out that a) organic structure is itself a product of doing things > > over thousands and millions of years, b) structures can be "borrowed" to do > > more than they are adapted for (what S.J. Gould called "exaptation") and c) > > none of this applies to "artificial organs", such as tools and signs, > > because mediational means are precisely structures "borrowed" from the > > environment to do more than they are adapted for. One of these > > supra-adaptive functions is to adapt the environment to human needs instead > > of vice versa. This by definition cannot be something that a tool or a sign > > is adapted for; you don't get tools or signs simply by adapting to the > > environment: you only get them by imagining how the environment can be made > > different and acting accordingly. Both tools and signs are the product of > > some quantum of conscious awareness, and neither is a creation of habit. > > > > And that is why, again quite unlike Andy, I am also happy to embrace the > > label of semiotic as opposed to activity theoretic. I think that although > > both tools and signs involve an idealization of the environment, they do > > not do so equally. Signs, for example, include conscious > > attentive idealization of the self as well (the self as part of the > > environment, as part of perizhivanie--as Vygotsky points out, what endures > > from the crisis at seven is the "self" in self-esteem and the "self" in > > "self respect", not the self of posing, mannerism and acting out). The flaw > > in Greimas is that he is uninterested this functional, this developmental > > aspect of structural semantics, and it is precisely this that allows us to > > distinguish, at three, between the child who is interested in changing the > > chess board as environment by playing with the pieces and the child who is > > interested in changing the semiotic structure of the board by playing the > > game, and to distinguish, at seven, between the child who is disappointed > > with the inferior affordances for constructing himself as a first person > > shooter that a chess board offers and the child who is excited by the > > superior affordances for constructing himself as a future grand master. . > > > > I was very interested in what you said about attention versus perception. > > They are developmentally linked, in Vygotsky, but functionally and thus > > structurally quite distinct. Volitional attention is so much a part of > > adult life we sometimes have to work at nonvolitional attention (!). But > > volitional perception occurs only in rare circumstances, e.g. the Edgar > > Rubin vases, Necker's cube, etc. I find myself straining to see every > > passing mouse as a zebra. > > > > David Kellogg > > Macquarie University > > . > > > > On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 2:31 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > > wrote: > > > > > Thanks, David, for such a beautiful and clarifying post. You have such a > > > brilliant manner to language Vygotsky in Vygotsky's language! > > > > > > I think we agree much more than we disagree, and before I turn to Andy's > > > very timely link to the "Fate of a Man", this may be a nice tutorial on > > > terminology, at least for me. > > > > > > My only problem had been seeing what to me had looked like an all too > > > empiricist treatment of the notion of perception in your prior post(s) > > > (including some older posts on micro-genesis). But I think you still > agree > > > that part of what it takes to become an experienced chess player is being > > > able to ATTEND (and *attention* may be a better term than perception) to > > > the pieces and their position in the board in front of her in much closer > > > detail than the child who merely plays "with" the pieces. Thus the > > > "perception" in the expert may be said to be much more rich and > *concrete* > > > than what one "perceives" by merely attending to (abstracting) color and > > > shape relations. But I keep thinking that perception is not the right > word > > > here, is it? Certainly not one "element" (I use your wording below) in > the > > > unit. But this may just be a wording problem. > > > > > > I really like your very important observation that chess produces > > > life-long learners, whereas the child that merely plays "with" the chess > > > pieces will soon find the game uninteresting. But again I don't think > that > > > the key here is an opposition between perceiving and semiosis, but > perhaps > > > between habit and conscious awareness (which at the end may be just > > > different words for saying the same thing). As a habit, the task of > > > grouping pieces by color involves a person-environment relation in which > > > the *need* for consciousness (and thereby interest!) to awaken is lesser, > > > thereby offering less possibilities for development. I think it is this > > > that you would phrase as "the environment seems to dominate". The way > > > habits are formed in chess, however, are such that they require of > > > consciousness for the operation to continue (which you may phrase as > > > "personality dominates more"). The relation between habit and awareness > is > > > transformed in the higher-order activity (or form of human consciousness) > > > that is chess-playing. Same thing, different words? > > > > > > Alfredo > > > > > > ________________________________________ > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > on behalf of David Kellogg > > > Sent: 13 January 2017 01:02 > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > > > > > Alfredo: > > > > > > Let's apply your reasoning to the distinction between non-language, > > > proto-language, and language proper. Imagine a nursery in which there are > > > three beds, one with a child who is only week old and who responds with > > > pleasure to a nipple and with pain to being shaken or dropped, one with a > > > child who is about ten months old and has worked out a system of squeaks > > > and directed cries in order to get attention and deliver an affective > > > response, and one with a child who is nearly two and can ask for objects, > > > evaluate them, and reject them. As you say, perception and semiosis are > at > > > work in each situation. But contrary to what you say, they are not > equally > > > at work, and the outcomes are very different. > > > > > > There is a good reason why children develop: it's in their interests, > both > > > in the long term sense in that it allows a much wider variety of outcomes > > > and in the short term sense in that it allows an escape from ennui. A > child > > > who plays the "game" of putting black pieces on black squares and white > > > pieces on white squares will find this game very dull in a matter of > hours. > > > A child who plays the game of chess will, in many cases, find a lifetime > > > vocation. Yes, there are "structures" that include perception and > semiosis > > > in both cases, but the precise make-up isn't insignificant or irrelevant. > > > > > > One important reason why perezhivanie is such an important unit of > > > structure is that it at last allows us to assign real, concrete, specific > > > values to the influence of its two elements, personality and environment. > > > These vary from period to period--for example, in periods of crisis, the > > > personality always appears to play a leading role (e.g. proto-language in > > > the Crisis at One, negativism in the Crisis at Three, "acting out" in the > > > Crisis at Seven). During stable periods, the environment always appears > to > > > dominate (e.g. speech proper in early childhood, play in preschool, and > > > thinking but not thinking-about-thinking in school age). > > > > > > Some "child-centred" pedagogies would like to treat childhood as one long > > > crisis. I think this is a disservice to the child, because it is > precisely > > > during the stable periods that the critical neoformations (e.g. > > > protospeech) find a supporting but absolutely crucial role. The child > > > doesn't forget the expressiveness of intonation and stress learned in > > > proto-language, any more than the child who plays chess no longer > > > distinguishes white squares from black ones. > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 7:41 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > David, I admire much of what you write in your first three examples in > > > > your prior post. But I am reacting to your latter post on Chess. It is > > > the > > > > second or third time that you bring the CHESS example to bear in xmca, > > > and > > > > I always feel uneasy about it. > > > > > > > > I see the point that there are different developmental stages and that > > > > these can be best categorised according to the type of generalisation > > > that > > > > the child can engage into. Obviously, treating a piece of marble "as > if" > > > it > > > > was a piece in the game of chess involves a different type of > > > > generalization than treating the same piece of marble as if it was a > > > piece > > > > in the game of "let's put the black pieces in black squares and white > > > > pieces in white squares". But I do not think that my 20 months daughter > > > > will put black pieces on black squares in any systematic manner simply > > > > because she can PERCEIVE and act upon the difference between black and > > > > white; and indeed I do not think that my 7 years old first daughter > will > > > do > > > > any of these things with the chess pieces, considering she has never > > > > learned to play chess. Indeed, why would any child do that? I do > strongly > > > > believe that to get any of my daughters to arrange the pieces by color, > > > > there would have first to be a TEACHING/LEARNING situation, which > itself > > > > would involve establishing a semantic field, a field that perhaps out > of > > > my > > > > ignorance I would call semiotic (sign). > > > > > > > > In my view, in both cases there are rules and therefore imagination, > if > > > > we listen to Vygotsky's writings on play, and perhaps, as Vygotsky > notes, > > > > there may be a difference in the "moral attitude", but I would be > > > cautious > > > > by gross divisions between perceptual and semantic structures. > Yes,there > > > > are different levels, types, or stages in the way semantic fields are > > > > organised, and that playing the chess pieces as pieces of the CHESS > game > > > > involves a qualitative leap compared to playing them as pieces in the > > > game > > > > of putting them together by shape or color; but there is a game going > on > > > in > > > > both cases, and therefore a perceptual as much as a semiotic structure > > > > being at play. These are different semiotic contexts, as you say at the > > > end > > > > of your e-mail, but I do think that your assertion that in playing with > > > the > > > > chess pieces by color "the structure would be visual but not semiotic" > > > can > > > > be problematic and may lead to what I consider an incorrect view of the > > > > relation between higher and lower functions in development. > > > > > > > > Alfredo > > > > ________________________________________ > > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > on behalf of David Kellogg > > > > Sent: 11 January 2017 04:50 > > > > To: Andy Blunden; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > > > > > > > Vygotsky's got a terrific metaphor for how "perezhivanie" is > > > internalized: > > > > it is like internalizing the rules of the game of chess. > > > > > > > > The child who doesn't know how to play chess simply plays WITH the > pieces > > > > instead of playing them. She or he might try to create a piece-board > > > > structure by putting black pieces on black squares and white pieces on > > > > white squares, but the structure is a visual one and not a semiotic > one; > > > > it's about color and not about meaning. The child who DOES know how to > > > play > > > > chess plays the pieces instead of playing with them. She or he too > > > creates > > > > "structures" but this time they are semiotic ones: a black knight in a > > > > completely different column and a completely different row, can > capture a > > > > white pawn. > > > > > > > > The board is the same and so are the kids; the children may have very > > > > similar biological and very similar cultural endowments, but they do > not > > > > have the same semiotic context at all. Hence different perezhivanie and > > > > different personalities. > > > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 11:54 AM, Andy Blunden > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > How to understand the personality? ... i.e., the *development* of the > > > > > personality? > > > > > > > > > > The subject's inheritance, and The subject's experiences > > > > (/perezhivaniya/) > > > > > > > > > > ... just think of how you'd go about writing a good biography or > > > > > Bildungsroman. > > > > > > > > > > Andy > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > Andy Blunden > > > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > > > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decisi > on-making > > > > > On 11/01/2017 10:24 AM, David Kellogg wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> Andy: > > > > >> > > > > >> A good paradox! Word meaning is a unit, but the spoken word itself > is > > > > >> just an element--a thing. We can see that this is, on the face of > it, > > > > >> impossible: within a single holistic analysis, an element can be a > > > part > > > > of > > > > >> a unit, but a unit can never be a part of an element. So what you > are > > > > >> referring to when you say that the word is a thing is the "sonic" or > > > > >> "phasal" quality of the word: its "acoustic" properties, its > > > > "phonetics". > > > > >> > > > > >> But not its phonology. The word that Vygotsky uses for "phoneme" > > > refers > > > > >> to the 1929 work of the Prague Circle, originally the Moscow Circle. > > > He > > > > is > > > > >> a LITTLE coy about this, because the founders, Jakobson and > > > Trubetskoy, > > > > >> were not very popular with the authorities and Vygotsky already had > > > > plenty > > > > >> of heterodox acquaintances to worry about. Nevertheless, whenever > > > > Vygotsky > > > > >> says "phoneme", we know he really means what Jakobson and Trubetskoy > > > > called > > > > >> "morphophonemes". We know this because the examples he actually > > > > >> gives--Russian case endings--are morpho-phonemes and not simply > > > > phonemes: > > > > >> so for example in English the sound /s/ is a simple phoneme when I > say > > > > the > > > > >> word "self" but if I say "Andy's" the sound /s/ is a > morpho-phoneme: a > > > > >> difference in sounding that makes a difference in meaning. The > system > > > > (that > > > > >> is, the paradigmatic menu) of these differences in soundings are > what > > > > the > > > > >> Moscow and Prague Circles called "phonology" (as OPPOSED to > > > phonetics), > > > > and > > > > >> this is the kind of "phoneme" that Vygotsky is really talking about. > > > > >> > > > > >> Still, you can see that it is not what he is talking about when he > > > says > > > > >> word meaning, because these units are still nowhere near big enough > to > > > > >> describe the kinds of changes which must occur when verbal thinking > > > > >> develops. I feel the same way about a lot of the examples offered of > > > > >> "perezhivanie", including Marc's. If MacDuff's grief or Carla's > > > epiphany > > > > >> about the misbehavior of her kids being due to "outside influences" > > > > really > > > > >> is the unit of personality and experience that Vygotsky wants us to > > > use > > > > >> when we analyse the ontogenesis of personality, then it is no more > > > > >> appropriate than using the morpho-phoneme to analyse the whole of > > > verbal > > > > >> thinking. Just as evolution (of species) requires very different > units > > > > from > > > > >> history (of classes), development, whether we are talking about > verbal > > > > >> thinking or the personality as a whole, is going to require very > > > > different > > > > >> units from learning, whether we are talking about MacDuff or Carla. > > > The > > > > >> units must be able to develop; that is, the relationship of the > > > elements > > > > >> within them must be susceptible to many changes over time. > > > > >> > > > > >> Let me give three examples of how this happens in different > > > > >> "perezhivanie". They are not mine; they are Vygotsky's, and they are > > > all > > > > >> from the Pedological Lectures. > > > > >> > > > > >> First, the Crisis at One. Neither the biological nor the social > > > > endowment > > > > >> of the child greatly changes in the acquisition of speech; > > > nevertheless, > > > > >> the relationship between the personality and the environment, of > which > > > > both > > > > >> personality moments and environmental ones are constituent elements, > > > is > > > > >> entirely transformed. Here we are not talking about phonemes, or > even > > > > >> morpho-phonemes: we are talking about "wordings"--whole utterances. > In > > > > >> Melbourne I presented some data that demonstrated this > beautifully--a > > > > >> child's first word is actually an attempt to imitate a whole > > > > conversation. > > > > >> > > > > >> Second, the Crisis at Three. Vygotsky spends a lot of time > discussing > > > > the > > > > >> "Seven Stars"--the symptoms of the "Terrible Twos" and > "Threenagehood" > > > > >> noted by harried parents everywhere. But by the end of his analysis > > > it's > > > > >> clear that what really happens is a new relationship between wish > and > > > > will: > > > > >> in extreme cases, the child actually wishes for one thing (e.g. > > > > compromise) > > > > >> and wills the opposite (the everlasting "No!"). Again, neither the > > > > >> personality moments as such nor the environmental ones change, but > > > > there is > > > > >> a separation and a sorting which allows the subordination of wish to > > > > will > > > > >> that we see in play. This isn't the kind of "aha" moment that Marc > is > > > > >> offering us at all: Vygotsky actually calls it the "antipode" of > > > future > > > > >> will, because instead of enabling will it actually paralyzes it. But > > > it > > > > is > > > > >> indubitably a key moment in the development of the relation of > > > > personality > > > > >> to environmental moments that we see in "perizhivanie". > > > > >> > > > > >> Thirdly, the Crisis at Seven. I think Gonzalez Rey makes a total > hash > > > of > > > > >> this, and I get very cross when I read his article. It is not true > > > that > > > > the > > > > >> essence of perizhivanie remained a mystery to Vygotsky simply > because > > > > he no > > > > >> longer subscribes to "the aesthetic reaction" and "catharsis" and > > > other > > > > >> notions that he toyed with in Psych of Art (he's no longer doing > > > > >> experiments on changes in breathing rate when people read the works > of > > > > >> Bunin either!). It might be true that he never offered a system of > > > facts > > > > >> and methodological procedures for perezivanie, but that was only > > > because > > > > >> one already existed, for example in the work of Wallon and Stern and > > > > >> others. It is demonstrably not true that when Vygotsky says that the > > > > speech > > > > >> environment of those around him does not change when the child > learns > > > to > > > > >> talk at one, he is not "profoundly contradictory with the concept of > > > > >> sense": when you read the quotation in context, it is very clear > that > > > > what > > > > >> he is referring to are the kinds of absolute indicators used by > > > Zalkind: > > > > >> how often the parents read the newspapers, the dialect they speak, > and > > > > >> their educational background. These do not change, and if the child > > > > wants > > > > >> to make sense, these are the factors the child will have to relate > to. > > > > >> > > > > >> Vygotsky gives the example of a child who is severely retarded. The > > > > child > > > > >> wants to play with other children and is rejected. The child walks > > > down > > > > the > > > > >> street and the other children follow, laughing. The child is > shrieked > > > > at, > > > > >> insulted, but as soon as the humiliation stops, the child is > perfectly > > > > >> happy with himself. Vygotsky points out that the child is not able > to > > > > >> "co-generalize" the "perizhivanie" of the humiliations: each is > > > > unpleasant, > > > > >> but they are entirely separate and cannot be connected with any > > > internal > > > > >> sense of inferiority. A normal child, however, is able to > > > "internalize" > > > > >> these humiliations and consequently develops a sense of inferiority. > > > We > > > > can > > > > >> see that what has happened is the insertion of what Vygotsky calls > an > > > > >> "intellectual" moment: an inner layer, which is what distinguishes > > > later > > > > >> Chaplin movies from earlier ones (again, Vygotsky's example, not > > > mine!) > > > > and > > > > >> what brings about the "loss of directness and naivete" that we see > in > > > > >> pre-schoolers. > > > > >> > > > > >> I think that the reason people find "perizhivanie" so hard to work > > > with > > > > >> is the same reason that they find "word meaning" hard to work with: > it > > > > >> develops. The feeling of drinking milk as the infant drinks it is > > > > >> perizhivanie, and the thought of being humiliated when you are > mulling > > > > it > > > > >> over and contemplating revenge is also perizhivanie, and only a > > > profound > > > > >> analysis which includes ontogenetic development and not just > learning > > > > will > > > > >> show the inner link between them. It's for that reason that I think > > > that > > > > >> "activity" is not a useful unit of analysis and I am much more > > > inclined > > > > to > > > > >> use your word "project", so long as it can include what Vygotsky > calls > > > > >> "inner activeness". > > > > >> > > > > >> Vygotsky says: > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> ????? ? ?????????, ?????????? ? ?. ?., ? ???? ???? ? ?????????? > > > > >> ???????????, ??? ?????????? ???????????? ??????????????? ????????? > > > > >> ??????????????? ?? ??????? ? ??????? ?????????????. ??? ??? ????? > > > ????? > > > > >> ?????????? ?????????? ? ???????? ???????? ??????????? ? ???, ???, ? > ?? > > > > >> ????? ??? ? ?????????? ???????? ??? ?????????? ???????????? > > > ???????????? > > > > >> ???????????????? ????? ? ?????????, ??????? ???????????, ? ???????? > > > > >> ???????? ?? ????? ???????????? ?????????????? ???????????, > > > ???????????? > > > > >> ??????????? ?????????? ?????????? ?? ????????? ? ??????? > ????????????. > > > > ??? > > > > >> ??? ???????, ??????? ????? ??????????, ? ?? ????? ????? ?? ?????? > ??? > > > > ????? > > > > >> ???-??????, ???, ? ???????? ????????? ?????????????? ??????? ? > > > > ?????????? > > > > >> ????????????. > > > > >> > > > > >> When I think, remember, etc. I am dealing withinner activeness; this > > > > >> psychological process of inner activity is not directly linked to > any > > > > >> external activity. The new form of inner activeness in the School > Age > > > > >> consists of this: that while during the preschool years these inner > > > > >> activities demonstrated an immediate link with action, with external > > > > >> activeness, in the school years we have a relative autonomy which > > > > emerges, > > > > >> inner activeness which is relatively independent of external > > > activities. > > > > >> Here is already a child who can think, at the same time when he is > > > > doing or > > > > >> seeing something, one in whom has emerged a differentiation of inner > > > and > > > > >> outer activities. > > > > >> > > > > >> David Kellogg > > > > >> Macquarie University > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 10:07 AM, Andy Blunden > > > > > > >> ablunden@mira.net>> wrote: > > > > >> > > > > >> David: "Are words really units?" > > > > >> > > > > >> Well, firstly, "units" is a *relative* term. That is, > > > > >> the question is: are words units of something, some > > > > >> complex process subject to analysis. And which? > > > > >> > > > > >> Secondly, according to Vygotsky, "no." The concept > > > > >> Vygotsky proposes as a unit is "word meaning" which he > > > > >> says is a unity of sound and meaning. The sound is an > > > > >> artefact, which, detached from its meaningful > > > > >> utterance in a transactional context is just a thing, > > > > >> viz., a word. Whereas "word meaning" is an > > > > >> arrtefact-mediated action, a unit of human social > > > > >> activity. > > > > >> > > > > >> It is true that words can be countable or mass > > > > >> according to context, but I wasn't talking about words > > > > >> was I? I was talking about word meaning. > > > > >> > > > > >> Andy > > > > >> > > > > >> ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > >> Andy Blunden > > > > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy > > > > >> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective- > > > > decision-making > > > > >> > > > >> decision-making> > > > > >> > > > > >> On 8/01/2017 7:59 AM, David Kellogg wrote: > > > > >> > > > > >> Are words really units? When we look at their > > > > >> ideational meaning (that is, > > > > >> their logical and experiential content--their > > > > >> capacity for representing and > > > > >> linking together human experiences) they seem to > > > > >> fall into two very > > > > >> different categories: lexical words like > > > > >> "perezhivanie" or "sense" or > > > > >> "personality" of "individual" and grammatical > > > > >> words like "of", or "might", > > > > >> or "is". The lexical words seem to behave like > > > > >> units--they are bounded, > > > > >> discrete, and, as Andy would say, "countable" (the > > > > >> problem is that almost > > > > >> all nouns are both countable and uncountable > > > > >> depending on the context you > > > > >> put them in, so this distinction is really not as > > > > >> essential as Andy seems > > > > >> to assume). But the more grammatical words seem to > > > > >> be elements of some > > > > >> larger unit, which we can call wording. > > > > >> > > > > >> Veresov and Fleer come up against this problem > > > > >> with "edintsvo" and > > > > >> "edintsa". Of course, as they say, the two words > > > > >> are distinct. But this > > > > >> doesn't necessarily mean that the former always > > > > >> corresponds to "unity" in > > > > >> English and the latter is always "unit". If you > > > > >> look at the paragraph they > > > > >> translate on 330, you can see that Vygotsky starts > > > > >> with an idea that is > > > > >> quite "synoptic" and is well expressed by "unit". > > > > >> But in the last sentence > > > > >> there is a sense that "perezhivanie" is a > > > > >> meta-stable unit--one that > > > > >> remains self-similar only through a process of > > > > >> thorough change, like a > > > > >> bicycle whose every part is replaced--and in > > > > >> English is it is better to > > > > >> express this idea with "unity". The problem is > > > > >> that the differences between > > > > >> "edintsvo" and "edintsva" in Russian is a matter > > > > >> of gender (I think) and > > > > >> not simply abstractness, and as a result the > > > > >> English version, which cannot > > > > >> use the resource of gender,has to rely on > > > > >> abstractness, so the words > > > > >> "unity" and "unit" are somewhat more distinct and > > > > >> less linked than > > > > >> "edintsvo" and "edintsva". > > > > >> > > > > >> There are other problems that are similar. When > > > > >> Gonzalez Rey uses the word > > > > >> "final moment" to refer to the final period of > > > > >> Vygotsky's thinking, he > > > > >> leaves the anglophone reader the impression that > > > > >> he is referring to > > > > >> Vygotsky's deathbed thoughts. On the other hand, > > > > >> when Veresov and Fleer use > > > > >> "factor" to translate the same Russian word that > > > > >> Gonzalez Rey is using, > > > > >> they are giving us something more quantitative > > > > >> than Vygotsky intended, and > > > > >> their translation of "dalee nerazloshim'im > > > > >> chastyami etava edinstva" > > > > >> into "vital and further indivisible part of the > > > > >> whole" is quite opaque in > > > > >> English (notice that here Veresov and Fleer use > > > > >> "whole" to translate > > > > >> "edinstva" rather than "unit"!) At some point you > > > > >> have to accept that you > > > > >> can change Russian words into English words as if > > > > >> you were exchanging > > > > >> rubles for dollars, but you still won't be able to > > > > >> buy a samovar at Walmart. > > > > >> > > > > >> David Kellogg > > > > >> Macquarie University > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 5:21 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > > > > >> > > > > > >> wrote: > > > > >> > > > > >> Larry, all, > > > > >> > > > > >> our arguments in the 2014 address a science > > > > >> education literature in which > > > > >> the constructivist perspective is the leading > > > > >> perspective; We note that the > > > > >> assertion that people learn from experience is > > > > >> everywhere taken for granted > > > > >> but nowhere accounted for. We resort to > > > > >> pragmatist and phenomenological > > > > >> literature along with Vygotsky's insights to > > > > >> point out the need to account > > > > >> for learning as something that cannot be the > > > > >> result of an individual's > > > > >> construction; in experience there is always > > > > >> something in excess of what you > > > > >> intended, and this is a basic feature of > > > > >> doing, of performing. I take that > > > > >> to be your "trans" in the trans/zhivanie word, > > > > >> Larry, which already is > > > > >> denoted in the word PERezhivanie. > > > > >> > > > > >> But I do not wish to move our discussion too > > > > >> far away from Marc's paper > > > > >> and the Perezhivanie special issue. We also > > > > >> risk disengaging many that have > > > > >> not have the privilege we've had to have the > > > > >> time to read so many articles > > > > >> in just few days into the new year. I think we > > > > >> are a point in the > > > > >> discussion where a pretty clear point of > > > > >> agreement/disagreement, and > > > > >> therefore of possibility for growth, has been > > > > >> reached with regard to the > > > > >> view of perezhivanie as "an experience" and as > > > > >> the "working over it". I > > > > >> think that to allow as many as possible to > > > > >> follow, and hopefully also > > > > >> engage, I think it will be helpful to bring > > > > >> the diverse perspectives and > > > > >> theoretical accounts to matter in accounting > > > > >> for some actual material. And > > > > >> there are a number of cases described in the > > > > >> articles, including Marc's > > > > >> case of a teacher, as well as everyday facts, > > > > >> such as those brought by > > > > >> Beth, and in Beth's article... > > > > >> > > > > >> I take the task for myself too, but Saturday > > > > >> morning need to attend to > > > > >> other things! > > > > >> A > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> ________________________________________ > > > > >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> Sent: 07 January 2017 18:26 > > > > >> To: Andy Blunden; Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended > > > > >> Mind, Culture, Activity; > > > > >> Larry Purss > > > > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and > > > > >> Perezhivanie! > > > > >> > > > > >> Andy, Peter, i hope the intention to move > > > > >> beyond politeness to struggle > > > > >> with this topic materializes. > > > > >> In this vein i want to introduce exploration > > > > >> of the 'excess' of actual > > > > >> over intended meaning as he sketched his > > > > >> introduction to 'experience'. > > > > >> > > > > >> Citing Dewey, Alfredo says that this excess of > > > > >> actual learning over > > > > >> intended learning INCLUDES what Dewey refers > > > > >> to as 'attitudes' and these > > > > >> 'attitudes' are FUNDAMENTALLY what count in > > > > >> the future. > > > > >> Alfredo and Roth then add this summary > > > > >> statement : > > > > >> > > > > >> There is therefore, a need to theorize > > > > >> experience in terms that do not > > > > >> assume control and rationality as the sine qua > > > > >> non of learning. It also > > > > >> implies a need to develop analytical accounts > > > > >> that retain the 'uncertainty' > > > > >> that is an 'integral part' of human experience. > > > > >> > > > > >> Where are Alfredo and Roth leading us with > > > > >> this sketch of experience? To > > > > >> highlight 'attitudes' that occur in the excess > > > > >> of actual over intended > > > > >> learning? The word 'attitudes' generates > > > > >> images of (atmosphere) and (moods) > > > > >> that 'flow' like cascading waterfalls that can > > > > >> be imaged as (force) or as > > > > >> (receptive). Attitudes that flow to places > > > > >> where they are received within a > > > > >> certain attitude of care and concern. Not as > > > > >> forceful an image as moving > > > > >> only with control and rationality. > Describing > > > > >> 'weaker' thought that > > > > >> remains uncertain but that also opens us to > > > > >> the other's peril and plight. > > > > >> Possibly a post-analytic motion that exceeds > > > > >> the intended by living-through > > > > >> the actual that develops 'attitudes' that are > > > > >> fundamentally what count for > > > > >> the future. > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > >> > > > > >> From: Andy Blunden > > > > >> Sent: January 7, 2017 5:00 AM > > > > >> To: Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, > > > > >> Activity > > > > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and > > > > >> Perezhivanie! > > > > >> > > > > >> OK Peter, what you say is all very true I am > > > > >> sure, but it > > > > >> entails conflating activity and action (as > > > > >> mass nouns) and > > > > >> context and mediation, and makes the required > > > > >> distinction > > > > >> much like one could find multiple meanings for > > > > >> the word > > > > >> "and" by listing the different phrases and > > > > >> clauses which can > > > > >> be linked by "and." > > > > >> > > > > >> Andy > > > > >> > > > > >> ------------------------------ > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > >> Andy Blunden > > > > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy > > > > >> > > > > >> http://www.brill.com/products/ > > > > book/origins-collective-decisi > > > > >> on-making > > > > >> > > > >> decision-making> > > > > >> > > > > >> On 7/01/2017 11:42 PM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > > > > >> > > > > >> Let me try to illustrate. > > > > >> > > > > >> Reading as mediated action: The > > > > >> cultural-historical > > > > >> context of reading mediates how one's > > > > >> attention and > > > > >> response are channeled in socially > > > > >> constructed ways. So, > > > > >> in one setting, say at home or reading in > > > > >> the company of > > > > >> friends, a novel might bring a reader to > > > > >> tears, or invite > > > > >> readers to share personal stories that > > > > >> parallel those of > > > > >> the plot lines, or laugh out loud. But > > > > >> another setting, a > > > > >> formal school or university class, would > > > > >> have historical > > > > >> values and practices that mute emotional > > > > >> and personal > > > > >> responses, and promote a more sober, > > > > >> analytic way of > > > > >> reading and talking that fits with > > > > >> specific historical > > > > >> critical conventions and genres, and > > > > >> discourages others. > > > > >> > > > > >> Reading as mediating action: The act of > > > > >> reading can be > > > > >> transformational. In reading about an > > > > >> talking about a > > > > >> character's actions, a reader might > > > > >> reconsider a value > > > > >> system, become more sympathetic to real > > > > >> people who > > > > >> resemble oppressed characters, etc. In > > > > >> other words, > > > > >> reading a text may serve a mediational > > > > >> process in which > > > > >> textual ideas and exemplars enable a > > > > >> reader to think > > > > >> differently. > > > > >> > > > > >> *From:*Andy Blunden > > > > >> [mailto:ablunden@mira.net > > > > >> ] > > > > >> *Sent:* Saturday, January 7, 2017 6:28 AM > > > > >> *To:* Peter Smagorinsky > > > >> >; eXtended Mind, > > > > >> Culture, Activity > > > >> > > > > > >> *Subject:* Re: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year > > > > >> and Perezhivanie! > > > > >> > > > > >> Can you explain in a paragraph or two,. > > > > >> Peter, rather than > > > > >> asking us all to read 10,000 words to > > > > >> extract an answer? > > > > >> > > > > >> Andy > > > > >> > > > > >> ------------------------------ > > > > >> ------------------------------ > > > > >> > > > > >> Andy Blunden > > > > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> http://www.brill.com/products/ > > > > >> book/origins-collective-decision-making > > > > >> > > collective- > > > > >> decision-making> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> On 7/01/2017 11:23 PM, Peter Smagorinsky > > > > >> wrote: > > > > >> > > > > >> Andy and others, I tried to work out > > > > >> the mediated/mediating question > > > > >> > > > > >> in the area of reading....see if this helps. > > > > >> > > > > >> Smagorinsky, P., & O'Donnell-Allen, > > > > >> C. (1998). Reading as mediated > > > > >> > > > > >> and mediating action: Composing meaning for > > > > >> literature through multimedia > > > > >> interpretive texts. Reading Research > > > > >> Quarterly, 33, 198-226. Available > > > > >> athttp://www.petersmagorinsky. > > > net/About/PDF/RRQ/RRQ1998.pdf > > > > >> > > net/About/PDF/RRQ/RRQ1998.pdf> > > > > >> > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > > > > >> > > > > >> From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> .ucsd.edu > > > > >> > > > > > >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> mailman.ucsd.edu ] On > > > > >> Behalf Of Andy Blunden > > > > >> > > > > >> Sent: Friday, January 6, 2017 7:12 PM > > > > >> > > > > >> To:xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year > > > > >> and Perezhivanie! > > > > >> > > > > >> I have never understood this supposed > > > > >> distinction, Alfredo, between > > > > >> > > > > >> "mediated activity" and "mediating activity" > > > > >> given that all activity is > > > > >> mediated and all activity mediates. > > > > >> > > > > >> Also, could you spell out what you > > > > >> mean by the "tension" > > > > >> > > > > >> between perezhivanie as meaning and > > > > >> perezhivanie as struggle. > > > > >> > > > > >> Andy > > > > >> > > > > >> ------------------------------ > > > > >> ------------------------------ > > > > >> > > > > >> Andy Blunden > > > > >> > > > > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> http://www.brill.com/products/ > > > book/origins-collective- > > > > >> > > collective- > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> decision-making > > > > >> > > > > >> On 5/01/2017 6:26 PM, Alfredo Jornet > > > > >> Gil wrote: > > > > >> > > > > >> Thanks Marc for your careful > > > > >> response. > > > > >> > > > > >> I am familiar to Vygotsky's > > > > >> notion of cultural mediation and I > > > > >> > > > > >> am aware and acknowledge that it was > > > > >> elaborated as a means to overcome > > > > >> dualism, and that it is not analog to a > > > > >> computational approach. > > > > >> > > > > >> When I brought the computing > > > > >> analogy, I did so with regard not > > > > >> > > > > >> to the concept of cultural mediation in > > > > >> general, but to the way it can be > > > > >> (and is) deployed analytically. I react to > > > > >> what it seems to me a dichotomy > > > > >> between a "meaning" as something that is > > > > >> static (thereby a form of > > > > >> "representation" or reflection of the relation > > > > >> with the environment instead > > > > >> of?refraction)?? and the > > > > >> experiencing-as-struggling, which is described > > > > >> as?transformation or change. If so, mediation > > > > >> here would seem to be part of > > > > >> a methodological device that first dissects "a > > > > >> type of meaning" from "a > > > > >> type of activity" (or a given state from the > > > > >> process that changes that > > > > >> state), and then unites it by adding the term > > > > >> "mediation." And this may be > > > > >> my misreading, but in that (mis)reading (which > > > > >> perhaps is mostly due to the > > > > >> fact that in your empirical illustration only > > > > >> the initial and end product, > > > > >> i.e., perezhivanie, are described, but not the > > > > >> experiencing-as-struggle, > > > > >> that is, the moving between the two), > > > > >> mediation here seems to do as > > > > >> analytical concept precisely what you were > > > > >> afraid our monism was doing: > > > > >> explaining nothing. Only the end products but > > > > >> not the process of producing > > > > >> perezhivanie are revealed. This may be > > > > >> problematic if one attends to what > > > > >> Veresov argues in the paper I shared > > > > >> yesterday, where he defends the notion > > > > >> of mediation but also specifies that Vygotsky > > > > >> speaks of *mediating > > > > >> activity* (as opposed to *mediated* activity). > > > > >> That is, not mediation by > > > > >> signs as products, but mediating activity as > > > > >> the activity of producing > > > > >> signs (which again is an activity of producing > > > > >> social relations, perhaps > > > > >> what you refer as "holistic meanings"?). What > > > > >> do you think? > > > > >> > > > > >> I did not think you were trying > > > > >> to deny the influence of > > > > >> > > > > >> Spinoza, and I do not think we ever said that > > > > >> Perezhivanie was primarily a > > > > >> move from Cartesian Dualism to Monism, as you > > > > >> suggest in your post. I copy > > > > >> and paste from my prior post: "The fact is > > > > >> that Vygotsky was building a > > > > >> theory on the unity of the affect and the > > > > >> intellect that was to be grounded > > > > >> on Spinoza, and what we try to do is to > > > > >> explore how perezhivanie, as a > > > > >> concept being developed during the same period > > > > >> (but not finalised or > > > > >> totally settled!), could be seen from the > > > > >> perspective of the Spinozist > > > > >> Vygotsky." > > > > >> > > > > >> I totally believe that bringing > > > > >> the distinction between > > > > >> > > > > >> perezhivanie as meaning, and perezhivanie as > > > > >> struggle, is totally relevant, > > > > >> and Beth Ferholt's vignettes of Where the Wild > > > > >> Things Are do indeed > > > > >> illustrate this. We really need to address > > > > >> this tension, which as Beth's > > > > >> examples and as our own everyday experience > > > > >> shows, is a tension that > > > > >> matters not just to books and to theories but > > > > >> to living persons (children, > > > > >> teachers), a tension that moreover is present > > > > >> and mentioned in all the > > > > >> articles of the symposium. The papers offer > > > > >> different proposals, and I > > > > >> think is so great we have the chance to > > > > >> discuss them! I too, as you, am > > > > >> very interesting in hearing others about the > > > > >> questions you had concerning > > > > >> sense and meaning. > > > > >> > > > > >> Alfredo > > > > >> > > > > >> From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > >> > > > > >> > > xmca-l-bounces@mailman > > > > >> .ucsd.edu > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > xmca-l-bounces@mailman > > > > >> .ucsd.edu > > > > >> > > > > > >> on behalf of Marc > > > > >> > > > > >> Clara > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> Sent: 04 January 2017 22:31 > > > > >> > > > > >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > >> > > > > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New > > > > >> Year and Perezhivanie! > > > > >> > > > > >> Thank you very much, Alfredo, for > > > > >> sharing this excellent paper by > > > > >> > > > > >> Veresov, and thanks also for your > > > > >> responses, which really helped > > > > >> > > > > >> me to > > > > >> > > > > >> better understand your points. My > > > > >> main doubt about your proposal > > > > >> > > > > >> was/is caused by the statement > > > > >> that the idea of cultural > > > > >> > > > > >> mediation/mediator implies a > > > > >> cartesian dualism. This shocks me > > > > >> > > > > >> because, to me, the idea of > > > > >> cultural mediation is absolutely > > > > >> > > > > >> crucial > > > > >> > > > > >> (in fact, the keystone) for the > > > > >> construction of a monist (and > > > > >> > > > > >> scientific) psychology that does > > > > >> not forget mind -that is, a > > > > >> > > > > >> cultural > > > > >> > > > > >> psychology. From your response, > > > > >> however, I realized that we may > > > > >> > > > > >> be > > > > >> > > > > >> approaching the idea of mediation > > > > >> in different ways. I talk of > > > > >> > > > > >> mediation and mediators in a > > > > >> quite restricted way. The starting > > > > >> > > > > >> point > > > > >> > > > > >> of my understanding of mediation > > > > >> is a dialectical relationship > > > > >> > > > > >> (organic, transactional) between > > > > >> the subject and the world > > > > >> > > > > >> (Vygotsky departs from the scheme > > > > >> stimulus-response, from reflexology). > > > > >> > > > > >> This relationship, that Vygotsky > > > > >> calls primitive psychological > > > > >> > > > > >> functions, would be basically > > > > >> biological. However, in human > > > > >> > > > > >> beings > > > > >> > > > > >> this relationship is mediated by > > > > >> cultural means: signs and > > > > >> > > > > >> tools; or > > > > >> > > > > >> primary, secondary and terciary > > > > >> artifacts. These cultural means > > > > >> > > > > >> reorganize the primitive > > > > >> functions (dialectic S-O relationship), > > > > >> > > > > >> which > > > > >> > > > > >> become then higher psychological > > > > >> functions (S-M-O) (see for > > > > >> > > > > >> example, > > > > >> > > > > >> The problem of the cultural > > > > >> development of the child, in The > > > > >> > > > > >> Vygotsky > > > > >> > > > > >> Reader). Now, the subject, the > > > > >> cultural mediators, and the > > > > >> > > > > >> object form > > > > >> > > > > >> an inseparable dialectical unit, > > > > >> so that the subject acts on > > > > >> > > > > >> (transforms) the object through > > > > >> the prism of the cultural > > > > >> > > > > >> mediators, > > > > >> > > > > >> the object acts on (transforms) > > > > >> the subject also through the > > > > >> > > > > >> prism of > > > > >> > > > > >> the cultural mediators, and the > > > > >> cultural means are themselves > > > > >> > > > > >> also > > > > >> > > > > >> transformed as a consequence of > > > > >> their mediation in this > > > > >> > > > > >> continuous > > > > >> > > > > >> dynamic dialectical tension. > > > > >> Here, for me, it is important the > > > > >> > > > > >> idea > > > > >> > > > > >> that the cultural means are as > > > > >> material (if we assume a > > > > >> > > > > >> materialist > > > > >> > > > > >> monism) as all the rest of the > > > > >> world; in fact, are parts of the > > > > >> > > > > >> material world which become signs > > > > >> or tools (and can be therefore > > > > >> > > > > >> socially distributed). This > > > > >> permits the introduction of the > > > > >> > > > > >> scientific > > > > >> > > > > >> study of mind-consciousness (as > > > > >> mediating systems of signs), > > > > >> > > > > >> because > > > > >> > > > > >> mind is not anymore something > > > > >> immaterial and unobservable, but > > > > >> > > > > >> it is > > > > >> > > > > >> as material and observable as the > > > > >> rest of the natural world. It > > > > >> > > > > >> is > > > > >> > > > > >> from this view that, for me, the > > > > >> idea of cultural mediation is > > > > >> > > > > >> the > > > > >> > > > > >> keystone of a monist psychology > > > > >> that includes mind. Thus, when I > > > > >> > > > > >> speak > > > > >> > > > > >> of mediators, I refer to the > > > > >> cultural means which mediate in the > > > > >> > > > > >> S-O > > > > >> > > > > >> dialectics; I am especially > > > > >> interested in signs/secondary > > > > >> > > > > >> artifacts. > > > > >> > > > > >> Here, it is perhaps necessary to > > > > >> insist that when I talk of > > > > >> > > > > >> studying > > > > >> > > > > >> mediators (and their semantic > > > > >> structure), this doesn't mean that > > > > >> > > > > >> they > > > > >> > > > > >> are taken out from the activity > > > > >> (the flux of live) in which they > > > > >> > > > > >> mediate (since out of activity > > > > >> they are not signs anymore); > > > > >> > > > > >> here, I > > > > >> > > > > >> think Vygotsky tries again to > > > > >> overcome another old dichotomy, the > > > > >> > > > > >> functionalism-structuralism one. > > > > >> I hope that all this makes also > > > > >> > > > > >> clear the difference between this view and > > > > >> that of computational > > > > >> psychologies (which in general are profoundly > > > > >> and explicitly dualist and > > > > >> not dialectic). > > > > >> > > > > >> Back to perezhivanie, I'm not > > > > >> obviously trying to deny the > > > > >> > > > > >> influence > > > > >> > > > > >> of Spinoza on Vygotsky's thinking > > > > >> (this is explicit in Vygotsky's > > > > >> > > > > >> writings, especially in "The > > > > >> teaching about emotions", in the > > > > >> > > > > >> Vol.6 of > > > > >> > > > > >> the Collected Works). But I have > > > > >> doubts that Vygotsky's > > > > >> > > > > >> introduction > > > > >> > > > > >> of the concept of perezhivanie is > > > > >> to be regarded primarily as a > > > > >> > > > > >> movement towards monism (from a > > > > >> previous cartesian dualism), and > > > > >> > > > > >> that > > > > >> > > > > >> this movement questions the > > > > >> concept of cultural mediation. > > > > >> > > > > >> Instead, > > > > >> > > > > >> and I think that this is in line > > > > >> with some of Gonzalez-Rey > > > > >> > > > > >> observations in his paper, my > > > > >> impression is that the > > > > >> > > > > >> introduction of > > > > >> > > > > >> the concept of perezhivanie > > > > >> responds more to a movement (a > > > > >> > > > > >> further > > > > >> > > > > >> step) towards holism (something > > > > >> that, in my understanding, can > > > > >> > > > > >> also be > > > > >> > > > > >> found in Spinoza). Thus, I think > > > > >> that the word meaning is still > > > > >> > > > > >> the > > > > >> > > > > >> unit of analysis in the last > > > > >> Vygotsky -and therefore, the idea of > > > > >> > > > > >> cultural mediation is still > > > > >> crucial (in fact, in The problem of > > > > >> > > > > >> the > > > > >> > > > > >> environment, he connects the > > > > >> concept of perezhivanie, which has > > > > >> > > > > >> just > > > > >> > > > > >> introduced, to the development of > > > > >> word meaning [p.345-346, also > > > > >> > > > > >> cited > > > > >> > > > > >> in my paper]). However, in my > > > > >> view, in the last Vygotsky the > > > > >> > > > > >> focus is > > > > >> > > > > >> not anymore primarily on the > > > > >> word-meaning as formed for things > > > > >> > > > > >> (or > > > > >> > > > > >> collections of things, as in the > > > > >> ontogenetic research with > > > > >> > > > > >> Sakharov), but the focus is now in the > > > > >> formation of meaning for holistic > > > > >> situations. > > > > >> > > > > >> Best regards, > > > > >> > > > > >> Marc. > > > > >> > > > > >> 2017-01-03 19:16 GMT+01:00 > > > > >> Alfredo Jornet Gil< > > > > >> > > > > >> a.j.gil@iped.uio.no > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> >: > > > > >> > > > > >> Hi Marc, all, > > > > >> > > > > >> thanks for joining and for > > > > >> your interesting work, which I > > > > >> > > > > >> follow > > > > >> > > > > >> since I became aware of it. I > > > > >> appreciate the way in your > > > > >> > > > > >> paper you > > > > >> > > > > >> show careful and honest > > > > >> attention to the texts of the authors > > > > >> > > > > >> involved, but perhaps most of > > > > >> all I appreciate that the > > > > >> > > > > >> paper makes > > > > >> > > > > >> the transformational > > > > >> dimension related to struggle and change > > > > >> > > > > >> salient, a dimension all > > > > >> papers deemed central to > > > > >> > > > > >> perezhivanie. And I > > > > >> > > > > >> have learned more about > > > > >> Vasilyuk by reading your paper. But > > > > >> > > > > >> I also > > > > >> > > > > >> see that we have approached > > > > >> the question of perezhivanie > > > > >> > > > > >> differently > > > > >> > > > > >> and I think that addressing > > > > >> the questions that you raise > > > > >> > > > > >> concerning > > > > >> > > > > >> our article may be a good way > > > > >> to both respond and discuss > > > > >> > > > > >> your paper. > > > > >> > > > > >> I am aware that our use of > > > > >> the term monism may be > > > > >> > > > > >> problematic to > > > > >> > > > > >> some, and N. Veresov, who has > > > > >> recently written about this > > > > >> > > > > >> (see > > > > >> > > > > >> attached article), warns > > > > >> against the dangers of simply > > > > >> > > > > >> moving from > > > > >> > > > > >> dualism into an > > > > >> undifferentiating monism that relativizes > > > > >> > > > > >> everything, > > > > >> > > > > >> making development > > > > >> un-studiable. This seems to be the way in > > > > >> > > > > >> which > > > > >> > > > > >> you have understood our > > > > >> argument, and of course this is not > > > > >> > > > > >> what we are or want to be doing. > > > > >> > > > > >> Probably many will think that > > > > >> *dialectical materialism* > > > > >> > > > > >> rather than > > > > >> > > > > >> monism is the proper term, > > > > >> and I could agree with them; we > > > > >> > > > > >> do in fact > > > > >> > > > > >> use dialectical materialism > > > > >> there and elsewhere. Yet, we > > > > >> > > > > >> wanted to > > > > >> > > > > >> emphasise the Spinozist > > > > >> influence (an influence that also > > > > >> > > > > >> runs > > > > >> > > > > >> through Marx) and so we found > > > > >> it appropriate to use the term > > > > >> > > > > >> monism, > > > > >> > > > > >> a term that Vygotsky uses > > > > >> before arguing that Spinoza > > > > >> > > > > >> "develops an essentially materialistic view" > > > > >> > > > > >> (Collected Works, Vol. 6, p. > > > > >> 124). For us, the aim is > > > > >> > > > > >> working out > > > > >> > > > > >> ways to empirically examine > > > > >> and formulate problems in ways > > > > >> > > > > >> that do > > > > >> > > > > >> not reify a mind-body dualism. > > > > >> > > > > >> Although overcoming dualism > > > > >> is foundational to the CHAT > > > > >> > > > > >> paradigm, I > > > > >> > > > > >> would however not say that > > > > >> Vygotsky did get to solve all of > > > > >> > > > > >> the > > > > >> > > > > >> problems that Cartesian > > > > >> dualism had created for psychology, > > > > >> > > > > >> even > > > > >> > > > > >> though he recognised those > > > > >> problems brilliantly as early as > > > > >> > > > > >> in the > > > > >> > > > > >> "Crisis". It should suffice > > > > >> to cite Vygotsky's own remarks, > > > > >> > > > > >> which we quote in the paper (and which A.N. > > > > >> > > > > >> Leont'ev mentions in the > > > > >> introduction to the collected > > > > >> > > > > >> works), where > > > > >> > > > > >> Vygotsky explicitly critiques > > > > >> some of his own prior ideas > > > > >> > > > > >> for failing > > > > >> > > > > >> to overcome dualism. We agree > > > > >> with those who, like F. G. > > > > >> > > > > >> Rey, see > > > > >> > > > > >> Vygotsky's project as a > > > > >> developing rather than as a > > > > >> > > > > >> finalised one. > > > > >> > > > > >> The fact is that Vygotsky was > > > > >> building a theory on the unity > > > > >> > > > > >> of the > > > > >> > > > > >> affect and the intellect that > > > > >> was to be grounded on Spinoza, > > > > >> > > > > >> and what > > > > >> > > > > >> we try to do is to explore > > > > >> how perezhivanie, as a concept > > > > >> > > > > >> being > > > > >> > > > > >> developed during the same > > > > >> period (but not finalised or > > > > >> > > > > >> totally > > > > >> > > > > >> settled!), could be seen from > > > > >> the perspective of the > > > > >> > > > > >> Spinozist Vygotsky. > > > > >> > > > > >> As you note, in our article > > > > >> we argue that, if one takes the > > > > >> > > > > >> Spinozist > > > > >> > > > > >> one-substance approach, > > > > >> classical concepts used in > > > > >> > > > > >> non-classical > > > > >> > > > > >> psychology, at least in the > > > > >> way they are commonly used in > > > > >> > > > > >> the current > > > > >> > > > > >> literature, should be > > > > >> revised. One such concept is > > > > >> > > > > >> mediation. And I > > > > >> > > > > >> personally do not have much > > > > >> of a problem when mediation is > > > > >> > > > > >> used to > > > > >> > > > > >> denote the fundamental fact > > > > >> that every thing exists always > > > > >> > > > > >> through > > > > >> > > > > >> *another*, never in and of > > > > >> itself. But I do think that it is > > > > >> > > > > >> problematic to identify > > > > >> MEDIATORS, such as "a meaning", as a > > > > >> > > > > >> means to > > > > >> > > > > >> account for or explain > > > > >> developmental processes and learning > > > > >> > > > > >> events, > > > > >> > > > > >> precisely because it is > > > > >> there, at least in my view, that > > > > >> > > > > >> dualism creeps in. > > > > >> > > > > >> For example, I find it > > > > >> paradoxical that you are concerned > > > > >> > > > > >> that our > > > > >> > > > > >> monist approach risks turning > > > > >> perezhivanie into a useless > > > > >> > > > > >> category > > > > >> > > > > >> because it may be used to > > > > >> explain everything and nothing, > > > > >> > > > > >> and yet you > > > > >> > > > > >> do not seem to have a problem > > > > >> using the term mediation to > > > > >> > > > > >> account for > > > > >> > > > > >> the transformation of > > > > >> perezhivanie without clearly > > > > >> > > > > >> elaborating on how > > > > >> > > > > >> mediation does change > > > > >> anything or what it looks like as a > > > > >> > > > > >> real > > > > >> > > > > >> process. How is it different > > > > >> saying that a perezhivanie > > > > >> > > > > >> mediates the > > > > >> > > > > >> experiencing-as-struggle from > > > > >> simply saying that it > > > > >> > > > > >> "affects" or > > > > >> > > > > >> "determines" it? Indeed, if > > > > >> perezhivanie mediates > > > > >> > > > > >> experiencing-as-struggle, > > > > >> does not experiencing-as-struglgle > > > > >> > > > > >> too > > > > >> > > > > >> mediate perezhivanie? And do > > > > >> not both may be said to mediate > > > > >> > > > > >> development, or development mediate them? Is > > > > >> not this explaining everything > > > > >> and nothing? > > > > >> > > > > >> I do believe you can argue > > > > >> that there is a difference between > > > > >> > > > > >> mediation and classical > > > > >> psychology's cause-effect relations, > > > > >> > > > > >> but to > > > > >> > > > > >> show this you need to dig > > > > >> into the dialectical underpinnings > > > > >> > > > > >> of the > > > > >> > > > > >> theory. In your paper, you > > > > >> offer a nice analysis of a lovely > > > > >> > > > > >> case of > > > > >> > > > > >> a teacher who, in dealing > > > > >> with a challenge with one of her > > > > >> > > > > >> students, > > > > >> > > > > >> changes her perezhivanie. I > > > > >> think you can rightly argue that > > > > >> > > > > >> there is > > > > >> > > > > >> a semiotic transformation, > > > > >> and I fully support your > > > > >> > > > > >> statement that by > > > > >> > > > > >> studying discourse we can > > > > >> empirically approach questions of > > > > >> > > > > >> psychological development. > > > > >> The contradictions you show as > > > > >> > > > > >> being > > > > >> > > > > >> involved and resolved > > > > >> resonate really well with what I > > > > >> > > > > >> experience as > > > > >> > > > > >> a parent or as a teacher in > > > > >> the classroom. Yet, without > > > > >> > > > > >> unpacking > > > > >> > > > > >> what this "mediation" taking > > > > >> place between one perezhivanie > > > > >> > > > > >> and the > > > > >> > > > > >> next one means as a concrete > > > > >> and real, the same analysis > > > > >> > > > > >> could be done taking an information processing > > > > >> approach: > > > > >> > > > > >> there is an situation that is > > > > >> processed (represented?) in > > > > >> > > > > >> one way, > > > > >> > > > > >> which then leads to a > > > > >> (cognitive) dissonance, and then there > > > > >> > > > > >> is a > > > > >> > > > > >> cognitive resolution by means > > > > >> of which the situation is > > > > >> > > > > >> presented > > > > >> > > > > >> differently in consciousness > > > > >> (indeed, when seen in this way, > > > > >> > > > > >> the term > > > > >> > > > > >> perezhivanie and the term > > > > >> "representation" become almost > > > > >> > > > > >> indistinguishable). How is > > > > >> mediation, as an analytical > > > > >> > > > > >> concept, > > > > >> > > > > >> helping here? And most > > > > >> importantly to the question of > > > > >> > > > > >> perezhivanie, > > > > >> > > > > >> how is this analysis going to > > > > >> show the internal connection > > > > >> > > > > >> between > > > > >> > > > > >> intellect and affect that > > > > >> Vygotsky formulates as > > > > >> > > > > >> constitutive of the notion of perezhivanie? > > > > >> > > > > >> I believe that the key lies > > > > >> in understanding what Vygotsky > > > > >> > > > > >> means when > > > > >> > > > > >> he says that perezhivanie is > > > > >> a unit of analysis. I will not > > > > >> > > > > >> repeat > > > > >> > > > > >> here what already is written > > > > >> in at least a couple of the > > > > >> > > > > >> articles in > > > > >> > > > > >> the special issue (Blunden, > > > > >> ours), that is the difference > > > > >> > > > > >> between > > > > >> > > > > >> analysis by elements and unit > > > > >> analysis (Vygotsky 1987). A > > > > >> > > > > >> unit > > > > >> > > > > >> analysis approach is > > > > >> consistent with Spinoza, for whom > > > > >> > > > > >> cause-effect > > > > >> > > > > >> explanations were not > > > > >> adequate, requiring instead an > > > > >> > > > > >> understanding of > > > > >> > > > > >> self-development, > > > > >> perezhivanie as a kernel cell for the > > > > >> > > > > >> development > > > > >> > > > > >> of personality. And I think > > > > >> you may be after this in your > > > > >> > > > > >> article in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From mcole@ucsd.edu Tue Jan 17 16:50:32 2017 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2017 16:50:32 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Fw: author articles MCA Issue 4 Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: References: <1484327382734.77186@iped.uio.no> <1484524342219.11085@iped.uio.no> <587c5eeb.4379630a.d3d04.fbd3@mx.google.com> <587e7a32.514f620a.25cb3.6a39@mx.google.com> Message-ID: Thanks for the heads up on the Highlander film, Robert. I'll definitely be on the lookout for it. From the discussions a while back that included the Highlander school is clearly a monumental achievement. Seems like we have a lot of movie watching we get to do at XMCA. :-) Whatever their shortcomings, Russian films seem like rich territory for discussing the polysemous pererzhivanie. Something about their historical experience perhaps. Seems like the Highlander film might also provide such opportunities, given its history of struggle. mike On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 1:37 PM, Robert Lake wrote: > Hi All, > If you have Turner Classic Movies in your cable, Roku, Amazon Stick or Dish > TV configuration > you might want to look at *You Got to Move - Stories of Change in the > South (*1985) > ?. It is the story of Highlander > Folk School and related activist movements from the 1930's to 1985 > and will available on demand until Tuesday, > Jan 24, 201 > ?7. > > *Robert Lake* > > > ? > > On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 3:09 PM, wrote: > > > I was unsure where to post my reflection of Beth and Monica?s paper. > > I decided that this thread held all this month?s article?s as a place for > > rehearsals. > > > > Beth and Monica, in their section on PERFORMANCE reference Schechner and > > the workshop-rehearsal process in three stages. > > The first stage breaks down a performer?s resistance, making him a kind > of > > tabula rasa. To do this requires the need for separation, for (sacred) or > > special space, and for a use of time different than that prevailing in > the > > ordinary. > > > > My question is if this sacred or special place can be developed as a > > disposition such that a person comes to experience the ordinary as > > (extraordinary) in the way Cavell uses the term the extraordinary IN the > > ordinary. > > What Schechner describes as the 1st stage as the need for separation > > within a sacred or special place becomes a practice of living vitality > > immanent and prevailing IN the ordinary? > > A way of life > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > From: lpscholar2@gmail.com > > Sent: January 15, 2017 9:49 PM > > To: Alfredo Jornet Gil; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: RE: [Xmca-l] Fw: author articles MCA Issue 4 Perezhivanie > > > > Alfredo, Thanks for sending the 87 pages that are exploring the > > multifaceted threads exploring perezhivanie. I believe we must also be > > closing in on another 87 pages generated in our discussions. I have now > > printed out the 87 pages of the journal and also many pages of the XMCA > > threads. > > THIS rich resource opens up multiple doors to enter into. I assume these > > are first steps and each separate article feels like a doorway into this > > common theme moving through multiple traditions. > > > > Yes, a symposium and also a symphony of questions & listening being > played. > > > > Sent from Mail for Windows 10 > > > > From: Alfredo Jornet Gil > > Sent: January 15, 2017 3:56 PM > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Fw: author articles MCA Issue 4 Perezhivanie > > > > ?I meant to send this e-mail last week, but it seems it did not go > > through, I am trying again > > > > Alfredo > > > > ________________________________ > > From: Alfredo Jornet Gil > > Sent: 13 January 2017 18:09 > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: author articles MCA Issue 4 Perezhivanie > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > as a complement to our ongoing perezhivanie discussion, and since the > > discussion has nicely taken the symposium form that also is present in > the > > special issue, all the authors have now agreed that we share their author > > versions. These are the versions accepted for publication before the > > proofs. That means that the ?articles attached may differ slightly from > the > > ones published, but they should be accurate enough to grant access to > > everyone who, like Larry and others, do not have institutional access to > > the T&F pages. > > > > > > Alfredo > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Robert Lake Ed.D. > Associate Professor > Social Foundations of Education > Dept. of Curriculum, Foundations, and Reading > Georgia Southern University > P. O. Box 8144, Statesboro, GA 30460 > Secretary/Treasurer-AERA- Paulo Freire Special Interest Group > Webpage: https://georgiasouthern.academia.edu/RobertLake*Democracy must be > born anew in every generation, and education is its midwife.* John > Dewey-*Democracy > and Education*,1916, p. 139 > From ablunden@mira.net Tue Jan 17 17:39:03 2017 From: ablunden@mira.net (Andy Blunden) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2017 12:39:03 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Fate of a Man In-Reply-To: References: <048522a2-cca0-3e56-cae2-f2142b9fbd5a@mira.net> <1484427999407.2877@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <2270f5e7-7d82-5150-89a3-808a4e20b89b@mira.net> Thank you Marc! It was the third "plane" which was my intention in providing "Fate of a Man" for discussion. You picked out what were for me also the main (but by no means the only) instances of perezhivanija in this movie. It seems to me that Sokolov (the author) offers one perezhivanie in particular as the main theme of the movie. At the beginning of the movie, the man and boy walk up the path to the camera and at the end of the movie they walk off together again. So this is the central theme. As you say, when Sokolov's family has all been killed, even his talented war-hero son who was going to be a famous mathematician, his life has become meaningless. I really liked your reflections of Sokolov's reflections too. He sees the young orphan boy who, he discovers, has no family and doesn't even know what town he comes from, but is aimlessly living on pieces of rubbish. He sees that the two of them are in the same situation. So after some time mulling this over a they sit together in the truck, he lies to the boy and tells him that he is the boy's father, and they embrace. But the boy questions this and he reasserts his claim and the boy accepts this. The man is able to define a new meaning for his life; he has done this autonomously without the help of a therapist, but he still needs another, the boy, to embody that meaning. But he knows it is his own invention. The boy on the other hand has to be made to believe it is true; he is not sufficiently mature to manufacture this meaning himself, but as a child he can be guided by an adult. As you say, Marc, it is very significant when Sokolov tells us how he is now, again, worried about his own death. What if I died in my sleep? that would be a shock for my son! For me, this reflection causes me to look back on the man's whole struggle during the war: in the first phase he does not differentiate between his life as a father and husband and his life as a Soviet citizen - war is his duty and he is confident, as is everyone else, of victory. His bravery in driving his truck to the front line under fire reflects the fact that he has never imagined his own death. Then he finds himself prostrate before 2 Nazi soldiers who we assume are going among the wounded shooting anyone who has survived. But surprisingly, he is allowed to live, but is to be used as a slave. Sokolov has been confronted by his own mortality for the first time and he chooses life, but accepts slavery (Sartre and Hegel both thematize this moment in their philosophy). In this second phase of Sokolov's life he is a survivor. Everything hinges on surviving and returning to his wife and family. As you point out, Marc, his later reflections on this are particularly poignant, when he discovers the futility of this hope. Eventually, the life of forced labour becomes unbearable. He cries out: "Why are we forced to dig 3 cubic metres when 1 cubic meter is enough for a grave!" Sokolov has accepted and embraced death after all. (Transition to the third phase.) To his German masters this is an unendurable act of defiance. As David points out, there are flaws in the scene which follows, but ... he confronts his own death defiantly, stares it in the eye, spits on it, and his life again gains meaning as a "brave Soviet soldier" unafraid of death even in such an impossible moment. Not only does he survive, but takes the Nazi Colonel prisoner and hands the war plans over to the Red Army. Now, when he is offered the chance to return to his wife as a war hero he declines and asks to be sent back to the front. His life has adopted this new meaning which casts his life as a father into the shade. He no longer fears death. But he is persuaded to take time off and learns of the death of his family. As Marc relates, the continued survival of his son, who is now also a war hero, provides continued meaning and integrates the two themes in his life. This takes work, as Marc points out, and he has the assistance of an older man, in achieving this redefinition of his life. But tragically, with the death of his son (and NB the end of the war, albeit in victory) his life is again without meaning. Fourth phase. He has survived, but has no purpose. By becoming a father again (Fifth phase), he regains the fear of death and meaning in his life. It is real work, and we witness this psychological turmoil as he copes with the idea that this scruffy orphan boy could be a son to him, and eventually he manages it. The transition between each phase is a critical period during which Sokolov's personality is transformed. Note also, that there is a premonition of this perezhivanie in Sokolov's earlier life: his family is wiped out in the Civil War and the famine of 1922, then he meets his wife-to-be, also raised in an orphanage, and they together create a life and have 17 happy years before the Nazi invasion intrudes. So from the beginning of the movie we are introduced to the main theme. These are the main moments in the movie, which caused me to select it for discussion rather than any other movie. Also, there is no doubt that in producing this movie in 1958 the Soviet government was engaged with its people, in a process of collective perezhivanie and by reflecting on the collective perezhivanie during the period of the war, before and after, they aim to assist the people in collectively assigning meaning to this terrible suffering and like the man and his "son" walking again into the future. As a propaganda movie, of course, it is open to much criticism, but that is hardly the point. I appreciate Marc's analysis in terms of the other concepts he has introduced. I wouldn't mind a recap on these. In terms of Vasilyuk's concepts, Sokolov's life-world is *simple and difficult*. The boy's life world is *simple and easy*. Can we continue to discuss "Fate of a Man", while I open another movie for analysis? I think there are at least 10 subscribers to this list who have published in learned journals on the topic of perezhivanie in childhood. Perhaps one of you would like to reflect on the boy's perezhivanija? Andy ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making On 18/01/2017 5:14 AM, Marc Clar? wrote: > Hi, all, > > and thank you, Andy, for sharing this amazing film, which I didn't know. I > think it will be very useful to share and discuss our respective views on > perezhivanie. > > In my view, the film could be analyzed in terms of perezhivanie in three > different planes. First, we could consider the person who watches the film, > and we could study how the meaning she forms for the film restructures her > relationship with aspects of her real life -such as, for example, her own > death or the death of a beloved one, etc. (perhaps this is a little bit > like what Beth and Monica, or Veresov and Fleer, do with their study of > playworlds?). In this plane, which would be perhaps the most naturalistic > one, the film could be studied as an human-made cultural artifact which > restuctures psychological functions; here, the meaning formed for the film > by who watches it and uses it as mediator in her relation to her real life > would be an m-perezhivanie. > > In a second plane, we could proceed as if the film was real life, and we > could consider Sokolov telling his story to the man he meets by the river > (a little bit like Carla telling her story to me). In this plane, Sokolov's > narrative (i.e., what is showed to us as narrated flashback) could be > considered as a cultural artifact that Sokolov uses to relate to all what > happened to him. At this plane, the meaning of this narrative would be the > m-perezhivanie that, in that moment, mediates the relationship between > Sokolov and the war events he experienced years ago (but these events are > still very present to him, so although relating to past events, there is > here a Sokolov's activity [towards the past war events] which is in present > -this echoes Christopher when, within our conversations, said: ?Part of > this might also be a question of what it means to describe and represent > one's own perezhivanie figuratively/narratively (whether to others, or to > oneself), as opposed to living that perezhivanie. Especially if the attempt > to capture/represent one's own perezhivanie is, perhaps, also central to > the living of it?? > > In a third plane, we could proceed as if Sokolov's narration was not a > retrospective narration, but the on-time sequence of events with on-time > Sokolov's explanation of these events (in the moments in which the narrator > voice is assumed within the flashback). In this plane, there are several > interesting perezhivanie phenomena. Clearly, there is a Sokolov's activity > of experiencing-as-struggle, which initiates when he realizes that all his > family, except one son, had been killed 2 years ago. At this moment, his > life becomes meaningless; the meaning (m-perezhivanie) he uses to relate to > all his life (including the past) at this moment is expressed in his > conversation with his oncle: ?it's got to be that this life of mine is > nothing but a nightmare!?. In this moment, Sokolov's past in the prision > camp becomes also meaningless: then, his link to life (the m-perezhivanie > that made being alive meaningful to him) was meeting his family; but at > that time his family was already dead, so when he discovers it, he realizes > that this m-perezhivanie (the idea of meeting his family) was linking him > to death, not to life, so all his efforts to surviving become meaningless: > ?Every night, when I was a prisioner, I talked with them. Now it turns out > that for two years I was talking with the dead??. In this conversation, > however, his oncle offers him an alternative m-perezhivanie to relate to > his life: he still has a son, so the m-perehivanie of meeting his family > can still turns Sokolov's life meaningful: ?you've got to go on living. You > have to find Anatoly. When the war is over, your son will get married, you > will live with them. You will take up your carpentry again, play with your > grandkids?. It takes some time to Sokolov to enter into this > m-perezhivanie, but he does it and his life becomes meaningful again: ?and > then, unexpectedly, I've got a gleam of sunlight?. But, then, Anatoly also > dies. How to keep living? Here, Sokolov holds the m-perezhivanie that > linked him to life until that moment, and therefore, he needs a son; > pretending being the father of Vanya turns his life meaningful again. > > Another interesting thing, still at that level, is how Sokolov's relation > with his own immediate death changes along the different occasions in which > he faces it. I thing here there are examples of > experiencing-as-contemplation -in my view, this is not > experiencing-as-struggle because the situation of impossibility (the > immediate death) is removed existentially (Sokolov's life is given back to > him), so that there is not a permanent situation of impossibility which is > initially meaningless and is turned into meaningful. In each occasion in > which Sokolov is faced with his immediate death, the m-perezhivanie that > mediates this relationship is different. When he is captured, his > m-perezhivanie is expressed as: ?here's my death coming after me?. When he > is conducted to meet the nazi official, the m-perezhivanie is expressed as: > ?the end of your misery?, ?to my death and my release of this torment, I > will drink?. In the first, the death is running after Sokolov; in the > second, it is Sokolov happily going to meet death. Later, at the end of the > film, he faces his immediate death again, and the m-perezhivanie is > expressed as: ?I'm really worried that I might die in my sleep, and that > would frighten my little son?. > > Well, just some thoughts after watching this wonderful film. > > Best regards, > > Marc. > > 2017-01-15 0:06 GMT+01:00 Christopher Schuck : > >> Yes, definitely that article! And specifically, when I used "pivoting" I >> couldn't help but think of Beth's earlier example about how a child will >> use a stick as a pivot for a horse. Perhaps a somewhat different >> application but related, no? >> >> On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 4:06 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >> wrote: >> >>> Chris, all, >>> >>> your post is totally relevant to Beth's and Monica's article in the >>> special issue. They write about film and perezhivanie (quoting Sobchack) >>> the following: >>> >>> The reason that film allows us to glimpse the future is that there is a >>> connection between filmic time and ?real? time: ?The images of a film >> exist >>> in the world as a temporal flow, within finitude and situation. Indeed, >> the >>> fascination of the film is that it does not transcend our >> lived-experience >>> of temporality, but rather that it seems to partake of it, to share it? >>> (1992, p. 60). >>> >>> And later >>> >>> "Specifically, the way that the flow of time becomes multidirectional is >>> that ?rehearsals make it necessary to think of the future in such a way >> as >>> to create a past? (1985, p. 39). As Schechner ex-plains: ?In a very real >>> way the future ? the project coming into existence through the process of >>> rehearsal ? determines the past: what will be kept from earlier >> rehearsals >>> or from the ?source ma-terials? (1985, p. 39)." >>> >>> Alfredo >>> >>> >>> ________________________________________ >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>> on behalf of Christopher Schuck >>> Sent: 14 January 2017 21:43 >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Fate of a Man >>> >>> But that's both the limitation and strength of art or fictional narrative >>> as opposed to real life, isn't it? That art focuses our attention and >>> highlights certain features in a way that is idealized and artificially >>> "designed" to convey something more clearly and purely (but less >>> organically and authentically) than it would be conveyed in the course of >>> living it, or observing someone else living it? One way to get around >> this >>> would be, as David says, to analyze the film in terms of clues as to the >>> stages of emergence. But maybe another way to use the film would be to >> view >>> it not so much as a complete, self-sufficient "example" of perezhivanie, >> as >>> a *tool *for pivoting back and forth between the concept of perezhivanie >> as >>> imaginatively constructed (through fiction), and the concept of >>> perezhivanie as imaginatively constructed (through our real living >>> experience and observation of it). So, it would be the *pivoting* between >>> these two manifestations of the concept (designed vs. evolved, as David >> put >>> it) that reveals new insights about perezhivanie, rather than >> understanding >>> the concept from the film per se. >>> >>> On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 3:08 PM, David Kellogg >>> wrote: >>> >>>> I think there's a good reason why Andy started a new thread on this: >>> he's a >>>> very tidy thinker (quite unlike yours truly) and he knows that one >> reason >>>> why xmca threads are seldom cumulative is that they digress to related >>>> problems without solving the immmediate ones. >>>> >>>> Yes, of course, a film allows us to consider an example of >>> "perezhivanie", >>>> but it is a designed perezhivanie rather than an evolved one; it >> doesn't >>>> explicitly display the various stages of emergence required for a >> genetic >>>> analysis, unless we analyze it not as a complete and finished work of >> art >>>> but instead for clues as to the stages of its creation (the way that, >> for >>>> example, "Quietly Flows the Don" was analyzed to determine its >>>> authenticity). >>>> >>>> I remember that In the original short story, the schnapps drinking >>>> scene seemed like pure sleight of hand: an artistically gratuitous >>> example >>>> of what eventually gave Soviet social realism such a bad name. >>>> >>>> David Kellogg >>>> Macquarie University >>>> >>>> On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 10:04 PM, Carol Macdonald < >> carolmacdon@gmail.com >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Fellow XMCa-ers >>>>> >>>>> I have watched it through now, thank you Andy, but right now only >>>> empirical >>>>> psychological categories come to mind. I will watch it again and in >>> the >>>>> meanwhile let my fellows with more recent experience of >> /perezhivanie/ >>>> take >>>>> the discussion further. >>>>> >>>>> It is a kind of timeless story, and modern film techniques would >>> perhaps >>>> be >>>>> more explicit. At the least I would say it has for me a Russian >>>>> understanding of suffering, perhaps because of their unique >> experience >>> of >>>>> it. But having said that, WWII must have generated other similar >>>>> experiences, apart from the first part about Andrei's family dying in >>> the >>>>> famine. >>>>> >>>>> Carol >>>>> >>>>> On 14 January 2017 at 02:15, Andy Blunden wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I watched it in two parts with subtitles: >>>>>> >>>>>> http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x16w7fg_destiny-of-a-man- >>>>>> 1959-pt-1_creation >>>>>> http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x16wat4_destiny-of-a-man- >>>>>> 1959-pt-2_creation >>>>>> >>>>>> Andy >>>>>> >>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>> Andy Blunden >>>>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy >>>>>> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective- >>> decision-making >>>>>> On 14/01/2017 2:35 AM, Beth Ferholt wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Thank you for taking us to a shared example. I think that >>> having a >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Carol A Macdonald Ph.D (Edin) >>>>> Cultural Historical Activity Theory >>>>> Honorary Research Fellow: Department of Linguistics, Unisa >>>>> alternative email address: tmacdoca@unisa.ac.za >>>>> > From ablunden@mira.net Tue Jan 17 17:42:37 2017 From: ablunden@mira.net (Andy Blunden) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2017 12:42:37 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] An Education Message-ID: <36fbdb59-fd4e-c698-ba07-36ff3eea2862@mira.net> There is a British movie, "An Education" which Mike and I have have discussed with some Russian psychologists in respect to /perezhivanie/. Marx and I having provided an example of analysing a movie in terms of /perezhivanie/, would people like to try this one? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P5mZro6Geug It is a coming of age movie starring Carey Mulligan, and very enjoyable. I look forward to your comments. Andy -- ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making From ablunden@mira.net Wed Jan 18 00:50:17 2017 From: ablunden@mira.net (Andy Blunden) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2017 19:50:17 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Fate of a Man (from Misha) In-Reply-To: <2270f5e7-7d82-5150-89a3-808a4e20b89b@mira.net> References: <048522a2-cca0-3e56-cae2-f2142b9fbd5a@mira.net> <1484427999407.2877@iped.uio.no> <2270f5e7-7d82-5150-89a3-808a4e20b89b@mira.net> Message-ID: <89d467ea-8552-c627-b265-0c646e961f09@mira.net> Misha, a Russian psychologist who has assisted Mike and me in analysing previous movies, offers this comment on "Fate of a Man." ------------------------------------------------------------ I need to re-watch this emotional film. After a while I can write something regarding your theme. Glad to hear you. I think we'll have a lot of discussions. Only one thing I want to say now - This movie is not an /illustration/ of perezhivanie but it /is/ really the perezhivanie. I re-watched the movie. Had a wonderful, unforgettable experience. Andrey, being a simple Soviet carpenter before the War, fell into the millstone of hard, bloody war by fate. He miraculously managed to survive, losing his son on the front, his beloved wife and two daughters in his native village near Voronezh. The war has warped him, forced to endure emotional anguish, physical pain and spiritual suffering. The war has truly wounded his soul, humiliated him as a man, but he remained a man of great kindness, taking care of the orphan boy, treating him like his own son. The film shows massive heroism of the Soviet people. Reading the story /Destiny of a Man/ by Mikhail Sholokhov and watching the movie of Sergey Bondarchuk with the same name, you can understand what it means to love the Motherland truly. Pain and anxiety for homeland and personal tragedy of the individual and the specific family were organically fused in the fate of Andrei Sokolov. Andrey's suffering is simultaneously private and public. But the hero of the film found the strength in himself not to fall down, and continue to work for the use and benefit of the country in the post-war period, and, staying alone, to raise the kid without assistants, the child who had experienced the intensive grief because of losing parents. The peculiarity of perezhivanie in this film is closely interwoven with the social disaster caused by the treachery and cruelty of the Germans in the great Patriotic war, and personal grief associated with the loss of his beloved family. The score of V. Basner naturally complements and musically ornaments this movie. It resembles the mood of Shostakovich's symphonies, where you can observe fear, terror and mental confusion, but it remains with kind and optimistic fundamentals. Sincere, not-sugary kindness and human warmth emanates from this strong and powerful film. The power of the spirit of this man is the good (kind and strong) character of such person, united with the solid beliefs of a healthy moral order. The film triggers a strong, intense perezhivanie from the audience, where an experience of art even gives priority way to perezhivanie of life itself, without losing at the same time tonality of high art. ------------------------------------------------------------ On 18/01/2017 12:39 PM, Andy Blunden wrote: > Thank you Marc! It was the third "plane" which was my > intention in providing "Fate of a Man" for discussion. You > picked out what were for me also the main (but by no means > the only) instances of perezhivanija in this movie. > > It seems to me that Sokolov (the author) offers one > perezhivanie in particular as the main theme of the movie. > At the beginning of the movie, the man and boy walk up the > path to the camera and at the end of the movie they walk > off together again. So this is the central theme. As you > say, when Sokolov's family has all been killed, even his > talented war-hero son who was going to be a famous > mathematician, his life has become meaningless. I really > liked your reflections of Sokolov's reflections too. He > sees the young orphan boy who, he discovers, has no family > and doesn't even know what town he comes from, but is > aimlessly living on pieces of rubbish. He sees that the > two of them are in the same situation. So after some time > mulling this over a they sit together in the truck, he > lies to the boy and tells him that he is the boy's father, > and they embrace. But the boy questions this and he > reasserts his claim and the boy accepts this. The man is > able to define a new meaning for his life; he has done > this autonomously without the help of a therapist, but he > still needs another, the boy, to embody that meaning. But > he knows it is his own invention. The boy on the other > hand has to be made to believe it is true; he is not > sufficiently mature to manufacture this meaning himself, > but as a child he can be guided by an adult. As you say, > Marc, it is very significant when Sokolov tells us how he > is now, again, worried about his own death. What if I died > in my sleep? that would be a shock for my son! > > For me, this reflection causes me to look back on the > man's whole struggle during the war: in the first phase he > does not differentiate between his life as a father and > husband and his life as a Soviet citizen - war is his duty > and he is confident, as is everyone else, of victory. His > bravery in driving his truck to the front line under fire > reflects the fact that he has never imagined his own > death. Then he finds himself prostrate before 2 Nazi > soldiers who we assume are going among the wounded > shooting anyone who has survived. But surprisingly, he is > allowed to live, but is to be used as a slave. Sokolov has > been confronted by his own mortality for the first time > and he chooses life, but accepts slavery (Sartre and Hegel > both thematize this moment in their philosophy). In this > second phase of Sokolov's life he is a survivor. > Everything hinges on surviving and returning to his wife > and family. As you point out, Marc, his later reflections > on this are particularly poignant, when he discovers the > futility of this hope. Eventually, the life of forced > labour becomes unbearable. He cries out: "Why are we > forced to dig 3 cubic metres when 1 cubic meter is enough > for a grave!" Sokolov has accepted and embraced death > after all. (Transition to the third phase.) To his German > masters this is an unendurable act of defiance. As David > points out, there are flaws in the scene which follows, > but ... he confronts his own death defiantly, stares it in > the eye, spits on it, and his life again gains meaning as > a "brave Soviet soldier" unafraid of death even in such an > impossible moment. Not only does he survive, but takes the > Nazi Colonel prisoner and hands the war plans over to the > Red Army. Now, when he is offered the chance to return to > his wife as a war hero he declines and asks to be sent > back to the front. His life has adopted this new meaning > which casts his life as a father into the shade. He no > longer fears death. But he is persuaded to take time off > and learns of the death of his family. As Marc relates, > the continued survival of his son, who is now also a war > hero, provides continued meaning and integrates the two > themes in his life. This takes work, as Marc points out, > and he has the assistance of an older man, in achieving > this redefinition of his life. But tragically, with the > death of his son (and NB the end of the war, albeit in > victory) his life is again without meaning. Fourth phase. > He has survived, but has no purpose. By becoming a father > again (Fifth phase), he regains the fear of death and > meaning in his life. It is real work, and we witness this > psychological turmoil as he copes with the idea that this > scruffy orphan boy could be a son to him, and eventually > he manages it. > > The transition between each phase is a critical period > during which Sokolov's personality is transformed. Note > also, that there is a premonition of this perezhivanie in > Sokolov's earlier life: his family is wiped out in the > Civil War and the famine of 1922, then he meets his > wife-to-be, also raised in an orphanage, and they together > create a life and have 17 happy years before the Nazi > invasion intrudes. So from the beginning of the movie we > are introduced to the main theme. > > These are the main moments in the movie, which caused me > to select it for discussion rather than any other movie. > Also, there is no doubt that in producing this movie in > 1958 the Soviet government was engaged with its people, in > a process of collective perezhivanie and by reflecting on > the collective perezhivanie during the period of the war, > before and after, they aim to assist the people in > collectively assigning meaning to this terrible suffering > and like the man and his "son" walking again into the > future. As a propaganda movie, of course, it is open to > much criticism, but that is hardly the point. I appreciate > Marc's analysis in terms of the other concepts he has > introduced. I wouldn't mind a recap on these. In terms of > Vasilyuk's concepts, Sokolov's life-world is *simple and > difficult*. The boy's life world is *simple and easy*. > > Can we continue to discuss "Fate of a Man", while I open > another movie for analysis? I think there are at least 10 > subscribers to this list who have published in learned > journals on the topic of perezhivanie in childhood. > Perhaps one of you would like to reflect on the boy's > perezhivanija? > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Andy Blunden > http://home.mira.net/~andy > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > On 18/01/2017 5:14 AM, Marc Clar? wrote: >> Hi, all, >> >> and thank you, Andy, for sharing this amazing film, which >> I didn't know. I >> think it will be very useful to share and discuss our >> respective views on >> perezhivanie. >> >> In my view, the film could be analyzed in terms of >> perezhivanie in three >> different planes. First, we could consider the person who >> watches the film, >> and we could study how the meaning she forms for the film >> restructures her >> relationship with aspects of her real life -such as, for >> example, her own >> death or the death of a beloved one, etc. (perhaps this >> is a little bit >> like what Beth and Monica, or Veresov and Fleer, do with >> their study of >> playworlds?). In this plane, which would be perhaps the >> most naturalistic >> one, the film could be studied as an human-made cultural >> artifact which >> restuctures psychological functions; here, the meaning >> formed for the film >> by who watches it and uses it as mediator in her relation >> to her real life >> would be an m-perezhivanie. >> >> In a second plane, we could proceed as if the film was >> real life, and we >> could consider Sokolov telling his story to the man he >> meets by the river >> (a little bit like Carla telling her story to me). In >> this plane, Sokolov's >> narrative (i.e., what is showed to us as narrated >> flashback) could be >> considered as a cultural artifact that Sokolov uses to >> relate to all what >> happened to him. At this plane, the meaning of this >> narrative would be the >> m-perezhivanie that, in that moment, mediates the >> relationship between >> Sokolov and the war events he experienced years ago (but >> these events are >> still very present to him, so although relating to past >> events, there is >> here a Sokolov's activity [towards the past war events] >> which is in present >> -this echoes Christopher when, within our conversations, >> said: ?Part of >> this might also be a question of what it means to >> describe and represent >> one's own perezhivanie figuratively/narratively (whether >> to others, or to >> oneself), as opposed to living that perezhivanie. >> Especially if the attempt >> to capture/represent one's own perezhivanie is, perhaps, >> also central to >> the living of it?? >> >> In a third plane, we could proceed as if Sokolov's >> narration was not a >> retrospective narration, but the on-time sequence of >> events with on-time >> Sokolov's explanation of these events (in the moments in >> which the narrator >> voice is assumed within the flashback). In this plane, >> there are several >> interesting perezhivanie phenomena. Clearly, there is a >> Sokolov's activity >> of experiencing-as-struggle, which initiates when he >> realizes that all his >> family, except one son, had been killed 2 years ago. At >> this moment, his >> life becomes meaningless; the meaning (m-perezhivanie) he >> uses to relate to >> all his life (including the past) at this moment is >> expressed in his >> conversation with his oncle: ?it's got to be that this >> life of mine is >> nothing but a nightmare!?. In this moment, Sokolov's past >> in the prision >> camp becomes also meaningless: then, his link to life >> (the m-perezhivanie >> that made being alive meaningful to him) was meeting his >> family; but at >> that time his family was already dead, so when he >> discovers it, he realizes >> that this m-perezhivanie (the idea of meeting his family) >> was linking him >> to death, not to life, so all his efforts to surviving >> become meaningless: >> ?Every night, when I was a prisioner, I talked with them. >> Now it turns out >> that for two years I was talking with the dead??. In this >> conversation, >> however, his oncle offers him an alternative >> m-perezhivanie to relate to >> his life: he still has a son, so the m-perehivanie of >> meeting his family >> can still turns Sokolov's life meaningful: ?you've got to >> go on living. You >> have to find Anatoly. When the war is over, your son will >> get married, you >> will live with them. You will take up your carpentry >> again, play with your >> grandkids?. It takes some time to Sokolov to enter into this >> m-perezhivanie, but he does it and his life becomes >> meaningful again: ?and >> then, unexpectedly, I've got a gleam of sunlight?. But, >> then, Anatoly also >> dies. How to keep living? Here, Sokolov holds the >> m-perezhivanie that >> linked him to life until that moment, and therefore, he >> needs a son; >> pretending being the father of Vanya turns his life >> meaningful again. >> >> Another interesting thing, still at that level, is how >> Sokolov's relation >> with his own immediate death changes along the different >> occasions in which >> he faces it. I thing here there are examples of >> experiencing-as-contemplation -in my view, this is not >> experiencing-as-struggle because the situation of >> impossibility (the >> immediate death) is removed existentially (Sokolov's life >> is given back to >> him), so that there is not a permanent situation of >> impossibility which is >> initially meaningless and is turned into meaningful. In >> each occasion in >> which Sokolov is faced with his immediate death, the >> m-perezhivanie that >> mediates this relationship is different. When he is >> captured, his >> m-perezhivanie is expressed as: ?here's my death coming >> after me?. When he >> is conducted to meet the nazi official, the >> m-perezhivanie is expressed as: >> ?the end of your misery?, ?to my death and my release of >> this torment, I >> will drink?. In the first, the death is running after >> Sokolov; in the >> second, it is Sokolov happily going to meet death. Later, >> at the end of the >> film, he faces his immediate death again, and the >> m-perezhivanie is >> expressed as: ?I'm really worried that I might die in my >> sleep, and that >> would frighten my little son?. >> >> Well, just some thoughts after watching this wonderful film. >> >> Best regards, >> >> Marc. >> >> 2017-01-15 0:06 GMT+01:00 Christopher Schuck >> : >> >>> Yes, definitely that article! And specifically, when I >>> used "pivoting" I >>> couldn't help but think of Beth's earlier example about >>> how a child will >>> use a stick as a pivot for a horse. Perhaps a somewhat >>> different >>> application but related, no? >>> >>> On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 4:06 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >>> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Chris, all, >>>> >>>> your post is totally relevant to Beth's and Monica's >>>> article in the >>>> special issue. They write about film and perezhivanie >>>> (quoting Sobchack) >>>> the following: >>>> >>>> The reason that film allows us to glimpse the future is >>>> that there is a >>>> connection between filmic time and ?real? time: ?The >>>> images of a film >>> exist >>>> in the world as a temporal flow, within finitude and >>>> situation. Indeed, >>> the >>>> fascination of the film is that it does not transcend our >>> lived-experience >>>> of temporality, but rather that it seems to partake of >>>> it, to share it? >>>> (1992, p. 60). >>>> >>>> And later >>>> >>>> "Specifically, the way that the flow of time becomes >>>> multidirectional is >>>> that ?rehearsals make it necessary to think of the >>>> future in such a way >>> as >>>> to create a past? (1985, p. 39). As Schechner >>>> ex-plains: ?In a very real >>>> way the future ? the project coming into existence >>>> through the process of >>>> rehearsal ? determines the past: what will be kept from >>>> earlier >>> rehearsals >>>> or from the ?source ma-terials? (1985, p. 39)." >>>> >>>> Alfredo >>>> >>>> >>>> ________________________________________ >>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>> >>>> on behalf of Christopher Schuck >>>> Sent: 14 January 2017 21:43 >>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Fate of a Man >>>> >>>> But that's both the limitation and strength of art or >>>> fictional narrative >>>> as opposed to real life, isn't it? That art focuses our >>>> attention and >>>> highlights certain features in a way that is idealized >>>> and artificially >>>> "designed" to convey something more clearly and purely >>>> (but less >>>> organically and authentically) than it would be >>>> conveyed in the course of >>>> living it, or observing someone else living it? One way >>>> to get around >>> this >>>> would be, as David says, to analyze the film in terms >>>> of clues as to the >>>> stages of emergence. But maybe another way to use the >>>> film would be to >>> view >>>> it not so much as a complete, self-sufficient "example" >>>> of perezhivanie, >>> as >>>> a *tool *for pivoting back and forth between the >>>> concept of perezhivanie >>> as >>>> imaginatively constructed (through fiction), and the >>>> concept of >>>> perezhivanie as imaginatively constructed (through our >>>> real living >>>> experience and observation of it). So, it would be the >>>> *pivoting* between >>>> these two manifestations of the concept (designed vs. >>>> evolved, as David >>> put >>>> it) that reveals new insights about perezhivanie, >>>> rather than >>> understanding >>>> the concept from the film per se. >>>> >>>> On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 3:08 PM, David Kellogg >>>> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> I think there's a good reason why Andy started a new >>>>> thread on this: >>>> he's a >>>>> very tidy thinker (quite unlike yours truly) and he >>>>> knows that one >>> reason >>>>> why xmca threads are seldom cumulative is that they >>>>> digress to related >>>>> problems without solving the immmediate ones. >>>>> >>>>> Yes, of course, a film allows us to consider an >>>>> example of >>>> "perezhivanie", >>>>> but it is a designed perezhivanie rather than an >>>>> evolved one; it >>> doesn't >>>>> explicitly display the various stages of emergence >>>>> required for a >>> genetic >>>>> analysis, unless we analyze it not as a complete and >>>>> finished work of >>> art >>>>> but instead for clues as to the stages of its creation >>>>> (the way that, >>> for >>>>> example, "Quietly Flows the Don" was analyzed to >>>>> determine its >>>>> authenticity). >>>>> >>>>> I remember that In the original short story, the >>>>> schnapps drinking >>>>> scene seemed like pure sleight of hand: an >>>>> artistically gratuitous >>>> example >>>>> of what eventually gave Soviet social realism such a >>>>> bad name. >>>>> >>>>> David Kellogg >>>>> Macquarie University >>>>> >>>>> On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 10:04 PM, Carol Macdonald < >>> carolmacdon@gmail.com >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Fellow XMCa-ers >>>>>> >>>>>> I have watched it through now, thank you Andy, but >>>>>> right now only >>>>> empirical >>>>>> psychological categories come to mind. I will watch >>>>>> it again and in >>>> the >>>>>> meanwhile let my fellows with more recent experience of >>> /perezhivanie/ >>>>> take >>>>>> the discussion further. >>>>>> >>>>>> It is a kind of timeless story, and modern film >>>>>> techniques would >>>> perhaps >>>>> be >>>>>> more explicit. At the least I would say it has for me >>>>>> a Russian >>>>>> understanding of suffering, perhaps because of their >>>>>> unique >>> experience >>>> of >>>>>> it. But having said that, WWII must have generated >>>>>> other similar >>>>>> experiences, apart from the first part about Andrei's >>>>>> family dying in >>>> the >>>>>> famine. >>>>>> >>>>>> Carol >>>>>> >>>>>> On 14 January 2017 at 02:15, Andy Blunden >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> I watched it in two parts with subtitles: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x16w7fg_destiny-of-a-man- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 1959-pt-1_creation >>>>>>> http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x16wat4_destiny-of-a-man- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 1959-pt-2_creation >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Andy >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Andy Blunden >>>>>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy >>>>>>> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective- >>>> decision-making >>>>>>> On 14/01/2017 2:35 AM, Beth Ferholt wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Thank you for taking us to a shared example. I >>>>>>>>>> think that >>>> having a >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Carol A Macdonald Ph.D (Edin) >>>>>> Cultural Historical Activity Theory >>>>>> Honorary Research Fellow: Department of Linguistics, >>>>>> Unisa >>>>>> alternative email address: tmacdoca@unisa.ac.za >>>>>> >> > > > From lpscholar2@gmail.com Wed Jan 18 10:42:48 2017 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2017 10:42:48 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! In-Reply-To: References: <1483344752182.40904@iped.uio.no> <1483467423798.57819@iped.uio.no> <1483601196884.31418@iped.uio.no> <5df5e870-3ef8-70d6-0c17-f8647ba17e62@mira.net> <587124d9.d957620a.4a5a8.bd56@mx.google.com> <1483820996800.91513@iped.uio.no> <1484253698990.7728@iped.uio.no> <1484328718783.79382@iped.uio.no> <587cfc5a.4e38630a.aa4eb.5a5d@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <587fb753.1aa3630a.f3dd3.63b0@mx.google.com> David, To not loose the thread where you say?: Applying care and compassion to non-sentient and non-conscious nature only serves to destroy the real content of care and compassion applied to that part of nature that has become sentient and aware... The notion of care as more active and compassion as more passive seem to be central to perezhivanie. Where we express the extent of care and compassion is an open question. I hear in your response care and compassion being a humanist response? This aligns with Beth and Monica highlighting the ?pivot? AS person. Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: David Kellogg Sent: January 17, 2017 4:33 PM To: Lplarry Cc: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: Re: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! Larry: I think that being a functionalist doesn't just mean that you like to get things done, or that you look to outcomes to explain structure instead of looking to structure to explain outcomes. Being a functionalist means that the key to the anatomy of the ape is in man--but not vice versa. This is because we share most of the bodily and even psychic functions that apes have, but not the other way around. The key to the anatomy of man is not even in man, but in artificial limbs and even artificial organs. And since the key to the anatomy of man is not in man, we can't expect to adapt nature to our present needs; the irrationality of the way the world economy is now run will not be solved simply by replacing the remnants of hunting and gathering (e.g. fly fishing) with husbandry and horticulture (e.g. farmed salmon). It seems to me that applying care and compassion to non-sentient and non-conscious nature?only serves to destroy the real content of care and compassion applied to?that part of nature that has become sentient and consciously aware?(animals and humans). Looking to what already exists in our psychic make up as a model for what should exist in our relationship to the environment is a little like?looking to child behaviour as a model for an adult relationship?with society. I think that the society I have personally lived in which was closest to equilibrium with the environment was China in the early eighties, where the vast majority of the country was still practicing subsistence agriculture. We recycled everything and never dreamed of calling it?that; we?economized?sheepishly rather than smugly?(my wife still obeys the old adage: "Wear it three years new, three years old, and three years patched up and stictched together" which is saying a lot when you only have two or three changes of clothes).?When Xi Jinping denounces "nativism" and "economic nationalism" and insists that China too has a right to the commodities that it produces for Western consumption,? I absolutely agree. Perhaps the place we should look for "exaptations" that can save both our personalities and our environment is not in our evolved needs, but in yet to be designed quasi-needs. Artificial organs, after all, always suggest new and ever more?artificial functions, like chess and language. As Ruqaiya Hasan used to say, the meaning of "not" is not in "not". David Kellogg Macquarie University On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 2:00 AM, wrote: David addressing Alfredo. ? A wonderful metaphor and nod to Alfredo helping us move from small prey to a substantial prey worth pursuing. ? David, you describe the process of development as moving through the stage of adapting the environment to human needs. (a possible perezhivanie relation?). ? However, is it possible we are now developing beyond this notion of adapting the environment FOR human needs and becoming aware of the vice versa movement. The movement of adapting human needs to environmental needs. Still within conscious awareness requiring our focused (and possibly also unfocused) attention but less human centric, more focused upon the ?relation? honouring and possibly experiencing as ?sacred? the ?relation? and through the ?relation? experiencing the ?environmental ?element? of perizhivanie as living vitality. This focus on the ?relation? shifting focus away from ?human needs or environmental needs as either/or as ?things? that exist outside of each other that must be ?connected?. There is no actual separation except imaginally and this is the ?heart? of the matter. The place of not only compassion as such but the heart as the place of CARE AND CONCERN. More active than compassion but not human centric only. CARE AND CONCERN for the ?relation? whether imagined as subject, object, subject&object, or the relation existing prior to this subject/object differentiation. ? ? Sent from my Windows 10 phone ? From: David Kellogg Sent: January 16, 2017 2:56 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! ? Alfredo: ? Well, I think that you are doing the really difficult and beautiful work, filling in Mike's ten league boots and keeping the cats in a coherent herd. Contrary to the popular expression, though, it is possible to herd cats. Lions, for example, herd themselves, apparently because the prey they consume is too large to consume individually before it goes bad, and if they work in a pride, they don't have to work every day. House cats, on the other hand, feed on small prey in individual portions and so they are notoriously selfish and competitive. It seems to me that with the "perezhivanie" symposium, we have at last begun to hunt lion-sized prey. Perhaps I am still doing mousework, though:? I think we actually disagree more than we agree. ? Unlike Andy, I am very willing to embrace both the label "structuralist" and the label "functionalist", so long as I can embrace them together, and add the label developmentalist: structures are as they are because they function as they do, but sometimes they function as they do for historical, developmental reasons rather than obvious and immediate ones. In the second chapter of HDHMF, Vygotsky invokes what he calls the "Jennings" principle: that is, that functions are always "functions of structure": organisms do what they are allowed to do by their organic structure and no more. For example, cats cannot herd themselves because their prey is too small. But he points out that a) organic structure is itself a product of doing things over thousands and millions of years, b) structures can be "borrowed" to do more than they are adapted for (what S.J. Gould called "exaptation") and c) none of this applies to "artificial organs", such as tools and signs, because mediational means are precisely structures "borrowed" from the environment to do more than they are adapted for. One of these supra-adaptive functions is to adapt the environment to human needs instead of vice versa. This by definition cannot be something that a tool or a sign is adapted for; you don't get tools or signs simply by adapting to the environment: you only get them by imagining how the environment can be made different and acting accordingly. Both tools and signs are the product of some quantum of conscious awareness, and neither is a creation of habit. ? And that is why, again quite unlike Andy, I am also happy to embrace the label of semiotic as opposed to activity theoretic. I think that although both tools and signs involve an idealization of the environment, they do not do so equally. Signs, for example, include conscious attentive idealization of the self as well (the self as part of the environment, as part of perizhivanie--as Vygotsky points out, what endures from the crisis at seven is the "self" in self-esteem and the "self" in "self respect", not the self of posing, mannerism and acting out). The flaw in Greimas is that he is uninterested this functional, this developmental aspect of structural semantics, and it is precisely this that allows us to distinguish, at three, between the child who is interested in changing the chess board as environment by playing with the pieces and the child who is interested in changing the semiotic structure of the board by playing the game, and to distinguish, at seven, between the child who is disappointed with the inferior affordances for constructing himself as a first person shooter that a chess board offers and the child who is excited by the superior affordances for constructing himself as a future grand master. . ? I was very interested in what you said about attention versus perception. They are developmentally linked, in Vygotsky, but functionally and thus structurally quite distinct. Volitional attention is so much a part of adult life we sometimes have to work at nonvolitional attention (!). But volitional perception occurs only in rare circumstances, e.g. the Edgar Rubin vases, Necker's cube, etc. I find myself straining to see every passing mouse as a zebra. ? David Kellogg Macquarie University . ? On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 2:31 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: ? > Thanks, David, for such a beautiful and clarifying post. You have such a > brilliant manner to language Vygotsky in Vygotsky's language! >? > I think we agree much more than we disagree, and before I turn to Andy's > very timely link to the "Fate of a Man", this may be a nice tutorial on > terminology, at least for me. >? > My only problem had been seeing what to me had looked like an all too > empiricist treatment of the notion of perception in your prior post(s) > (including some older posts on micro-genesis). But I think you still agree > that part of what it takes to become an experienced chess player is being > able to ATTEND (and *attention* may be a better term than perception) to > the pieces and their position in the board in front of her in much closer > detail than the child who merely plays "with" the pieces. Thus the > "perception" in the expert may be said to be much more rich and *concrete* > than what one "perceives" by merely attending to (abstracting) color and > shape relations. But I keep thinking that perception is not the right word > here, is it? Certainly not one "element" (I use your wording below) in the > unit. But this may just be a wording problem. >? > I really like your very important observation that chess produces > life-long learners, whereas the child that merely plays "with" the chess > pieces will soon find the game uninteresting. But again I don't think that > the key here is an opposition between perceiving and semiosis, but perhaps > between habit and conscious awareness (which at the end may be just > different words for saying the same thing). As a habit, the task of > grouping pieces by color involves a person-environment relation in which > the *need* for consciousness (and thereby interest!) to awaken is lesser, > thereby offering less possibilities for development. I think it is this > that you would phrase as "the environment seems to dominate". The way > habits are formed in chess, however, are such that they require of > consciousness for the operation to continue (which you may phrase as > "personality dominates more"). The relation between habit and awareness is > transformed in the higher-order activity (or form of human consciousness) > that is chess-playing. Same thing, different words? >? > Alfredo >? > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of David Kellogg > Sent: 13 January 2017 01:02 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! >? > Alfredo: >? > Let's apply your reasoning to the distinction between non-language, > proto-language, and language proper. Imagine a nursery in which there are > three beds, one with a child who is only week old and who responds with > pleasure to a nipple and with pain to being shaken or dropped, one with a > child who is about ten months old and has worked out a system of squeaks > and directed cries in order to get attention and deliver an affective > response, and one with a child who is nearly two and can ask for objects, > evaluate them, and reject them. As you say, perception and semiosis are at > work in each situation. But contrary to what you say, they are not equally > at work, and the outcomes are very different. >? > There is a good reason why children develop: it's in their interests, both > in the long term sense in that it allows a much wider variety of outcomes > and in the short term sense in that it allows an escape from ennui. A child > who plays the "game" of putting black pieces on black squares and white > pieces on white squares will find this game very dull in a matter of hours. > A child who plays the game of chess will, in many cases, find a lifetime > vocation. Yes, there are "structures" that include perception and semiosis > in both cases, but the precise make-up isn't insignificant or irrelevant. >? > One important reason why perezhivanie is such an important unit of > structure is that it at last allows us to assign real, concrete, specific > values to the influence of its two elements, personality and environment. > These vary from period to period--for example, in periods of crisis, the > personality always appears to play a leading role (e.g. proto-language in > the Crisis at One, negativism in the Crisis at Three, "acting out" in the > Crisis at Seven). During stable periods, the environment always appears to > dominate (e.g. speech proper in early childhood, play in preschool, and > thinking but not thinking-about-thinking in school age). >? > Some "child-centred" pedagogies would like to treat childhood as one long > crisis. I think this is a disservice to the child, because it is precisely > during the stable periods that the critical neoformations (e.g. > protospeech) find a supporting but absolutely crucial role. The child > doesn't forget the expressiveness of intonation and stress learned in > proto-language, any more than the child who plays chess no longer > distinguishes white squares from black ones. >? > David Kellogg > Macquarie University >? >? >? > On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 7:41 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > wrote: >? > > David, I admire much of what you write in your first three examples in > > your prior post. But I am reacting to your latter post on Chess. It is > the > > second or third time that you bring the CHESS example to bear in xmca, > and > > I always feel uneasy about it. > > > > I see the point that there are different developmental stages and that > > these can be best categorised according to the type of generalisation > that > > the child can engage into. Obviously, treating a piece of marble "as if" > it > > was a piece in the game of chess involves a different type of > > generalization than treating the same piece of marble as if it was a > piece > > in the game of "let's put the black pieces in black squares and white > > pieces in white squares". But I do not think that my 20 months daughter > > will put black pieces on black squares in any systematic manner simply > > because she can PERCEIVE and act upon the difference between black and > > white; and indeed I do not think that my 7 years old first daughter will > do > > any of these things with the chess pieces, considering? she has never > > learned to play chess. Indeed, why would any child do that? I do strongly > > believe that to get any of my daughters to arrange the pieces by color, > > there would have first to be a TEACHING/LEARNING situation, which itself > > would involve establishing a semantic field, a field that perhaps out of > my > > ignorance I would call semiotic (sign). > > > >? In my view, in both cases there are rules and therefore imagination, if > > we listen to Vygotsky's writings on play, and perhaps, as Vygotsky notes, > > there may be a difference in the "moral attitude", but I would be > cautious > > by gross divisions between perceptual and semantic structures. Yes,there > > are different levels, types, or stages in the way semantic fields are > > organised, and that playing the chess pieces as pieces of the CHESS game > > involves a qualitative leap compared to playing them as pieces in the > game > > of putting them together by shape or color; but there is a game going on > in > > both cases, and therefore a perceptual as much as a semiotic structure > > being at play. These are different semiotic contexts, as you say at the > end > > of your e-mail, but I do think that your assertion that in playing with > the > > chess pieces by color "the structure would be visual but not semiotic" > can > > be problematic and may lead to what I consider an incorrect view of the > > relation between higher and lower functions in development. > > > > Alfredo > > ________________________________________ > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > on behalf of David Kellogg > > Sent: 11 January 2017 04:50 > > To: Andy Blunden; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > > > Vygotsky's got a terrific metaphor for how "perezhivanie" is > internalized: > > it is like internalizing the rules of the game of chess. > > > > The child who doesn't know how to play chess simply plays WITH the pieces > > instead of playing them. She or he might try to create a piece-board > > structure by putting black pieces on black squares and white pieces on > > white squares, but the structure is a visual one and not a semiotic one; > > it's about color and not about meaning. The child who DOES know how to > play > > chess plays the pieces instead of playing with them. She or he too > creates > > "structures" but this time they are semiotic ones: a black knight in a > > completely different column and a completely different row, can capture a > > white pawn. > > > > The board is the same and so are the kids; the children may have very > > similar biological and very similar cultural endowments, but they do not > > have the same semiotic context at all. Hence different perezhivanie and > > different personalities. > > > > David Kellogg > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 11:54 AM, Andy Blunden > wrote: > > > > > How to understand the personality? ... i.e., the *development* of the > > > personality? > > > > > > The subject's inheritance, and The subject's experiences > > (/perezhivaniya/) > > > > > > ... just think of how you'd go about writing a good biography or > > > Bildungsroman. > > > > > > Andy > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > Andy Blunden > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > > On 11/01/2017 10:24 AM, David Kellogg wrote: > > > > > >> Andy: > > >> > > >> A good paradox! Word meaning is a unit, but the spoken word itself is > > >> just an element--a thing. We can see that this is, on the face of it, > > >> impossible: within a single holistic analysis, an element can be a > part > > of > > >> a unit, but a unit can never be a part of an element. So what you are > > >> referring to when you say that the word is a thing is the "sonic" or > > >> "phasal" quality of the word: its "acoustic" properties, its > > "phonetics". > > >> > > >> But not its phonology. The word that Vygotsky uses for "phoneme" > refers > > >> to the 1929 work of the Prague Circle, originally the Moscow Circle. > He > > is > > >> a LITTLE coy about this, because the founders, Jakobson and > Trubetskoy, > > >> were not very popular with the authorities and Vygotsky already had > > plenty > > >> of heterodox acquaintances to worry about. Nevertheless, whenever > > Vygotsky > > >> says "phoneme", we know he really means what Jakobson and Trubetskoy > > called > > >> "morphophonemes". We know this because the examples he actually > > >> gives--Russian case endings--are morpho-phonemes and not simply > > phonemes: > > >> so for example in English the sound /s/ is a simple phoneme when I say > > the > > >> word "self" but if I say "Andy's" the sound /s/ is a morpho-phoneme: a > > >> difference in sounding that makes a difference in meaning. The system > > (that > > >> is, the paradigmatic menu) of these differences in soundings are what > > the > > >> Moscow and Prague Circles called "phonology" (as OPPOSED to > phonetics), > > and > > >> this is the kind of "phoneme" that Vygotsky is really talking about. > > >> > > >> Still, you can see that it is not what he is talking about when he > says > > >> word meaning, because these units are still nowhere near big enough to > > >> describe the kinds of changes which must occur when verbal thinking > > >> develops. I feel the same way about a lot of the examples offered of > > >> "perezhivanie", including Marc's. If MacDuff's grief or Carla's > epiphany > > >> about the misbehavior of her kids being due to "outside influences" > > really > > >> is the unit of personality and experience that Vygotsky wants us to > use > > >> when we analyse the ontogenesis of personality, then it is no more > > >> appropriate than using the morpho-phoneme to analyse the whole of > verbal > > >> thinking. Just as evolution (of species) requires very different units > > from > > >> history (of classes), development, whether we are talking about verbal > > >> thinking or the personality as a whole, is going to require very > > different > > >> units from learning, whether we are talking about MacDuff or Carla. > The > > >> units must be able to develop; that is, the relationship of the > elements > > >> within them must be susceptible to many changes over time. > > >> > > >> Let me give three examples of how this happens in different > > >> "perezhivanie". They are not mine; they are Vygotsky's, and they are > all > > >> from the Pedological Lectures. > > >> > > >> First, the Crisis at One. Neither the biological nor the social > > endowment > > >> of the child greatly changes in the acquisition of speech; > nevertheless, > > >> the relationship between the personality and the environment, of which > > both > > >> personality moments and environmental ones are constituent elements, > is > > >> entirely transformed. Here we are not talking about phonemes, or even > > >> morpho-phonemes: we are talking about "wordings"--whole utterances. In > > >> Melbourne I presented some data that demonstrated this beautifully--a > > >> child's first word is actually an attempt to imitate a whole > > conversation. > > >> > > >> Second, the Crisis at Three. Vygotsky spends a lot of time discussing > > the > > >> "Seven Stars"--the symptoms of the "Terrible Twos" and "Threenagehood" > > >> noted by harried parents everywhere. But by the end of his analysis > it's > > >> clear that what really happens is a new relationship between wish and > > will: > > >> in extreme cases, the child actually wishes for one thing (e.g. > > compromise) > > >> and wills the opposite (the everlasting "No!"). Again, neither the > > >> personality moments as such nor the environmental ones change, but > > there is > > >> a separation and a sorting which allows the subordination of wish to > > will > > >> that we see in play. This isn't the kind of "aha" moment that Marc is > > >> offering us at all: Vygotsky actually calls it the "antipode" of > future > > >> will, because instead of enabling will it actually paralyzes it. But > it > > is > > >> indubitably a key moment in the development of the relation of > > personality > > >> to environmental moments that we see in "perizhivanie". > > >> > > >> Thirdly, the Crisis at Seven. I think Gonzalez Rey makes a total hash > of > > >> this, and I get very cross when I read his article. It is not true > that > > the > > >> essence of perizhivanie remained a mystery to Vygotsky simply because > > he no > > >> longer subscribes to "the aesthetic reaction" and "catharsis" and > other > > >> notions that he toyed with in Psych of Art (he's no longer doing > > >> experiments on changes in breathing rate when people read the works of > > >> Bunin either!). It might be true that he never offered a system of > facts > > >> and methodological procedures for perezivanie, but that was only > because > > >> one already existed, for example in the work of Wallon and Stern and > > >> others. It is demonstrably not true that when Vygotsky says that the > > speech > > >> environment of those around him does not change when the child learns > to > > >> talk at one, he is not "profoundly contradictory with the concept of > > >> sense": when you read the quotation in context, it is very clear that > > what > > >> he is referring to are the kinds of absolute indicators used by > Zalkind: > > >> how often the parents read the newspapers, the dialect they speak, and > > >> their educational background. These do not change, and if the child > > wants > > >> to make sense, these are the factors the child will have to relate to. > > >> > > >> Vygotsky gives the example of a child who is severely retarded. The > > child > > >> wants to play with other children and is rejected. The child walks > down > > the > > >> street and the other children follow, laughing. The child is shrieked > > at, > > >> insulted, but as soon as the humiliation stops, the child is perfectly > > >> happy with himself. Vygotsky points out that the child is not able to > > >> "co-generalize" the "perizhivanie" of the humiliations: each is > > unpleasant, > > >> but they are entirely separate and cannot be connected with any > internal > > >> sense of inferiority. A normal child, however, is able to > "internalize" > > >> these humiliations and consequently develops a sense of inferiority. > We > > can > > >> see that what has happened is the insertion of what Vygotsky calls an > > >> "intellectual" moment: an inner layer, which is what distinguishes > later > > >> Chaplin movies from earlier ones (again, Vygotsky's example, not > mine!) > > and > > >> what brings about the "loss of directness and naivete" that we see in > > >> pre-schoolers. > > >> > > >> I think that the reason people find "perizhivanie" so hard to work > with > > >> is the same reason that they find "word meaning" hard to work with: it > > >> develops. The feeling of drinking milk as the infant drinks it is > > >> perizhivanie, and the thought of being humiliated when you are mulling > > it > > >> over and contemplating revenge is also perizhivanie, and only a > profound > > >> analysis which includes ontogenetic development and not just learning > > will > > >> show the inner link between them. It's for that reason that I think > that > > >> "activity" is not a useful unit of analysis and I am much more > inclined > > to > > >> use your word "project", so long as it can include what Vygotsky calls > > >> "inner activeness". > > >> > > >> Vygotsky says: > > >> > > >> > > >> ????? ? ?????????, ?????????? ? ?. ?., ? ???? ???? ? ?????????? > > >> ???????????, ??? ?????????? ???????????? ??????????????? ????????? > > >> ??????????????? ?? ??????? ? ??????? ?????????????. ??? ??? ????? > ????? > > >> ?????????? ?????????? ? ???????? ???????? ??????????? ? ???, ???, ? ?? > > >> ????? ??? ? ?????????? ???????? ??? ?????????? ???????????? > ???????????? > > >> ???????????????? ????? ? ?????????, ??????? ???????????, ? ???????? > > >> ???????? ?? ????? ???????????? ?????????????? ???????????, > ???????????? > > >> ??????????? ?????????? ?????????? ?? ????????? ? ??????? ????????????. > > ??? > > >> ??? ???????, ??????? ????? ??????????, ? ?? ????? ????? ?? ?????? ??? > > ????? > > >> ???-??????, ???, ? ???????? ????????? ?????????????? ??????? ? > > ?????????? > > >> ????????????. > > >> > > >> When I think, remember, etc. I am dealing withinner activeness; this > > >> psychological process of inner activity is not directly linked to any > > >> external activity. The new form of inner activeness in the School Age > > >> consists of this: that while during the preschool years these inner > > >> activities demonstrated an immediate link with action, with external > > >> activeness, in the school years we have a relative autonomy which > > emerges, > > >> inner activeness which is relatively independent of external > activities. > > >> Here is already a child who can think, at the same time when he is > > doing or > > >> seeing something, one in whom has emerged a differentiation of inner > and > > >> outer activities. > > >> > > >> David Kellogg > > >> Macquarie University > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 10:07 AM, Andy Blunden > > >> ablunden@mira.net>> wrote: > > >> > > >>???? David: "Are words really units?" > > >> > > >>???? Well, firstly, "units" is a *relative* term. That is, > > >>???? the question is: are words units of something, some > > >>???? complex process subject to analysis. And which? > > >> > > >>???? Secondly, according to Vygotsky, "no." The concept > > >>???? Vygotsky proposes as a unit is "word meaning" which he > > >>???? says is a unity of sound and meaning. The sound is an > > >>???? artefact, which, detached from its meaningful > > >>???? utterance in a transactional context is just a thing, > > >>???? viz., a word. Whereas "word meaning" is an > > >>???? arrtefact-mediated action, a unit of human social > > >>???? activity. > > >> > > >>???? It is true that words can be countable or mass > > >>???? according to context, but I wasn't talking about words > > >>???? was I? I was talking about word meaning. > > >> > > >>???? Andy > > >> > > >>???? ------------------------------------------------------------ > > >>???? Andy Blunden > > >>???? http://home.mira.net/~andy > > >>???? http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective- > > decision-making > > >>???? > >> decision-making> > > >> > > >>???? On 8/01/2017 7:59 AM, David Kellogg wrote: > > >> > > >>???????? Are words really units? When we look at their > > >>???????? ideational meaning (that is, > > >>???????? their logical and experiential content--their > > >>???????? capacity for representing and > > >>???????? linking together human experiences) they seem to > > >>???????? fall into two very > > >>???????? different categories: lexical words like > > >>???????? "perezhivanie" or "sense" or > > >>???????? "personality" of "individual" and grammatical > > >>???????? words like "of", or "might", > > >>???????? or "is". The lexical words seem to behave like > > >>???????? units--they are bounded, > > >>???????? discrete, and, as Andy would say, "countable" (the > > >>???????? problem is that almost > > >>???????? all nouns are both countable and uncountable > > >>???????? depending on the context you > > >>???????? put them in, so this distinction is really not as > > >>???????? essential as Andy seems > > >>???????? to assume). But the more grammatical words seem to > > >>???????? be elements of some > > >>???????? larger unit, which we can call wording. > > >> > > >>???????? Veresov and Fleer come up against this problem > > >>???????? with "edintsvo" and > > >>???????? "edintsa". Of course, as they say, the two words > > >>???????? are distinct. But this > > >>???????? doesn't necessarily mean that the former always > > >>???????? corresponds to "unity" in > > >>???????? English and the latter is always "unit". If you > > >>???????? look at the paragraph they > > >>???????? translate on 330, you can see that Vygotsky starts > > >>???????? with an idea that is > > >>? ???????quite "synoptic" and is well expressed by "unit". > > >>???????? But in the last sentence > > >>???????? there is a sense that "perezhivanie" is a > > >>???????? meta-stable unit--one that > > >>???????? remains self-similar only through a process of > > >>???????? thorough change, like a > > >>???????? bicycle whose every part is replaced--and in > > >>???????? English is it is better to > > >>???????? express this idea with "unity". The problem is > > >>???????? that the differences between > > >> ????????"edintsvo" and "edintsva" in Russian is a matter > > >>???????? of gender (I think) and > > >>???????? not simply abstractness, and as a result the > > >>???????? English version, which cannot > > >>???????? use the resource of gender,has to rely on > > >>???????? abstractness, so the words > > >>???????? "unity" and "unit" are somewhat more distinct and > > >>???????? less linked than > > >>???????? "edintsvo" and "edintsva". > > >> > > >>???????? There are other problems that are similar. When > > >>???????? Gonzalez Rey uses the word > > >>???????? "final moment" to refer to the final period of > > >>???????? Vygotsky's thinking, he > > >>???????? leaves the anglophone reader the impression that > > >>???????? he is referring to > > >>???????? Vygotsky's deathbed thoughts. On the other hand, > > >>???????? when Veresov and Fleer use > > >>???????? "factor" to translate the same Russian word that > > >>???????? Gonzalez Rey is using, > > >>???????? they are giving us something more quantitative > > >>???????? than Vygotsky intended, and > > >>???????? their translation of "dalee nerazloshim'im > > >>???????? chastyami etava edinstva" > > >>???????? into? "vital and further indivisible part of the > > >>???????? whole" is quite opaque in > > >>???????? English (notice that here Veresov and Fleer use > > >>???????? "whole" to translate > > >>???????? "edinstva" rather than "unit"!) At some point you > > >>???????? have to accept that you > > >>???????? can change Russian words into English words as if > > >>???????? you were exchanging > > >>???????? rubles for dollars, but you still won't be able to > > >>???????? buy a samovar at Walmart. > > >> > > >>???????? David Kellogg > > >>???????? Macquarie University > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >>???????? On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 5:21 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > > >>???????? > > > >>???????? wrote: > > >> > > >>???????????? Larry, all, > > >> > > >>???????????? our arguments in the 2014 address a science > > >>???????????? education literature in which > > >>???????????? the constructivist perspective is the leading > > >>???????????? perspective; We note that the > > >>???????????? assertion that people learn from experience is > > >>???????????? everywhere taken for granted > > >>???????????? but nowhere accounted for. We resort to > > >>???????????? pragmatist and phenomenological > > >>???????????? literature along with Vygotsky's insights to > > >>???????????? point out the need to account > > >>???????????? for learning as something that cannot be the > > >>???????????? result of an individual's > > >>???????????? construction; in experience there is always > > >>???????????? something in excess of what you > > >>???????????? intended, and this is a basic feature of > > >>???????????? doing, of performing. I take that > > >>???????????? to be your "trans" in the trans/zhivanie word, > > >>???????????? Larry, which already is > > >>????????? ???denoted in the word PERezhivanie. > > >> > > >>???????????? But I do not wish to move our discussion too > > >>???????????? far away from Marc's paper > > >>???????????? and the Perezhivanie special issue. We also > > >>???????????? risk disengaging many that have > > >>???????????? not have the privilege we've had to have the > > >>???????????? time to read so many articles > > >>???????????? in just few days into the new year. I think we > > >>???????????? are a point in the > > >>???????????? discussion where a pretty clear point of > > >>???????????? agreement/disagreement, and > > >>???????????? therefore of possibility for growth, has been > > >>???????????? reached with regard to the > > >>???????????? view of perezhivanie as "an experience" and as > > >>???????????? the "working over it". I > > >>???????????? think that to allow as many as possible to > > >>???????????? follow, and hopefully also > > >>???????????? engage, I think it will be helpful to bring > > >>?????? ??????the diverse perspectives and > > >>???????????? theoretical accounts to matter in accounting > > >>???????????? for some actual material. And > > >>???????????? there are a number of cases described in the > > >>???????????? articles, including Marc's > > >>???????????? case of a teacher, as well as everyday facts, > > >>???????????? such as those brought by > > >>???????????? Beth, and in Beth's article... > > >> > > >>???????????? I take the task for myself too, but Saturday > > >>???????????? morning need to attend to > > >>???????????? other things! > > >>???????????? A > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >>???????????? ________________________________________ > > >>???????????? From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >>???????????? > > >>???????????? > >>???????????? > > > >>???????????? on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com > > >>???????????? > > >>???????????? > >>???????????? > > > >>???????????? Sent: 07 January 2017 18:26 > > >>???????????? To: Andy Blunden; Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended > > >>???????????? Mind, Culture, Activity; > > >>???????????? Larry Purss > > >>???????????? Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and > > >>???????????? Perezhivanie! > > >> > > >>???????????? Andy, Peter, i hope the intention to move > > >>???????????? beyond politeness to struggle > > >>???????????? with this topic materializes. > > >>???????????? In this vein i want to introduce exploration > > >>???????????? of the 'excess' of actual > > >>???????????? over intended meaning as he sketched his > > >>???????????? introduction to 'experience'. > > >> > > >>???????????? Citing Dewey, Alfredo says that this excess of > > >>???????????? actual learning over > > >>???????????? intended learning INCLUDES what Dewey refers > > >>???????????? to as 'attitudes' and these > > >>???????????? 'attitudes' are FUNDAMENTALLY what count in > > >>???????????? the future. > > >>???????????? Alfredo and Roth? then add this summary > > >>???????????? statement : > > >> > > >>???????????? There is therefore, a need to theorize > > >>???????????? experience in terms that do not > > >>???????????? assume control and rationality as the sine qua > > >>???????????? non of learning. It also > > >>???????????? implies a need to develop analytical accounts > > >>???????????? that retain the 'uncertainty' > > >>???????????? that is an 'integral part' of human experience. > > >> > > >>???????????? Where are Alfredo and Roth leading us with > > >>???????????? this sketch of experience? To > > >>???????????? highlight 'attitudes' that occur in the excess > > >>???????????? of actual over intended > > >>???????????? learning? The word 'attitudes' generates > > >>???????????? images of (atmosphere) and (moods) > > >>???????????? that 'flow' like cascading waterfalls that can > > >>???????????? be imaged as (force) or as > > >>???????????? (receptive). Attitudes that flow to places > > >>???????????? where they are received within a > > >>???????????? certain attitude of care and concern. Not as > > >>???????????? forceful an image as moving > > >>???????????? only? with control and rationality.???????????? Describing > > >> 'weaker' thought that > > >>???????????? remains uncertain but that also opens us to > > >>???????????? the other's peril and plight. > > >>???????????? Possibly a post-analytic motion that exceeds > > >>???????????? the intended by living-through > > >>???????????? the actual that develops 'attitudes' that are > > >>???????????? fundamentally what count for > > >>???????????? the future. > > >> > > >> > > >>???????????? Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > >> > > >>???????????? From: Andy Blunden > > >>???????????? Sent: January 7, 2017 5:00 AM > > >>???????????? To: Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, > > >>???????????? Activity > > >>???????????? Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and > > >>???????????? Perezhivanie! > > >> > > >>???????????? OK Peter, what you say is all very true I am > > >>???????????? sure, but it > > >>???????????? entails conflating activity and action (as > > >>?????????? ??mass nouns) and > > >>???????????? context and mediation, and makes the required > > >>???????????? distinction > > >>???????????? much like one could find multiple meanings for > > >>???????????? the word > > >>???????????? "and" by listing the different phrases and > > >>???????????? clauses which can > > >>???????????? be linked by "and." > > >> > > >>???????????? Andy > > >> > > >>???????????? ------------------------------ > > ------------------------------ > > >>???????????? Andy Blunden > > >>???????????? http://home.mira.net/~andy > > >>???????????? > > >>???????????? http://www.brill.com/products/ > > book/origins-collective-decisi > > >> on-making > > >>???????????? > >> decision-making> > > >> > > >>???????????? On 7/01/2017 11:42 PM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > > >> > > >>???????????????? Let me try to illustrate. > > >> > > >>???????????????? Reading as mediated action: The > > >>???????????????? cultural-historical > > >>???????????????? context of reading mediates how one's > > >>???????????????? attention and > > >>???????????????? response are channeled in socially > > >>???????????????? constructed ways. So, > > >>???????????????? in one setting, say at home or reading in > > >>???????????????? the company of > > >>???????????????? friends, a novel might bring a reader to > > >>???????????????? tears, or invite > > >>???????????????? readers to share personal stories that > > >>??????????????? ?parallel those of > > >>???????????????? the plot lines, or laugh out loud. But > > >>???????????????? another setting, a > > >>???????????????? formal school or university class, would > > >>???????????????? have historical > > >>???????????????? values and practices that mute emotional > > >>???????????????? and personal > > >>???????????????? responses, and promote a more sober, > > >>???????????????? analytic way of > > >>???????????????? reading and talking that fits with > > >>???????????????? specific historical > > >>?????????????????? critical conventions and genres, and > > >>???????????????? discourages others. > > >> > > >>???????????????? Reading as mediating action: The act of > > >>???????????????? reading can be > > >>???????????????? transformational. In reading about an > > >>???????????????? talking about a > > >>???????????????? character's actions, a reader might > > >>???????????????? reconsider a value > > >>???????????????? system, become more sympathetic to real > > >>???????????????? people who > > >>???????????????? resemble oppressed characters, etc. In > > >>???????????????? other words, > > >>???????????????? reading a text may serve a mediational > > >>???????????????? process in which > > >>?????? ??????????textual ideas and exemplars enable a > > >>???????????????? reader to think > > >>???????????????? differently. > > >> > > >>???????????????? *From:*Andy Blunden > > >>???????????????? [mailto:ablunden@mira.net > > >>???????????????? ] > > >>???????????????? *Sent:* Saturday, January 7, 2017 6:28 AM > > >>???????????????? *To:* Peter Smagorinsky > >>???????????????? >; eXtended Mind, > > >>???????????????? Culture, Activity > >>???????????????? > > > >>???????????????? *Subject:* Re: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year > > >>???????????????? and Perezhivanie! > > >> > > >>???????????? ????Can you explain in a paragraph or two,. > > >>???????????????? Peter, rather than > > >>???????????????? asking us all to read 10,000 words to > > >>???????????????? extract an answer? > > >> > > >>???????????????? Andy > > >> > > >>???????????????? ------------------------------ > > >> ------------------------------ > > >> > > >>???????????????? Andy Blunden > > >>???????????????? http://home.mira.net/~andy > > >>???????????????? > > >>???????????????? > > >>???????????????? http://www.brill.com/products/ > > >> book/origins-collective-decision-making > > >>???????????????? collective- > > >> decision-making> > > >> > > >> > > >>???????????????? On 7/01/2017 11:23 PM, Peter Smagorinsky > > >>???????????????? wrote: > > >> > > >>????????????????????? Andy and others, I tried to work out > > >>???????????????? the mediated/mediating question > > >> > > >>???????????? in the area of reading....see if this helps. > > >> > > >>????????????????????? Smagorinsky, P., & O'Donnell-Allen, > > >>???????????????? C. (1998). Reading as mediated > > >> > > >>???????????? and mediating action: Composing meaning for > > >>???????????? literature through multimedia > > >>???????????? interpretive texts. Reading Research > > >>???????????? Quarterly, 33, 198-226. Available > > >>???????????? athttp://www.petersmagorinsky. > net/About/PDF/RRQ/RRQ1998.pdf > > >>?????? ?????? net/About/PDF/RRQ/RRQ1998.pdf> > > >> > > >>????????????????????? -----Original Message----- > > >> > > >>???????????????? From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >>???????????????? > > >>???????????????????????????????????? > >> .ucsd.edu > > >>???????????????? > > > >>???????????????? [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ > > >>???????????????? > > >> > > >>???????????? mailman.ucsd.edu ] On > > >>???????????? Behalf Of Andy Blunden > > >> > > >>????????????????????? Sent: Friday, January 6, 2017 7:12 PM > > >> > > >>???????????????? To:xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >>???????????????? > > >>???????????????? > >>???????????????? > > > >> > > >>????????????????????? Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year > > >>???? ????????????and Perezhivanie! > > >> > > >>????????????????????? I have never understood this supposed > > >>???????????????? distinction, Alfredo, between > > >> > > >>???????????? "mediated activity" and "mediating activity" > > >>???????????? given that all activity is > > >>???????????? mediated and all activity mediates. > > >> > > >>????????????????????? Also, could you spell out what you > > >>???????????????? mean by the "tension" > > >> > > >>????????????????????? between perezhivanie as meaning and > > >>???????????????? perezhivanie as struggle. > > >> > > >>????????????????????? Andy > > >> > > >>???????????????????????????????????? ------------------------------ > > >> ------------------------------ > > >> > > >>????????????????????? Andy Blunden > > >> > > >>???????????????? http://home.mira.net/~andy > > >>???????????????? > > >>???????????????? > > >> > > >>???????????????? http://www.brill.com/products/ > book/origins-collective- > > >>???????????????? collective- > > > > > >> > > >>???????????? decision-making > > >> > > >>????????????????????? On 5/01/2017 6:26 PM, Alfredo Jornet > > >>????????? ???????Gil wrote: > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? Thanks Marc for your careful > > >>???????????????? response. > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? I am familiar to Vygotsky's > > >>???????????????? notion of cultural mediation and I > > >> > > >>???????????? am aware and acknowledge that it was > > >>???????????? elaborated as a means to overcome > > >>???????????? dualism, and that it is not analog to a > > >>???????????? computational approach. > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? When I brought the computing > > >>???????????????? analogy, I did so with regard not > > >> > > >>???????????? to the concept of cultural mediation in > > >>???????????? general, but to the way it can be > > >>???????????? (and is) deployed analytically. I react to > > >>???????????? what it seems to me a dichotomy > > >>???????????? between a "meaning" as something that is > > >>???????????? static (thereby a form of > > >>???????????? "representation" or reflection of the relation > > >>???????????? with the environment instead > > >>???????????? of?refraction)??? and the > > >>???????????? experiencing-as-struggling, which is described > > >>???????????? as?transformation or change. If so, mediation > > >>???????????? here would seem to be part of > > >>???????????? a methodological device that first dissects "a > > >>???????????? type of meaning" from "a > > >>???????????? type of activity" (or a given state from the > > >>???????????? process that changes that > > >>???? ????????state), and then unites it by adding the term > > >>???????????? "mediation." And this may be > > >>???????????? my misreading, but in that (mis)reading (which > > >>???????????? perhaps is mostly due to the > > >>???????????? fact that in your empirical illustration only > > >>???????????? the initial and end product, > > >>???????????? i.e., perezhivanie, are described, but not the > > >>???????????? experiencing-as-struggle, > > >>???????????? that is, the moving between the two), > > >>???????????? mediation here seems to do as > > >>???????????? analytical concept precisely what you were > > >>???????????? afraid our monism was doing: > > >>???????????? explaining nothing. Only the end products but > > >>???????????? not the process of producing > > >>???????????? perezhivanie are revealed. This may be > > >>???????????? problematic if one attends to what > > >>???????????? Veresov argues in the paper I shared > > >>???????????? yesterday, where he defends the notion > > >>??????? ?????of mediation but also specifies that Vygotsky > > >>???????????? speaks of *mediating > > >>???????????? activity* (as opposed to *mediated* activity). > > >>???????????? That is, not mediation by > > >>???????????? signs as products, but mediating activity as > > >>???????????? the activity of producing > > >>???????????? signs (which again is an activity of producing > > >>???????????? social relations, perhaps > > >>???????????? what you refer as "holistic meanings"?). What > > >>???????????? do you think? > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? I did not think you were trying > > >>???????????????? to deny the influence of > > >> > > >>???????????? Spinoza, and I do not think we ever said that > > >>???????????? Perezhivanie was primarily a > > >>?? ??????????move from Cartesian Dualism to Monism, as you > > >>???????????? suggest in your post. I copy > > >>???????????? and paste from my prior post:? "The fact is > > >>???????????? that Vygotsky was building a > > >>???????????? theory on the unity of the affect and the > > >>???????????? intellect that was to be grounded > > >>???????????? on Spinoza, and what we try to do is to > > >>???????????? explore how perezhivanie, as a > > >>???????????? concept being developed during the same period > > >>???????????? (but not finalised or > > >>???????????? totally settled!), could be seen from the > > >>???????????? perspective of the Spinozist > > >>???????????? Vygotsky." > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? I totally believe that bringing > > >>???????????????? the distinction between > > >> > > >>???????????? perezhivanie as meaning, and perezhivanie as > > >>???????????? struggle, is totally relevant, > > >>???????????? and Beth Ferholt's vignettes of Where the Wild > > >>???????????? Things Are do indeed > > >>???????????? illustrate this. We really need to address > > >>???????????? this tension, which as Beth's > > >>???????????? examples and as our own everyday experience > > >>???????????? shows, is a tension that > > >>???????????? matters not just to books and to theories but > > >>???????????? to living persons (children, > > >>???????????? teachers), a tension that moreover is present > > >>???????????? and mentioned in all the > > >>???????????? articles of the symposium. The papers offer > > >>???????????? different proposals, and I > > >>???????????? think is so great we have the chance to > > >>???????????? discuss them! I too, as you, am > > >>???????????? very interesting in hearing others about the > > >>???????????? questions you had concerning > > >>???????????? sense and meaning. > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? Alfredo > > >> > > >>???????????????? From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >>???????????????? > > >>???????????????????????????????????????? xmca-l-bounces@mailman > > >> .ucsd.edu > > >>???????????????? > > > >> > > >> ????????????????????????? > >>???????????????? > > > >>???????????????????????????????????????? xmca-l-bounces@mailman > > >> .ucsd.edu > > >>???????????????? > > > >>???????????????? on behalf of Marc > > >> > > >>???????????? Clara > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? > >>???????????????? > > > >>???????????????? > >>???????????????? > > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? Sent: 04 January 2017 22:31 > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New > > >>???????????????? Year and Perezhivanie! > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? Thank you very much, Alfredo, for > > >>???????????????? sharing this excellent paper by > > >> > > >>???? ?????????????????????Veresov, and thanks also for your > > >>???????????????? responses, which really helped > > >> > > >>???????????? me to > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? better understand your points. My > > >>???????????????? main doubt about your proposal > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? was/is caused by the statement > > >>???????????????? that the idea of cultural > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? mediation/mediator implies a > > >>???????????????? cartesian dualism. This shocks me > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? because, to me, the idea of > > >>???????????????? cultural mediation is absolutely > > >> > > >>???????????? crucial > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? (in fact, the keystone) for the > > >>???????????????? construction of a monist (and > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? scientific) psychology that does > > >>???????????????? not forget mind -that is, a > > >> > > >>???????????? cultural > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? psychology. From your response, > > >>???????????????? however, I realized that we may > > >> > > >>???????????? be > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? approaching the idea of mediation > > >>???????????????? in different ways. I talk of > > >> > > >>??????? ??????????????????mediation and mediators in a > > >>???????????????? quite restricted way. The starting > > >> > > >>???????????? point > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? of my understanding of mediation > > >>???????????????? is a dialectical relationship > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? (organic, transactional) between > > >>???????????????? the subject and the world > > >> > > >>???????????? (Vygotsky departs from the scheme > > >>???????????? stimulus-response, from reflexology). > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? This relationship, that Vygotsky > > >>???????????????? calls primitive psychological > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? functions, would be basically > > >>???????????????? biological. However, in human > > >> > > >>?? ??????????beings > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? this relationship is mediated by > > >>???????????????? cultural means: signs and > > >> > > >>???????????? tools; or > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? primary, secondary and terciary > > >>???? ????????????artifacts. These cultural means > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? reorganize the primitive > > >>???????????????? functions (dialectic S-O relationship), > > >> > > >>???????????? which > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? become then higher psychological > > >>???????????????? functions (S-M-O) (see for > > >> > > >>???????????? example, > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? The problem of the cultural > > >>???????????????? development of the child, in The > > >> > > >>???????????? Vygotsky > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? Reader). Now, the subject, the > > >>???????????????? cultural mediators, and the > > >> > > >>???????????? object form > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? an inseparable dialectical unit, > > >>???????????????? so that the subject acts on > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? (transforms) the object through > > >>???????????????? the prism of the cultural > > >> > > >>???????????? mediators, > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? the object acts on (transforms) > > >>???????????????? the subject also through the > > >> > > >>???????????? prism of > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? the cultural mediators, and the > > >>???????????????? cultural means are themselves > > >> > > >>????? ???????also > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? transformed as a consequence of > > >>???????????????? their mediation in this > > >> > > >>???????????? continuous > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? dynamic dialectical tension. > > >>???????????????? Here, for me, it is important the > > >> > > >>???????????? idea > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? that the cultural means are as > > >>???????????????? material (if we assume a > > >> > > >>???????????? materialist > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? monism) as all the rest of the > > >>???????????????? world; in fact, are parts of the > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? material world which become signs > > >>???????????????? or tools (and can be therefore > > >> > > >>? ????????????????????????socially distributed). This > > >>???????????????? permits the introduction of the > > >> > > >>???????????? scientific > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? study of mind-consciousness (as > > >>???????????????? mediating systems of signs), > > >> > > >>???????????? because > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? mind is not anymore something > > >>???????????????? immaterial and unobservable, but > > >> > > >>???????????? it is > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? as material and observable as the > > >>???????????????? rest of the natural world. It > > >> > > >>???????????? is > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? from this view that, for me, the > > >>???????????????? idea of cultural mediation is > > >> > > >>???????????? the > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? keystone of a monist psychology > > >>???????????????? that includes mind. Thus, when I > > >> > > >>???????????? speak > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? of mediators, I refer to the > > >>???????????????? cultural means which mediate in the > > >> > > >>???????????? S-O > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? dialectics; I am especially > > >>???????????????? interested in signs/secondary > > >> > > >>???????????? artifacts. > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? Here, it is perhaps necessary to > > >>???????????????? insist that when I talk of > > >> > > >>???????????? studying > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? mediators (and their semantic > > >>???????????????? structure), this doesn't mean that > > >> > > >>???????????? they > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? are taken out from the activity > > >>???????????????? (the flux of live) in which they > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? mediate (since out of activity > > >>???????????????? they are not signs anymore); > > >> > > >>???????????? here, I > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? think Vygotsky tries again to > > >>???????????????? overcome another old dichotomy, the > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? functionalism-structuralism one. > > >>???????????????? I hope that all this makes also > > >> > > >>???????????? clear the difference between this view and > > >>???????????? that of computational > > >>???????????? psychologies (which in general are profoundly > > >>???????????? and explicitly dualist and > > >>???????????? not dialectic). > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? Back to perezhivanie, I'm not > > >>???????????????? obviously trying to deny the > > >> > > >>???????????? influence > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? of Spinoza on Vygotsky's thinking > > >>???????????????? (this is explicit in Vygotsky's > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? writings, especially in "The > > >>???????????????? teaching about emotions", in the > > >> > > >>???????????? Vol.6 of > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? the Collected Works). But I have > > >>???????????????? doubts that Vygotsky's > > >> > > >>???????????? introduction > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? of the concept of perezhivanie is > > >>???????????????? to be regarded primarily as a > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? movement towards monism (from a > > >>???????????????? previous cartesian dualism), and > > >> > > >>???????????? that > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? this movement questions the > > >>???????????????? concept of cultural mediation. > > >> > > >>???????????? Instead, > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? and I think that this is in line > > >>???????????????? with some of Gonzalez-Rey > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? observations in his paper, my > > >>???????????????? impression is that the > > >> > > >>???????????? introduction of > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? the concept of perezhivanie > > >>???????????????? responds more to a movement (a > > >> > > >>???????????? further > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? step) towards holism (something > > >>???????????????? that, in my understanding, can > > >> > > >>???????????? also be > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? found in Spinoza). Thus, I think > > >>???????????????? that the word meaning is still > > >> > > >>???????????? the > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? unit of analysis in the last > > >>???????????????? Vygotsky -and therefore, the idea of > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? cultural mediation is still > > >>???????????????? crucial (in fact, in The problem of > > >> > > >>???????????? the > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? environment, he connects the > > >>???????????????? concept of perezhivanie, which has > > >> > > >>???????????? just > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? introduced, to the development of > > >>???????????????? word meaning [p.345-346, also > > >> > > >>???????????? cited > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? in my paper]). However, in my > > >>???????????????? view, in the last Vygotsky the > > >> > > >>???????????? focus is > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? not anymore primarily on the > > >>???????????????? word-meaning as formed for things > > >> > > >>???????????? (or > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? collections of things, as in the > > >>???????????????? ontogenetic research with > > >> > > >>???????????? Sakharov), but the focus is now in the > > >>???????????? formation of meaning for holistic > > >>???????????? situations. > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? Best regards, > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? Marc. > > >> > > >>????????????????????????? 2017-01-03 19:16 GMT+01:00 > > >>???????????????? Alfredo Jornet Gil< > > >> > > >>???????????? a.j.gil@iped.uio.no > > >>???????????? > > > >>???????????? > >>????? ???????>: > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? Hi Marc, all, > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? thanks for joining and for > > >>???????????????? your interesting work, which I > > >> > > >>???????????? follow > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? since I became aware of it. I > > >>???????????????? appreciate the way in your > > >> > > >>???????????? paper you > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? show careful and honest > > >>???????????????? attention to the texts of the authors > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? involved, but perhaps most of > > >>???????????????? all I appreciate that the > > >> > > >>???????????? paper makes > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? the transformational > > >>???????????????? dimension related to struggle and change > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? salient, a dimension all > > >>???????????????? papers deemed central to > > >> > > >>???????????? perezhivanie. And I > > >> > > >>???????????????? ?????????????have learned more about > > >>???????????????? Vasilyuk by reading your paper. But > > >> > > >>???????????? I also > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? see that we have approached > > >>???????????????? the question of perezhivanie > > >> > > >>???????????? differently > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? and I think that addressing > > >>???????????????? the questions that you raise > > >> > > >>???????????? concerning > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? our article may be a good way > > >>???????????????? to both respond and discuss > > >> > > >>???????????? your paper. > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? I am aware that our use of > > >>???????????????? the term monism may be > > >> > > >>???????????? problematic to > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? some, and N. Veresov, who has > > >>???????????????? recently written about this > > >> > > >>???????????? (see > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? attached article), warns > > >>???????????????? against the dangers of simply > > >> > > >>???????????? moving from > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? dualism into an > > >>???????????????? undifferentiating monism that relativizes > > >> > > >>???????????? everything, > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? making development > > >>???????????????? un-studiable. This seems to be the way in > > >> > > >>???????????? which > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? you have understood our > > >>???????????????? argument, and of course this is not > > >> > > >>???????????? what we are or want to be doing. > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? Probably many will think that > > >>???????????????? *dialectical materialism* > > >> > > >>?? ??????????rather than > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? monism is the proper term, > > >>???????????????? and I could agree with them; we > > >> > > >>???????????? do in fact > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? use dialectical materialism > > >>???????????????? there and elsewhere. Yet, we > > >> > > >>???????????? wanted to > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? emphasise the Spinozist > > >>???????????????? influence (an influence that also > > >> > > >>???????????? runs > > >> > > >> ?????????????????????????????through Marx) and so we found > > >>???????????????? it appropriate to use the term > > >> > > >>???????????? monism, > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? a term that Vygotsky uses > > >>???????????????? before arguing that Spinoza > > >> > > >>???????????? "develops an essentially materialistic view" > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? (Collected Works, Vol. 6, p. > > >>???????????????? 124). For us, the aim is > > >> > > >> ????????????working out > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? ways to empirically examine > > >>???????????????? and formulate problems in ways > > >> > > >>???????????? that do > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? not reify a mind-body dualism. > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? Although overcoming dualism > > >>???????????????? is foundational to the CHAT > > >> > > >>???????????? paradigm, I > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? would however not say that > > >>???????????????? Vygotsky did get to solve all of > > >> > > >>???????????? the > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? problems that Cartesian > > >>???????????????? dualism had created for psychology, > > >> > > >>???????????? even > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? though he recognised those > > >>???????????????? problems brilliantly as early as > > >> > > >>???????????? in the > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? "Crisis". It should suffice > > >>???????????????? to cite Vygotsky's own remarks, > > >> > > >>???????????? which we quote in the paper (and which A.N. > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? Leont'ev mentions in the > > >>???????????????? introduction to the collected > > >> > > >>???????????? works), where > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? Vygotsky explicitly critiques > > >>???????????????? some of his own prior ideas > > >> > > >>???????????? for failing > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? to overcome dualism. We agree > > >>???????????????? with those who, like F. G. > > >> > > >>???????????? Rey, see > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? Vygotsky's project as a > > >>???????????????? developing rather than as a > > >> > > >>???????????? finalised one. > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? The fact is that Vygotsky was > > >>???????????????? building a theory on the unity > > >> > > >>???????????? of the > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? affect and the intellect that > > >>???????????????? was to be grounded on Spinoza, > > >> > > >>???????????? and what > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? we try to do is to explore > > >>???????????????? how perezhivanie, as a concept > > >> > > >>???????????? being > > >> > > >>??????????????????????????? ??developed during the same > > >>???????????????? period (but not finalised or > > >> > > >>???????????? totally > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? settled!), could be seen from > > >>???????????????? the perspective of the > > >> > > >>????????? ???Spinozist Vygotsky. > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? As you note, in our article > > >>???????????????? we argue that, if one takes the > > >> > > >>???????????? Spinozist > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? one-substance approach, > > >>???????????????? classical concepts used in > > >> > > >>???????????? non-classical > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? psychology, at least in the > > >>???????????????? way they are commonly used in > > >> > > >>???????????? the current > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? literature, should be > > >>???????????????? revised. One such concept is > > >> > > >>???????????? mediation. And I > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? personally do not have much > > >>???????????????? of a problem when mediation is > > >> > > >>???????????? used to > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? denote the fundamental fact > > >>???????????????? that every thing exists always > > >> > > >>???????????? through > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? *another*, never in and of > > >>???????????????? itself. But I do think that it is > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? problematic to identify > > >>???????????????? MEDIATORS, such as "a meaning", as a > > >> > > >>???????????? means to > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? account for or explain > > >>???????????????? developmental processes and learning > > >> > > >>???????????? events, > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? precisely because it is > > >>???????????????? there, at least in my view, that > > >> > > >>???????????? dualism creeps in. > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? For example, I find it > > >>???????????????? paradoxical that you are concerned > > >> > > >>???????????? that our > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? monist approach risks turning > > >>???????????????? perezhivanie into a useless > > >> > > >>???????????? category > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? because it may be used to > > >>???????????????? explain everything and nothing, > > >> > > >>???????????? and yet you > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? do not seem to have a problem > > >>???????????????? using the term mediation to > > >> > > >>???????????? account for > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? the transformation of > > >>???????????????? perezhivanie without clearly > > >> > > >>???????????? elaborating on how > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? mediation does change > > >>???????????????? anything or what it looks like as a > > >> > > >>???????????? real > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? process. How is it different > > >>???????????????? saying that a perezhivanie > > >> > > >>???????????? mediates the > > >> > > >>????????????????????? ????????experiencing-as-struggle from > > >>???????????????? simply saying that it > > >> > > >>???????????? "affects" or > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? "determines" it? Indeed, if > > >>???????????????? perezhivanie mediates > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? experiencing-as-struggle, > > >>???????????????? does not experiencing-as-struglgle > > >> > > >>???????????? too > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? mediate perezhivanie? And do > > >>???????????????? not both may be said to mediate > > >> > > >>???????????? development, or development mediate them? Is > > >>???????????? not this explaining everything > > >>???????????? and nothing? > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? I do believe you can argue > > >>????? ???????????that there is a difference between > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? mediation and classical > > >>???????????????? psychology's cause-effect relations, > > >> > > >>???????????? but to > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? show this you need to dig > > >>???????????????? into the dialectical underpinnings > > >> > > >>???????????? of the > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? theory. In your paper, you > > >>???????????????? offer a nice analysis of a lovely > > >> > > >>???????????? case of > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? a teacher who, in dealing > > >>???????????????? with a challenge with one of her > > >> > > >>???????????? students, > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? changes her perezhivanie. I > > >>???????????????? think you can rightly argue that > > >> > > >>???????????? there is > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? a semiotic transformation, > > >>???????????????? and I fully support your > > >> > > >>???????????? statement that by > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? studying discourse we can > > >>???????????????? empirically approach questions of > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? psychological development. > > >>???????????????? The contradictions you show as > > >> > > >>???????????? being > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? involved and resolved > > >>???????????????? resonate really well with what I > > >> > > >>???????????? experience as > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? a parent or as a teacher in > > >>???????????????? the classroom. Yet, without > > >> > > >>???????????? unpacking > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? what this "mediation" taking > > >>???????????????? place between one perezhivanie > > >> > > >>???????????? and the > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? next one means as a concrete > > >>???????????????? and real, the same analysis > > >> > > >>???????????? could be done taking an information processing > > >>???????????? approach: > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? there is an situation that is > > >>???????????????? processed (represented?) in > > >> > > >>???????????? one way, > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? which then leads to a > > >>? ???????????????(cognitive) dissonance, and then there > > >> > > >>???????????? is a > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? cognitive resolution by means > > >>???????????????? of which the situation is > > >> > > >>???????????? presented > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? differently in consciousness > > >>???????????????? (indeed, when seen in this way, > > >> > > >>???????????? the term > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? perezhivanie and the term > > >>???????????????? "representation" become almost > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? indistinguishable). How is > > >>???????????????? mediation, as an analytical > > >> > > >>???????????? concept, > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? helping here? And most > > >>????? ???????????importantly to the question of > > >> > > >>???????????? perezhivanie, > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? how is this analysis going to > > >>???????????????? show the internal connection > > >> > > >>???????????? between > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? intellect and affect that > > >>???????????????? Vygotsky formulates as > > >> > > >>???????????? constitutive of the notion of perezhivanie? > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? I believe that the key lies > > >> ????????????????in understanding what Vygotsky > > >> > > >>???????????? means when > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? he says that perezhivanie is > > >>???????????????? a unit of analysis. I will not > > >> > > >>???????????? repeat > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? here what already is written > > >>???????????????? in at least a couple of the > > >> > > >>???????????? articles in > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? the special issue (Blunden, > > >>???????????????? ours), that is the difference > > >> > > >>???????????? between > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? analysis by elements and unit > > >>???????????????? analysis (Vygotsky 1987). A > > >> > > >>???????????? unit > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? analysis approach is > > >>???????????????? consistent with Spinoza, for whom > > >> > > >>???????????? cause-effect > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? explanations were not > > >>???????????????? adequate, requiring instead an > > >> > > >>???????????? understanding of > > >> > > >>????????????????????????????? self-development, > > >>???????????????? perezhivanie as a kernel cell for the > > >> > > >>???????????? development > > >> > > >>??????????????????????? ??????of personality. And I think > > >>???????????????? you may be after this in your > > >> > > >>???????????? article in > > > > > > > > >? ? From ajrajala@gmail.com Wed Jan 18 12:53:07 2017 From: ajrajala@gmail.com (Antti Rajala) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2017 22:53:07 +0200 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! In-Reply-To: <587fb753.1aa3630a.f3dd3.63b0@mx.google.com> References: <1483344752182.40904@iped.uio.no> <1483467423798.57819@iped.uio.no> <1483601196884.31418@iped.uio.no> <5df5e870-3ef8-70d6-0c17-f8647ba17e62@mira.net> <587124d9.d957620a.4a5a8.bd56@mx.google.com> <1483820996800.91513@iped.uio.no> <1484253698990.7728@iped.uio.no> <1484328718783.79382@iped.uio.no> <587cfc5a.4e38630a.aa4eb.5a5d@mx.google.com> <587fb753.1aa3630a.f3dd3.63b0@mx.google.com> Message-ID: Dear Marc, Thanks a lot for your thoughtful reply. I am not in fact searching one appropriate unit of analysis but think (it seems, in line with Veresov and Fleer contribution) that different units of analysis can be useful given the pragmatic needs of the research and its aims and material. Nevertheless, I agree that articulating epistemological and ontological stances is important. I wonder if there is some confusion regarding the notion of functionalism. Andy seems to refer to functionalism in social theory whereas David refers to functionalistic psychological theory. Maybe they do not speak of the same functionalism. Kozulin, suggested by Andy, seems to draw upon yet another tradition, Russian humanism, in which life is seen as literature or art. Perhaps, the preference for the notion of drama by Alfredo and Nikolai, has some resonance with this tradition. Andy, Kozulin depicts Vasilyuk's humanism in sharp contrast with Marxism. Do you agree? Marc, you are right I moved the discussion to methodological issues, which the special issue does not address that much. I would be interested in reading about methodology, too. Isn't the question of unit of analysis also a methodological issue. I agree that it can be tricky to find indications of perezhivanie. If it is supposed to be developmentally significant crisis moment, are we limited to retrospective methods. In my own research, I've engaged in ethnographic video research of teachers' experiencing of educational change. However, it seems that the moments we have managed to capture on video rarely seem to be very developmentally significant (despite 100+ h of video). Maybe one answer is to artificially create the conditions for display of perezhivanie. This can be done by confronting the subjects with difficult work situtations such as described in the study of Annalisa Sannino in her paper in MCA 2008 (in Change Lab intervention setting). Ferholt and Nilssen seem to argue that perezhivanie is primarily displayed to others (including researchers) by artistic means. In support of this idea, in Beth's contribution, I liked heir quote of Vygotsky: "Art is the social technique of emotion, a tool of society which brings the most intimate and personal aspects of our being into the circle of social life. It would be more correct to say that emotion becomes personal when every one of us experiences a work of art; it becomes personal without ceasing to be social. (p. 249)" Best, Antti On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 8:42 PM, wrote: > David, > To not loose the thread where you say : > > Applying care and compassion to non-sentient and non-conscious nature only > serves to destroy the real content of care and compassion applied to that > part of nature that has become sentient and aware... > > The notion of care as more active and compassion as more passive seem to > be central to perezhivanie. > Where we express the extent of care and compassion is an open question. I > hear in your response care and compassion being a humanist response? > > This aligns with Beth and Monica highlighting the ?pivot? AS person. > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > From: David Kellogg > Sent: January 17, 2017 4:33 PM > To: Lplarry > Cc: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: Re: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > Larry: > > I think that being a functionalist doesn't just mean that you like to get > things done, or that you look to outcomes to explain structure instead of > looking to structure to explain outcomes. Being a functionalist means that > the key to the anatomy of the ape is in man--but not vice versa. This is > because we share most of the bodily and even psychic functions that apes > have, but not the other way around. > > The key to the anatomy of man is not even in man, but in artificial limbs > and even artificial organs. And since the key to the anatomy of man is not > in man, we can't expect to adapt nature to our present needs; the > irrationality of the way the world economy is now run will not be solved > simply by replacing the remnants of hunting and gathering (e.g. fly > fishing) with husbandry and horticulture (e.g. farmed salmon). > > It seems to me that applying care and compassion to non-sentient and > non-conscious nature only serves to destroy the real content of care and > compassion applied to that part of nature that has become sentient and > consciously aware (animals and humans). Looking to what already exists in > our psychic make up as a model for what should exist in our relationship to > the environment is a little like looking to child behaviour as a model for > an adult relationship with society. > > I think that the society I have personally lived in which was closest to > equilibrium with the environment was China in the early eighties, where the > vast majority of the country was still practicing subsistence agriculture. > We recycled everything and never dreamed of calling it that; > we economized sheepishly rather than smugly (my wife still obeys the old > adage: "Wear it three years new, three years old, and three years patched > up and stictched together" which is saying a lot when you only have two or > three changes of clothes). When Xi Jinping denounces "nativism" and > "economic nationalism" and insists that China too has a right to the > commodities that it produces for Western consumption, I absolutely agree. > > Perhaps the place we should look for "exaptations" that can save both our > personalities and our environment is not in our evolved needs, but in yet > to be designed quasi-needs. Artificial organs, after all, always suggest > new and ever more artificial functions, like chess and language. As Ruqaiya > Hasan used to say, the meaning of "not" is not in "not". > > David Kellogg > Macquarie University > > > On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 2:00 AM, wrote: > David addressing Alfredo. > > A wonderful metaphor and nod to Alfredo helping us move from small prey to > a substantial prey worth pursuing. > > David, you describe the process of development as moving through the stage > of adapting the environment to human needs. (a possible perezhivanie > relation?). > > However, is it possible we are now developing beyond this notion of > adapting the environment FOR human needs and becoming aware of the vice > versa movement. The movement of adapting human needs to environmental > needs. Still within conscious awareness requiring our focused (and possibly > also unfocused) attention but less human centric, more focused upon the > ?relation? honouring and possibly experiencing as ?sacred? the ?relation? > and through the ?relation? experiencing the environmental ?element? of > perizhivanie as living vitality. This focus on the ?relation? shifting > focus away from human needs or environmental needs as either/or as > ?things? that exist outside of each other that must be ?connected?. > There is no actual separation except imaginally and this is the ?heart? of > the matter. The place of not only compassion as such but the heart as the > place of CARE AND CONCERN. More active than compassion but not human > centric only. CARE AND CONCERN for the ?relation? whether imagined as > subject, object, subject&object, or the relation existing prior to this > subject/object differentiation. > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > From: David Kellogg > Sent: January 16, 2017 2:56 AM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > Alfredo: > > Well, I think that you are doing the really difficult and beautiful work, > filling in Mike's ten league boots and keeping the cats in a coherent herd. > Contrary to the popular expression, though, it is possible to herd cats. > Lions, for example, herd themselves, apparently because the prey they > consume is too large to consume individually before it goes bad, and if > they work in a pride, they don't have to work every day. House cats, on the > other hand, feed on small prey in individual portions and so they are > notoriously selfish and competitive. It seems to me that with the > "perezhivanie" symposium, we have at last begun to hunt lion-sized prey. > Perhaps I am still doing mousework, though: I think we actually disagree > more than we agree. > > Unlike Andy, I am very willing to embrace both the label "structuralist" > and the label "functionalist", so long as I can embrace them together, and > add the label developmentalist: structures are as they are because they > function as they do, but sometimes they function as they do for historical, > developmental reasons rather than obvious and immediate ones. In the second > chapter of HDHMF, Vygotsky invokes what he calls the "Jennings" principle: > that is, that functions are always "functions of structure": organisms do > what they are allowed to do by their organic structure and no more. For > example, cats cannot herd themselves because their prey is too small. But > he points out that a) organic structure is itself a product of doing things > over thousands and millions of years, b) structures can be "borrowed" to do > more than they are adapted for (what S.J. Gould called "exaptation") and c) > none of this applies to "artificial organs", such as tools and signs, > because mediational means are precisely structures "borrowed" from the > environment to do more than they are adapted for. One of these > supra-adaptive functions is to adapt the environment to human needs instead > of vice versa. This by definition cannot be something that a tool or a sign > is adapted for; you don't get tools or signs simply by adapting to the > environment: you only get them by imagining how the environment can be made > different and acting accordingly. Both tools and signs are the product of > some quantum of conscious awareness, and neither is a creation of habit. > > And that is why, again quite unlike Andy, I am also happy to embrace the > label of semiotic as opposed to activity theoretic. I think that although > both tools and signs involve an idealization of the environment, they do > not do so equally. Signs, for example, include conscious > attentive idealization of the self as well (the self as part of the > environment, as part of perizhivanie--as Vygotsky points out, what endures > from the crisis at seven is the "self" in self-esteem and the "self" in > "self respect", not the self of posing, mannerism and acting out). The flaw > in Greimas is that he is uninterested this functional, this developmental > aspect of structural semantics, and it is precisely this that allows us to > distinguish, at three, between the child who is interested in changing the > chess board as environment by playing with the pieces and the child who is > interested in changing the semiotic structure of the board by playing the > game, and to distinguish, at seven, between the child who is disappointed > with the inferior affordances for constructing himself as a first person > shooter that a chess board offers and the child who is excited by the > superior affordances for constructing himself as a future grand master. . > > I was very interested in what you said about attention versus perception. > They are developmentally linked, in Vygotsky, but functionally and thus > structurally quite distinct. Volitional attention is so much a part of > adult life we sometimes have to work at nonvolitional attention (!). But > volitional perception occurs only in rare circumstances, e.g. the Edgar > Rubin vases, Necker's cube, etc. I find myself straining to see every > passing mouse as a zebra. > > David Kellogg > Macquarie University > . > > On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 2:31 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > wrote: > > > Thanks, David, for such a beautiful and clarifying post. You have such a > > brilliant manner to language Vygotsky in Vygotsky's language! > > > > I think we agree much more than we disagree, and before I turn to Andy's > > very timely link to the "Fate of a Man", this may be a nice tutorial on > > terminology, at least for me. > > > > My only problem had been seeing what to me had looked like an all too > > empiricist treatment of the notion of perception in your prior post(s) > > (including some older posts on micro-genesis). But I think you still > agree > > that part of what it takes to become an experienced chess player is being > > able to ATTEND (and *attention* may be a better term than perception) to > > the pieces and their position in the board in front of her in much closer > > detail than the child who merely plays "with" the pieces. Thus the > > "perception" in the expert may be said to be much more rich and > *concrete* > > than what one "perceives" by merely attending to (abstracting) color and > > shape relations. But I keep thinking that perception is not the right > word > > here, is it? Certainly not one "element" (I use your wording below) in > the > > unit. But this may just be a wording problem. > > > > I really like your very important observation that chess produces > > life-long learners, whereas the child that merely plays "with" the chess > > pieces will soon find the game uninteresting. But again I don't think > that > > the key here is an opposition between perceiving and semiosis, but > perhaps > > between habit and conscious awareness (which at the end may be just > > different words for saying the same thing). As a habit, the task of > > grouping pieces by color involves a person-environment relation in which > > the *need* for consciousness (and thereby interest!) to awaken is lesser, > > thereby offering less possibilities for development. I think it is this > > that you would phrase as "the environment seems to dominate". The way > > habits are formed in chess, however, are such that they require of > > consciousness for the operation to continue (which you may phrase as > > "personality dominates more"). The relation between habit and awareness > is > > transformed in the higher-order activity (or form of human consciousness) > > that is chess-playing. Same thing, different words? > > > > Alfredo > > > > ________________________________________ > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > on behalf of David Kellogg > > Sent: 13 January 2017 01:02 > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > > > Alfredo: > > > > Let's apply your reasoning to the distinction between non-language, > > proto-language, and language proper. Imagine a nursery in which there are > > three beds, one with a child who is only week old and who responds with > > pleasure to a nipple and with pain to being shaken or dropped, one with a > > child who is about ten months old and has worked out a system of squeaks > > and directed cries in order to get attention and deliver an affective > > response, and one with a child who is nearly two and can ask for objects, > > evaluate them, and reject them. As you say, perception and semiosis are > at > > work in each situation. But contrary to what you say, they are not > equally > > at work, and the outcomes are very different. > > > > There is a good reason why children develop: it's in their interests, > both > > in the long term sense in that it allows a much wider variety of outcomes > > and in the short term sense in that it allows an escape from ennui. A > child > > who plays the "game" of putting black pieces on black squares and white > > pieces on white squares will find this game very dull in a matter of > hours. > > A child who plays the game of chess will, in many cases, find a lifetime > > vocation. Yes, there are "structures" that include perception and > semiosis > > in both cases, but the precise make-up isn't insignificant or irrelevant. > > > > One important reason why perezhivanie is such an important unit of > > structure is that it at last allows us to assign real, concrete, specific > > values to the influence of its two elements, personality and environment. > > These vary from period to period--for example, in periods of crisis, the > > personality always appears to play a leading role (e.g. proto-language in > > the Crisis at One, negativism in the Crisis at Three, "acting out" in the > > Crisis at Seven). During stable periods, the environment always appears > to > > dominate (e.g. speech proper in early childhood, play in preschool, and > > thinking but not thinking-about-thinking in school age). > > > > Some "child-centred" pedagogies would like to treat childhood as one long > > crisis. I think this is a disservice to the child, because it is > precisely > > during the stable periods that the critical neoformations (e.g. > > protospeech) find a supporting but absolutely crucial role. The child > > doesn't forget the expressiveness of intonation and stress learned in > > proto-language, any more than the child who plays chess no longer > > distinguishes white squares from black ones. > > > > David Kellogg > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 7:41 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > > > wrote: > > > > > David, I admire much of what you write in your first three examples in > > > your prior post. But I am reacting to your latter post on Chess. It is > > the > > > second or third time that you bring the CHESS example to bear in xmca, > > and > > > I always feel uneasy about it. > > > > > > I see the point that there are different developmental stages and that > > > these can be best categorised according to the type of generalisation > > that > > > the child can engage into. Obviously, treating a piece of marble "as > if" > > it > > > was a piece in the game of chess involves a different type of > > > generalization than treating the same piece of marble as if it was a > > piece > > > in the game of "let's put the black pieces in black squares and white > > > pieces in white squares". But I do not think that my 20 months daughter > > > will put black pieces on black squares in any systematic manner simply > > > because she can PERCEIVE and act upon the difference between black and > > > white; and indeed I do not think that my 7 years old first daughter > will > > do > > > any of these things with the chess pieces, considering she has never > > > learned to play chess. Indeed, why would any child do that? I do > strongly > > > believe that to get any of my daughters to arrange the pieces by color, > > > there would have first to be a TEACHING/LEARNING situation, which > itself > > > would involve establishing a semantic field, a field that perhaps out > of > > my > > > ignorance I would call semiotic (sign). > > > > > > In my view, in both cases there are rules and therefore imagination, > if > > > we listen to Vygotsky's writings on play, and perhaps, as Vygotsky > notes, > > > there may be a difference in the "moral attitude", but I would be > > cautious > > > by gross divisions between perceptual and semantic structures. > Yes,there > > > are different levels, types, or stages in the way semantic fields are > > > organised, and that playing the chess pieces as pieces of the CHESS > game > > > involves a qualitative leap compared to playing them as pieces in the > > game > > > of putting them together by shape or color; but there is a game going > on > > in > > > both cases, and therefore a perceptual as much as a semiotic structure > > > being at play. These are different semiotic contexts, as you say at the > > end > > > of your e-mail, but I do think that your assertion that in playing with > > the > > > chess pieces by color "the structure would be visual but not semiotic" > > can > > > be problematic and may lead to what I consider an incorrect view of the > > > relation between higher and lower functions in development. > > > > > > Alfredo > > > ________________________________________ > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > on behalf of David Kellogg > > > Sent: 11 January 2017 04:50 > > > To: Andy Blunden; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > > > > > Vygotsky's got a terrific metaphor for how "perezhivanie" is > > internalized: > > > it is like internalizing the rules of the game of chess. > > > > > > The child who doesn't know how to play chess simply plays WITH the > pieces > > > instead of playing them. She or he might try to create a piece-board > > > structure by putting black pieces on black squares and white pieces on > > > white squares, but the structure is a visual one and not a semiotic > one; > > > it's about color and not about meaning. The child who DOES know how to > > play > > > chess plays the pieces instead of playing with them. She or he too > > creates > > > "structures" but this time they are semiotic ones: a black knight in a > > > completely different column and a completely different row, can > capture a > > > white pawn. > > > > > > The board is the same and so are the kids; the children may have very > > > similar biological and very similar cultural endowments, but they do > not > > > have the same semiotic context at all. Hence different perezhivanie and > > > different personalities. > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 11:54 AM, Andy Blunden > > wrote: > > > > > > > How to understand the personality? ... i.e., the *development* of the > > > > personality? > > > > > > > > The subject's inheritance, and The subject's experiences > > > (/perezhivaniya/) > > > > > > > > ... just think of how you'd go about writing a good biography or > > > > Bildungsroman. > > > > > > > > Andy > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > Andy Blunden > > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective- > decision-making > > > > On 11/01/2017 10:24 AM, David Kellogg wrote: > > > > > > > >> Andy: > > > >> > > > >> A good paradox! Word meaning is a unit, but the spoken word itself > is > > > >> just an element--a thing. We can see that this is, on the face of > it, > > > >> impossible: within a single holistic analysis, an element can be a > > part > > > of > > > >> a unit, but a unit can never be a part of an element. So what you > are > > > >> referring to when you say that the word is a thing is the "sonic" or > > > >> "phasal" quality of the word: its "acoustic" properties, its > > > "phonetics". > > > >> > > > >> But not its phonology. The word that Vygotsky uses for "phoneme" > > refers > > > >> to the 1929 work of the Prague Circle, originally the Moscow Circle. > > He > > > is > > > >> a LITTLE coy about this, because the founders, Jakobson and > > Trubetskoy, > > > >> were not very popular with the authorities and Vygotsky already had > > > plenty > > > >> of heterodox acquaintances to worry about. Nevertheless, whenever > > > Vygotsky > > > >> says "phoneme", we know he really means what Jakobson and Trubetskoy > > > called > > > >> "morphophonemes". We know this because the examples he actually > > > >> gives--Russian case endings--are morpho-phonemes and not simply > > > phonemes: > > > >> so for example in English the sound /s/ is a simple phoneme when I > say > > > the > > > >> word "self" but if I say "Andy's" the sound /s/ is a > morpho-phoneme: a > > > >> difference in sounding that makes a difference in meaning. The > system > > > (that > > > >> is, the paradigmatic menu) of these differences in soundings are > what > > > the > > > >> Moscow and Prague Circles called "phonology" (as OPPOSED to > > phonetics), > > > and > > > >> this is the kind of "phoneme" that Vygotsky is really talking about. > > > >> > > > >> Still, you can see that it is not what he is talking about when he > > says > > > >> word meaning, because these units are still nowhere near big enough > to > > > >> describe the kinds of changes which must occur when verbal thinking > > > >> develops. I feel the same way about a lot of the examples offered of > > > >> "perezhivanie", including Marc's. If MacDuff's grief or Carla's > > epiphany > > > >> about the misbehavior of her kids being due to "outside influences" > > > really > > > >> is the unit of personality and experience that Vygotsky wants us to > > use > > > >> when we analyse the ontogenesis of personality, then it is no more > > > >> appropriate than using the morpho-phoneme to analyse the whole of > > verbal > > > >> thinking. Just as evolution (of species) requires very different > units > > > from > > > >> history (of classes), development, whether we are talking about > verbal > > > >> thinking or the personality as a whole, is going to require very > > > different > > > >> units from learning, whether we are talking about MacDuff or Carla. > > The > > > >> units must be able to develop; that is, the relationship of the > > elements > > > >> within them must be susceptible to many changes over time. > > > >> > > > >> Let me give three examples of how this happens in different > > > >> "perezhivanie". They are not mine; they are Vygotsky's, and they are > > all > > > >> from the Pedological Lectures. > > > >> > > > >> First, the Crisis at One. Neither the biological nor the social > > > endowment > > > >> of the child greatly changes in the acquisition of speech; > > nevertheless, > > > >> the relationship between the personality and the environment, of > which > > > both > > > >> personality moments and environmental ones are constituent elements, > > is > > > >> entirely transformed. Here we are not talking about phonemes, or > even > > > >> morpho-phonemes: we are talking about "wordings"--whole utterances. > In > > > >> Melbourne I presented some data that demonstrated this > beautifully--a > > > >> child's first word is actually an attempt to imitate a whole > > > conversation. > > > >> > > > >> Second, the Crisis at Three. Vygotsky spends a lot of time > discussing > > > the > > > >> "Seven Stars"--the symptoms of the "Terrible Twos" and > "Threenagehood" > > > >> noted by harried parents everywhere. But by the end of his analysis > > it's > > > >> clear that what really happens is a new relationship between wish > and > > > will: > > > >> in extreme cases, the child actually wishes for one thing (e.g. > > > compromise) > > > >> and wills the opposite (the everlasting "No!"). Again, neither the > > > >> personality moments as such nor the environmental ones change, but > > > there is > > > >> a separation and a sorting which allows the subordination of wish to > > > will > > > >> that we see in play. This isn't the kind of "aha" moment that Marc > is > > > >> offering us at all: Vygotsky actually calls it the "antipode" of > > future > > > >> will, because instead of enabling will it actually paralyzes it. But > > it > > > is > > > >> indubitably a key moment in the development of the relation of > > > personality > > > >> to environmental moments that we see in "perizhivanie". > > > >> > > > >> Thirdly, the Crisis at Seven. I think Gonzalez Rey makes a total > hash > > of > > > >> this, and I get very cross when I read his article. It is not true > > that > > > the > > > >> essence of perizhivanie remained a mystery to Vygotsky simply > because > > > he no > > > >> longer subscribes to "the aesthetic reaction" and "catharsis" and > > other > > > >> notions that he toyed with in Psych of Art (he's no longer doing > > > >> experiments on changes in breathing rate when people read the works > of > > > >> Bunin either!). It might be true that he never offered a system of > > facts > > > >> and methodological procedures for perezivanie, but that was only > > because > > > >> one already existed, for example in the work of Wallon and Stern and > > > >> others. It is demonstrably not true that when Vygotsky says that the > > > speech > > > >> environment of those around him does not change when the child > learns > > to > > > >> talk at one, he is not "profoundly contradictory with the concept of > > > >> sense": when you read the quotation in context, it is very clear > that > > > what > > > >> he is referring to are the kinds of absolute indicators used by > > Zalkind: > > > >> how often the parents read the newspapers, the dialect they speak, > and > > > >> their educational background. These do not change, and if the child > > > wants > > > >> to make sense, these are the factors the child will have to relate > to. > > > >> > > > >> Vygotsky gives the example of a child who is severely retarded. The > > > child > > > >> wants to play with other children and is rejected. The child walks > > down > > > the > > > >> street and the other children follow, laughing. The child is > shrieked > > > at, > > > >> insulted, but as soon as the humiliation stops, the child is > perfectly > > > >> happy with himself. Vygotsky points out that the child is not able > to > > > >> "co-generalize" the "perizhivanie" of the humiliations: each is > > > unpleasant, > > > >> but they are entirely separate and cannot be connected with any > > internal > > > >> sense of inferiority. A normal child, however, is able to > > "internalize" > > > >> these humiliations and consequently develops a sense of inferiority. > > We > > > can > > > >> see that what has happened is the insertion of what Vygotsky calls > an > > > >> "intellectual" moment: an inner layer, which is what distinguishes > > later > > > >> Chaplin movies from earlier ones (again, Vygotsky's example, not > > mine!) > > > and > > > >> what brings about the "loss of directness and naivete" that we see > in > > > >> pre-schoolers. > > > >> > > > >> I think that the reason people find "perizhivanie" so hard to work > > with > > > >> is the same reason that they find "word meaning" hard to work with: > it > > > >> develops. The feeling of drinking milk as the infant drinks it is > > > >> perizhivanie, and the thought of being humiliated when you are > mulling > > > it > > > >> over and contemplating revenge is also perizhivanie, and only a > > profound > > > >> analysis which includes ontogenetic development and not just > learning > > > will > > > >> show the inner link between them. It's for that reason that I think > > that > > > >> "activity" is not a useful unit of analysis and I am much more > > inclined > > > to > > > >> use your word "project", so long as it can include what Vygotsky > calls > > > >> "inner activeness". > > > >> > > > >> Vygotsky says: > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> ????? ? ?????????, ?????????? ? ?. ?., ? ???? ???? ? ?????????? > > > >> ???????????, ??? ?????????? ???????????? ??????????????? ????????? > > > >> ??????????????? ?? ??????? ? ??????? ?????????????. ??? ??? ????? > > ????? > > > >> ?????????? ?????????? ? ???????? ???????? ??????????? ? ???, ???, ? > ?? > > > >> ????? ??? ? ?????????? ???????? ??? ?????????? ???????????? > > ???????????? > > > >> ???????????????? ????? ? ?????????, ??????? ???????????, ? ???????? > > > >> ???????? ?? ????? ???????????? ?????????????? ???????????, > > ???????????? > > > >> ??????????? ?????????? ?????????? ?? ????????? ? ??????? > ????????????. > > > ??? > > > >> ??? ???????, ??????? ????? ??????????, ? ?? ????? ????? ?? ?????? > ??? > > > ????? > > > >> ???-??????, ???, ? ???????? ????????? ?????????????? ??????? ? > > > ?????????? > > > >> ????????????. > > > >> > > > >> When I think, remember, etc. I am dealing withinner activeness; this > > > >> psychological process of inner activity is not directly linked to > any > > > >> external activity. The new form of inner activeness in the School > Age > > > >> consists of this: that while during the preschool years these inner > > > >> activities demonstrated an immediate link with action, with external > > > >> activeness, in the school years we have a relative autonomy which > > > emerges, > > > >> inner activeness which is relatively independent of external > > activities. > > > >> Here is already a child who can think, at the same time when he is > > > doing or > > > >> seeing something, one in whom has emerged a differentiation of inner > > and > > > >> outer activities. > > > >> > > > >> David Kellogg > > > >> Macquarie University > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 10:07 AM, Andy Blunden > > > > >> ablunden@mira.net>> wrote: > > > >> > > > >> David: "Are words really units?" > > > >> > > > >> Well, firstly, "units" is a *relative* term. That is, > > > >> the question is: are words units of something, some > > > >> complex process subject to analysis. And which? > > > >> > > > >> Secondly, according to Vygotsky, "no." The concept > > > >> Vygotsky proposes as a unit is "word meaning" which he > > > >> says is a unity of sound and meaning. The sound is an > > > >> artefact, which, detached from its meaningful > > > >> utterance in a transactional context is just a thing, > > > >> viz., a word. Whereas "word meaning" is an > > > >> arrtefact-mediated action, a unit of human social > > > >> activity. > > > >> > > > >> It is true that words can be countable or mass > > > >> according to context, but I wasn't talking about words > > > >> was I? I was talking about word meaning. > > > >> > > > >> Andy > > > >> > > > >> ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > >> Andy Blunden > > > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy > > > >> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective- > > > decision-making > > > >> > > >> decision-making> > > > >> > > > >> On 8/01/2017 7:59 AM, David Kellogg wrote: > > > >> > > > >> Are words really units? When we look at their > > > >> ideational meaning (that is, > > > >> their logical and experiential content--their > > > >> capacity for representing and > > > >> linking together human experiences) they seem to > > > >> fall into two very > > > >> different categories: lexical words like > > > >> "perezhivanie" or "sense" or > > > >> "personality" of "individual" and grammatical > > > >> words like "of", or "might", > > > >> or "is". The lexical words seem to behave like > > > >> units--they are bounded, > > > >> discrete, and, as Andy would say, "countable" (the > > > >> problem is that almost > > > >> all nouns are both countable and uncountable > > > >> depending on the context you > > > >> put them in, so this distinction is really not as > > > >> essential as Andy seems > > > >> to assume). But the more grammatical words seem to > > > >> be elements of some > > > >> larger unit, which we can call wording. > > > >> > > > >> Veresov and Fleer come up against this problem > > > >> with "edintsvo" and > > > >> "edintsa". Of course, as they say, the two words > > > >> are distinct. But this > > > >> doesn't necessarily mean that the former always > > > >> corresponds to "unity" in > > > >> English and the latter is always "unit". If you > > > >> look at the paragraph they > > > >> translate on 330, you can see that Vygotsky starts > > > >> with an idea that is > > > >> quite "synoptic" and is well expressed by "unit". > > > >> But in the last sentence > > > >> there is a sense that "perezhivanie" is a > > > >> meta-stable unit--one that > > > >> remains self-similar only through a process of > > > >> thorough change, like a > > > >> bicycle whose every part is replaced--and in > > > >> English is it is better to > > > >> express this idea with "unity". The problem is > > > >> that the differences between > > > >> "edintsvo" and "edintsva" in Russian is a matter > > > >> of gender (I think) and > > > >> not simply abstractness, and as a result the > > > >> English version, which cannot > > > >> use the resource of gender,has to rely on > > > >> abstractness, so the words > > > >> "unity" and "unit" are somewhat more distinct and > > > >> less linked than > > > >> "edintsvo" and "edintsva". > > > >> > > > >> There are other problems that are similar. When > > > >> Gonzalez Rey uses the word > > > >> "final moment" to refer to the final period of > > > >> Vygotsky's thinking, he > > > >> leaves the anglophone reader the impression that > > > >> he is referring to > > > >> Vygotsky's deathbed thoughts. On the other hand, > > > >> when Veresov and Fleer use > > > >> "factor" to translate the same Russian word that > > > >> Gonzalez Rey is using, > > > >> they are giving us something more quantitative > > > >> than Vygotsky intended, and > > > >> their translation of "dalee nerazloshim'im > > > >> chastyami etava edinstva" > > > >> into "vital and further indivisible part of the > > > >> whole" is quite opaque in > > > >> English (notice that here Veresov and Fleer use > > > >> "whole" to translate > > > >> "edinstva" rather than "unit"!) At some point you > > > >> have to accept that you > > > >> can change Russian words into English words as if > > > >> you were exchanging > > > >> rubles for dollars, but you still won't be able to > > > >> buy a samovar at Walmart. > > > >> > > > >> David Kellogg > > > >> Macquarie University > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 5:21 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > > > >> > > > > >> wrote: > > > >> > > > >> Larry, all, > > > >> > > > >> our arguments in the 2014 address a science > > > >> education literature in which > > > >> the constructivist perspective is the leading > > > >> perspective; We note that the > > > >> assertion that people learn from experience is > > > >> everywhere taken for granted > > > >> but nowhere accounted for. We resort to > > > >> pragmatist and phenomenological > > > >> literature along with Vygotsky's insights to > > > >> point out the need to account > > > >> for learning as something that cannot be the > > > >> result of an individual's > > > >> construction; in experience there is always > > > >> something in excess of what you > > > >> intended, and this is a basic feature of > > > >> doing, of performing. I take that > > > >> to be your "trans" in the trans/zhivanie word, > > > >> Larry, which already is > > > >> denoted in the word PERezhivanie. > > > >> > > > >> But I do not wish to move our discussion too > > > >> far away from Marc's paper > > > >> and the Perezhivanie special issue. We also > > > >> risk disengaging many that have > > > >> not have the privilege we've had to have the > > > >> time to read so many articles > > > >> in just few days into the new year. I think we > > > >> are a point in the > > > >> discussion where a pretty clear point of > > > >> agreement/disagreement, and > > > >> therefore of possibility for growth, has been > > > >> reached with regard to the > > > >> view of perezhivanie as "an experience" and as > > > >> the "working over it". I > > > >> think that to allow as many as possible to > > > >> follow, and hopefully also > > > >> engage, I think it will be helpful to bring > > > >> the diverse perspectives and > > > >> theoretical accounts to matter in accounting > > > >> for some actual material. And > > > >> there are a number of cases described in the > > > >> articles, including Marc's > > > >> case of a teacher, as well as everyday facts, > > > >> such as those brought by > > > >> Beth, and in Beth's article... > > > >> > > > >> I take the task for myself too, but Saturday > > > >> morning need to attend to > > > >> other things! > > > >> A > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> ________________________________________ > > > >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> Sent: 07 January 2017 18:26 > > > >> To: Andy Blunden; Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended > > > >> Mind, Culture, Activity; > > > >> Larry Purss > > > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and > > > >> Perezhivanie! > > > >> > > > >> Andy, Peter, i hope the intention to move > > > >> beyond politeness to struggle > > > >> with this topic materializes. > > > >> In this vein i want to introduce exploration > > > >> of the 'excess' of actual > > > >> over intended meaning as he sketched his > > > >> introduction to 'experience'. > > > >> > > > >> Citing Dewey, Alfredo says that this excess of > > > >> actual learning over > > > >> intended learning INCLUDES what Dewey refers > > > >> to as 'attitudes' and these > > > >> 'attitudes' are FUNDAMENTALLY what count in > > > >> the future. > > > >> Alfredo and Roth then add this summary > > > >> statement : > > > >> > > > >> There is therefore, a need to theorize > > > >> experience in terms that do not > > > >> assume control and rationality as the sine qua > > > >> non of learning. It also > > > >> implies a need to develop analytical accounts > > > >> that retain the 'uncertainty' > > > >> that is an 'integral part' of human experience. > > > >> > > > >> Where are Alfredo and Roth leading us with > > > >> this sketch of experience? To > > > >> highlight 'attitudes' that occur in the excess > > > >> of actual over intended > > > >> learning? The word 'attitudes' generates > > > >> images of (atmosphere) and (moods) > > > >> that 'flow' like cascading waterfalls that can > > > >> be imaged as (force) or as > > > >> (receptive). Attitudes that flow to places > > > >> where they are received within a > > > >> certain attitude of care and concern. Not as > > > >> forceful an image as moving > > > >> only with control and rationality. > Describing > > > >> 'weaker' thought that > > > >> remains uncertain but that also opens us to > > > >> the other's peril and plight. > > > >> Possibly a post-analytic motion that exceeds > > > >> the intended by living-through > > > >> the actual that develops 'attitudes' that are > > > >> fundamentally what count for > > > >> the future. > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > >> > > > >> From: Andy Blunden > > > >> Sent: January 7, 2017 5:00 AM > > > >> To: Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, > > > >> Activity > > > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and > > > >> Perezhivanie! > > > >> > > > >> OK Peter, what you say is all very true I am > > > >> sure, but it > > > >> entails conflating activity and action (as > > > >> mass nouns) and > > > >> context and mediation, and makes the required > > > >> distinction > > > >> much like one could find multiple meanings for > > > >> the word > > > >> "and" by listing the different phrases and > > > >> clauses which can > > > >> be linked by "and." > > > >> > > > >> Andy > > > >> > > > >> ------------------------------ > > > ------------------------------ > > > >> Andy Blunden > > > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy > > > >> > > > >> http://www.brill.com/products/ > > > book/origins-collective-decisi > > > >> on-making > > > >> > > >> decision-making> > > > >> > > > >> On 7/01/2017 11:42 PM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > > > >> > > > >> Let me try to illustrate. > > > >> > > > >> Reading as mediated action: The > > > >> cultural-historical > > > >> context of reading mediates how one's > > > >> attention and > > > >> response are channeled in socially > > > >> constructed ways. So, > > > >> in one setting, say at home or reading in > > > >> the company of > > > >> friends, a novel might bring a reader to > > > >> tears, or invite > > > >> readers to share personal stories that > > > >> parallel those of > > > >> the plot lines, or laugh out loud. But > > > >> another setting, a > > > >> formal school or university class, would > > > >> have historical > > > >> values and practices that mute emotional > > > >> and personal > > > >> responses, and promote a more sober, > > > >> analytic way of > > > >> reading and talking that fits with > > > >> specific historical > > > >> critical conventions and genres, and > > > >> discourages others. > > > >> > > > >> Reading as mediating action: The act of > > > >> reading can be > > > >> transformational. In reading about an > > > >> talking about a > > > >> character's actions, a reader might > > > >> reconsider a value > > > >> system, become more sympathetic to real > > > >> people who > > > >> resemble oppressed characters, etc. In > > > >> other words, > > > >> reading a text may serve a mediational > > > >> process in which > > > >> textual ideas and exemplars enable a > > > >> reader to think > > > >> differently. > > > >> > > > >> *From:*Andy Blunden > > > >> [mailto:ablunden@mira.net > > > >> ] > > > >> *Sent:* Saturday, January 7, 2017 6:28 AM > > > >> *To:* Peter Smagorinsky > > >> >; eXtended Mind, > > > >> Culture, Activity > > >> > > > > >> *Subject:* Re: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year > > > >> and Perezhivanie! > > > >> > > > >> Can you explain in a paragraph or two,. > > > >> Peter, rather than > > > >> asking us all to read 10,000 words to > > > >> extract an answer? > > > >> > > > >> Andy > > > >> > > > >> ------------------------------ > > > >> ------------------------------ > > > >> > > > >> Andy Blunden > > > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> http://www.brill.com/products/ > > > >> book/origins-collective-decision-making > > > >> > collective- > > > >> decision-making> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> On 7/01/2017 11:23 PM, Peter Smagorinsky > > > >> wrote: > > > >> > > > >> Andy and others, I tried to work out > > > >> the mediated/mediating question > > > >> > > > >> in the area of reading....see if this helps. > > > >> > > > >> Smagorinsky, P., & O'Donnell-Allen, > > > >> C. (1998). Reading as mediated > > > >> > > > >> and mediating action: Composing meaning for > > > >> literature through multimedia > > > >> interpretive texts. Reading Research > > > >> Quarterly, 33, 198-226. Available > > > >> athttp://www.petersmagorinsky. > > net/About/PDF/RRQ/RRQ1998.pdf > > > >> > net/About/PDF/RRQ/RRQ1998.pdf> > > > >> > > > >> -----Original Message----- > > > >> > > > >> From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > >> > > > >> > > >> .ucsd.edu > > > >> > > > > >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> mailman.ucsd.edu ] On > > > >> Behalf Of Andy Blunden > > > >> > > > >> Sent: Friday, January 6, 2017 7:12 PM > > > >> > > > >> To:xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year > > > >> and Perezhivanie! > > > >> > > > >> I have never understood this supposed > > > >> distinction, Alfredo, between > > > >> > > > >> "mediated activity" and "mediating activity" > > > >> given that all activity is > > > >> mediated and all activity mediates. > > > >> > > > >> Also, could you spell out what you > > > >> mean by the "tension" > > > >> > > > >> between perezhivanie as meaning and > > > >> perezhivanie as struggle. > > > >> > > > >> Andy > > > >> > > > >> ------------------------------ > > > >> ------------------------------ > > > >> > > > >> Andy Blunden > > > >> > > > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> http://www.brill.com/products/ > > book/origins-collective- > > > >> > collective- > > > > > > > >> > > > >> decision-making > > > >> > > > >> On 5/01/2017 6:26 PM, Alfredo Jornet > > > >> Gil wrote: > > > >> > > > >> Thanks Marc for your careful > > > >> response. > > > >> > > > >> I am familiar to Vygotsky's > > > >> notion of cultural mediation and I > > > >> > > > >> am aware and acknowledge that it was > > > >> elaborated as a means to overcome > > > >> dualism, and that it is not analog to a > > > >> computational approach. > > > >> > > > >> When I brought the computing > > > >> analogy, I did so with regard not > > > >> > > > >> to the concept of cultural mediation in > > > >> general, but to the way it can be > > > >> (and is) deployed analytically. I react to > > > >> what it seems to me a dichotomy > > > >> between a "meaning" as something that is > > > >> static (thereby a form of > > > >> "representation" or reflection of the relation > > > >> with the environment instead > > > >> of?refraction)?? and the > > > >> experiencing-as-struggling, which is described > > > >> as?transformation or change. If so, mediation > > > >> here would seem to be part of > > > >> a methodological device that first dissects "a > > > >> type of meaning" from "a > > > >> type of activity" (or a given state from the > > > >> process that changes that > > > >> state), and then unites it by adding the term > > > >> "mediation." And this may be > > > >> my misreading, but in that (mis)reading (which > > > >> perhaps is mostly due to the > > > >> fact that in your empirical illustration only > > > >> the initial and end product, > > > >> i.e., perezhivanie, are described, but not the > > > >> experiencing-as-struggle, > > > >> that is, the moving between the two), > > > >> mediation here seems to do as > > > >> analytical concept precisely what you were > > > >> afraid our monism was doing: > > > >> explaining nothing. Only the end products but > > > >> not the process of producing > > > >> perezhivanie are revealed. This may be > > > >> problematic if one attends to what > > > >> Veresov argues in the paper I shared > > > >> yesterday, where he defends the notion > > > >> of mediation but also specifies that Vygotsky > > > >> speaks of *mediating > > > >> activity* (as opposed to *mediated* activity). > > > >> That is, not mediation by > > > >> signs as products, but mediating activity as > > > >> the activity of producing > > > >> signs (which again is an activity of producing > > > >> social relations, perhaps > > > >> what you refer as "holistic meanings"?). What > > > >> do you think? > > > >> > > > >> I did not think you were trying > > > >> to deny the influence of > > > >> > > > >> Spinoza, and I do not think we ever said that > > > >> Perezhivanie was primarily a > > > >> move from Cartesian Dualism to Monism, as you > > > >> suggest in your post. I copy > > > >> and paste from my prior post: "The fact is > > > >> that Vygotsky was building a > > > >> theory on the unity of the affect and the > > > >> intellect that was to be grounded > > > >> on Spinoza, and what we try to do is to > > > >> explore how perezhivanie, as a > > > >> concept being developed during the same period > > > >> (but not finalised or > > > >> totally settled!), could be seen from the > > > >> perspective of the Spinozist > > > >> Vygotsky." > > > >> > > > >> I totally believe that bringing > > > >> the distinction between > > > >> > > > >> perezhivanie as meaning, and perezhivanie as > > > >> struggle, is totally relevant, > > > >> and Beth Ferholt's vignettes of Where the Wild > > > >> Things Are do indeed > > > >> illustrate this. We really need to address > > > >> this tension, which as Beth's > > > >> examples and as our own everyday experience > > > >> shows, is a tension that > > > >> matters not just to books and to theories but > > > >> to living persons (children, > > > >> teachers), a tension that moreover is present > > > >> and mentioned in all the > > > >> articles of the symposium. The papers offer > > > >> different proposals, and I > > > >> think is so great we have the chance to > > > >> discuss them! I too, as you, am > > > >> very interesting in hearing others about the > > > >> questions you had concerning > > > >> sense and meaning. > > > >> > > > >> Alfredo > > > >> > > > >> From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > >> > > > >> > xmca-l-bounces@mailman > > > >> .ucsd.edu > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > xmca-l-bounces@mailman > > > >> .ucsd.edu > > > >> > > > > >> on behalf of Marc > > > >> > > > >> Clara > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> Sent: 04 January 2017 22:31 > > > >> > > > >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > >> > > > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New > > > >> Year and Perezhivanie! > > > >> > > > >> Thank you very much, Alfredo, for > > > >> sharing this excellent paper by > > > >> > > > >> Veresov, and thanks also for your > > > >> responses, which really helped > > > >> > > > >> me to > > > >> > > > >> better understand your points. My > > > >> main doubt about your proposal > > > >> > > > >> was/is caused by the statement > > > >> that the idea of cultural > > > >> > > > >> mediation/mediator implies a > > > >> cartesian dualism. This shocks me > > > >> > > > >> because, to me, the idea of > > > >> cultural mediation is absolutely > > > >> > > > >> crucial > > > >> > > > >> (in fact, the keystone) for the > > > >> construction of a monist (and > > > >> > > > >> scientific) psychology that does > > > >> not forget mind -that is, a > > > >> > > > >> cultural > > > >> > > > >> psychology. From your response, > > > >> however, I realized that we may > > > >> > > > >> be > > > >> > > > >> approaching the idea of mediation > > > >> in different ways. I talk of > > > >> > > > >> mediation and mediators in a > > > >> quite restricted way. The starting > > > >> > > > >> point > > > >> > > > >> of my understanding of mediation > > > >> is a dialectical relationship > > > >> > > > >> (organic, transactional) between > > > >> the subject and the world > > > >> > > > >> (Vygotsky departs from the scheme > > > >> stimulus-response, from reflexology). > > > >> > > > >> This relationship, that Vygotsky > > > >> calls primitive psychological > > > >> > > > >> functions, would be basically > > > >> biological. However, in human > > > >> > > > >> beings > > > >> > > > >> this relationship is mediated by > > > >> cultural means: signs and > > > >> > > > >> tools; or > > > >> > > > >> primary, secondary and terciary > > > >> artifacts. These cultural means > > > >> > > > >> reorganize the primitive > > > >> functions (dialectic S-O relationship), > > > >> > > > >> which > > > >> > > > >> become then higher psychological > > > >> functions (S-M-O) (see for > > > >> > > > >> example, > > > >> > > > >> The problem of the cultural > > > >> development of the child, in The > > > >> > > > >> Vygotsky > > > >> > > > >> Reader). Now, the subject, the > > > >> cultural mediators, and the > > > >> > > > >> object form > > > >> > > > >> an inseparable dialectical unit, > > > >> so that the subject acts on > > > >> > > > >> (transforms) the object through > > > >> the prism of the cultural > > > >> > > > >> mediators, > > > >> > > > >> the object acts on (transforms) > > > >> the subject also through the > > > >> > > > >> prism of > > > >> > > > >> the cultural mediators, and the > > > >> cultural means are themselves > > > >> > > > >> also > > > >> > > > >> transformed as a consequence of > > > >> their mediation in this > > > >> > > > >> continuous > > > >> > > > >> dynamic dialectical tension. > > > >> Here, for me, it is important the > > > >> > > > >> idea > > > >> > > > >> that the cultural means are as > > > >> material (if we assume a > > > >> > > > >> materialist > > > >> > > > >> monism) as all the rest of the > > > >> world; in fact, are parts of the > > > >> > > > >> material world which become signs > > > >> or tools (and can be therefore > > > >> > > > >> socially distributed). This > > > >> permits the introduction of the > > > >> > > > >> scientific > > > >> > > > >> study of mind-consciousness (as > > > >> mediating systems of signs), > > > >> > > > >> because > > > >> > > > >> mind is not anymore something > > > >> immaterial and unobservable, but > > > >> > > > >> it is > > > >> > > > >> as material and observable as the > > > >> rest of the natural world. It > > > >> > > > >> is > > > >> > > > >> from this view that, for me, the > > > >> idea of cultural mediation is > > > >> > > > >> the > > > >> > > > >> keystone of a monist psychology > > > >> that includes mind. Thus, when I > > > >> > > > >> speak > > > >> > > > >> of mediators, I refer to the > > > >> cultural means which mediate in the > > > >> > > > >> S-O > > > >> > > > >> dialectics; I am especially > > > >> interested in signs/secondary > > > >> > > > >> artifacts. > > > >> > > > >> Here, it is perhaps necessary to > > > >> insist that when I talk of > > > >> > > > >> studying > > > >> > > > >> mediators (and their semantic > > > >> structure), this doesn't mean that > > > >> > > > >> they > > > >> > > > >> are taken out from the activity > > > >> (the flux of live) in which they > > > >> > > > >> mediate (since out of activity > > > >> they are not signs anymore); > > > >> > > > >> here, I > > > >> > > > >> think Vygotsky tries again to > > > >> overcome another old dichotomy, the > > > >> > > > >> functionalism-structuralism one. > > > >> I hope that all this makes also > > > >> > > > >> clear the difference between this view and > > > >> that of computational > > > >> psychologies (which in general are profoundly > > > >> and explicitly dualist and > > > >> not dialectic). > > > >> > > > >> Back to perezhivanie, I'm not > > > >> obviously trying to deny the > > > >> > > > >> influence > > > >> > > > >> of Spinoza on Vygotsky's thinking > > > >> (this is explicit in Vygotsky's > > > >> > > > >> writings, especially in "The > > > >> teaching about emotions", in the > > > >> > > > >> Vol.6 of > > > >> > > > >> the Collected Works). But I have > > > >> doubts that Vygotsky's > > > >> > > > >> introduction > > > >> > > > >> of the concept of perezhivanie is > > > >> to be regarded primarily as a > > > >> > > > >> movement towards monism (from a > > > >> previous cartesian dualism), and > > > >> > > > >> that > > > >> > > > >> this movement questions the > > > >> concept of cultural mediation. > > > >> > > > >> Instead, > > > >> > > > >> and I think that this is in line > > > >> with some of Gonzalez-Rey > > > >> > > > >> observations in his paper, my > > > >> impression is that the > > > >> > > > >> introduction of > > > >> > > > >> the concept of perezhivanie > > > >> responds more to a movement (a > > > >> > > > >> further > > > >> > > > >> step) towards holism (something > > > >> that, in my understanding, can > > > >> > > > >> also be > > > >> > > > >> found in Spinoza). Thus, I think > > > >> that the word meaning is still > > > >> > > > >> the > > > >> > > > >> unit of analysis in the last > > > >> Vygotsky -and therefore, the idea of > > > >> > > > >> cultural mediation is still > > > >> crucial (in fact, in The problem of > > > >> > > > >> the > > > >> > > > >> environment, he connects the > > > >> concept of perezhivanie, which has > > > >> > > > >> just > > > >> > > > >> introduced, to the development of > > > >> word meaning [p.345-346, also > > > >> > > > >> cited > > > >> > > > >> in my paper]). However, in my > > > >> view, in the last Vygotsky the > > > >> > > > >> focus is > > > >> > > > >> not anymore primarily on the > > > >> word-meaning as formed for things > > > >> > > > >> (or > > > >> > > > >> collections of things, as in the > > > >> ontogenetic research with > > > >> > > > >> Sakharov), but the focus is now in the > > > >> formation of meaning for holistic > > > >> situations. > > > >> > > > >> Best regards, > > > >> > > > >> Marc. > > > >> > > > >> 2017-01-03 19:16 GMT+01:00 > > > >> Alfredo Jornet Gil< > > > >> > > > >> a.j.gil@iped.uio.no > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> >: > > > >> > > > >> Hi Marc, all, > > > >> > > > >> thanks for joining and for > > > >> your interesting work, which I > > > >> > > > >> follow > > > >> > > > >> since I became aware of it. I > > > >> appreciate the way in your > > > >> > > > >> paper you > > > >> > > > >> show careful and honest > > > >> attention to the texts of the authors > > > >> > > > >> involved, but perhaps most of > > > >> all I appreciate that the > > > >> > > > >> paper makes > > > >> > > > >> the transformational > > > >> dimension related to struggle and change > > > >> > > > >> salient, a dimension all > > > >> papers deemed central to > > > >> > > > >> perezhivanie. And I > > > >> > > > >> have learned more about > > > >> Vasilyuk by reading your paper. But > > > >> > > > >> I also > > > >> > > > >> see that we have approached > > > >> the question of perezhivanie > > > >> > > > >> differently > > > >> > > > >> and I think that addressing > > > >> the questions that you raise > > > >> > > > >> concerning > > > >> > > > >> our article may be a good way > > > >> to both respond and discuss > > > >> > > > >> your paper. > > > >> > > > >> I am aware that our use of > > > >> the term monism may be > > > >> > > > >> problematic to > > > >> > > > >> some, and N. Veresov, who has > > > >> recently written about this > > > >> > > > >> (see > > > >> > > > >> attached article), warns > > > >> against the dangers of simply > > > >> > > > >> moving from > > > >> > > > >> dualism into an > > > >> undifferentiating monism that relativizes > > > >> > > > >> everything, > > > >> > > > >> making development > > > >> un-studiable. This seems to be the way in > > > >> > > > >> which > > > >> > > > >> you have understood our > > > >> argument, and of course this is not > > > >> > > > >> what we are or want to be doing. > > > >> > > > >> Probably many will think that > > > >> *dialectical materialism* > > > >> > > > >> rather than > > > >> > > > >> monism is the proper term, > > > >> and I could agree with them; we > > > >> > > > >> do in fact > > > >> > > > >> use dialectical materialism > > > >> there and elsewhere. Yet, we > > > >> > > > >> wanted to > > > >> > > > >> emphasise the Spinozist > > > >> influence (an influence that also > > > >> > > > >> runs > > > >> > > > >> through Marx) and so we found > > > >> it appropriate to use the term > > > >> > > > >> monism, > > > >> > > > >> a term that Vygotsky uses > > > >> before arguing that Spinoza > > > >> > > > >> "develops an essentially materialistic view" > > > >> > > > >> (Collected Works, Vol. 6, p. > > > >> 124). For us, the aim is > > > >> > > > >> working out > > > >> > > > >> ways to empirically examine > > > >> and formulate problems in ways > > > >> > > > >> that do > > > >> > > > >> not reify a mind-body dualism. > > > >> > > > >> Although overcoming dualism > > > >> is foundational to the CHAT > > > >> > > > >> paradigm, I > > > >> > > > >> would however not say that > > > >> Vygotsky did get to solve all of > > > >> > > > >> the > > > >> > > > >> problems that Cartesian > > > >> dualism had created for psychology, > > > >> > > > >> even > > > >> > > > >> though he recognised those > > > >> problems brilliantly as early as > > > >> > > > >> in the > > > >> > > > >> "Crisis". It should suffice > > > >> to cite Vygotsky's own remarks, > > > >> > > > >> which we quote in the paper (and which A.N. > > > >> > > > >> Leont'ev mentions in the > > > >> introduction to the collected > > > >> > > > >> works), where > > > >> > > > >> Vygotsky explicitly critiques > > > >> some of his own prior ideas > > > >> > > > >> for failing > > > >> > > > >> to overcome dualism. We agree > > > >> with those who, like F. G. > > > >> > > > >> Rey, see > > > >> > > > >> Vygotsky's project as a > > > >> developing rather than as a > > > >> > > > >> finalised one. > > > >> > > > >> The fact is that Vygotsky was > > > >> building a theory on the unity > > > >> > > > >> of the > > > >> > > > >> affect and the intellect that > > > >> was to be grounded on Spinoza, > > > >> > > > >> and what > > > >> > > > >> we try to do is to explore > > > >> how perezhivanie, as a concept > > > >> > > > >> being > > > >> > > > >> developed during the same > > > >> period (but not finalised or > > > >> > > > >> totally > > > >> > > > >> settled!), could be seen from > > > >> the perspective of the > > > >> > > > >> Spinozist Vygotsky. > > > >> > > > >> As you note, in our article > > > >> we argue that, if one takes the > > > >> > > > >> Spinozist > > > >> > > > >> one-substance approach, > > > >> classical concepts used in > > > >> > > > >> non-classical > > > >> > > > >> psychology, at least in the > > > >> way they are commonly used in > > > >> > > > >> the current > > > >> > > > >> literature, should be > > > >> revised. One such concept is > > > >> > > > >> mediation. And I > > > >> > > > >> personally do not have much > > > >> of a problem when mediation is > > > >> > > > >> used to > > > >> > > > >> denote the fundamental fact > > > >> that every thing exists always > > > >> > > > >> through > > > >> > > > >> *another*, never in and of > > > >> itself. But I do think that it is > > > >> > > > >> problematic to identify > > > >> MEDIATORS, such as "a meaning", as a > > > >> > > > >> means to > > > >> > > > >> account for or explain > > > >> developmental processes and learning > > > >> > > > >> events, > > > >> > > > >> precisely because it is > > > >> there, at least in my view, that > > > >> > > > >> dualism creeps in. > > > >> > > > >> For example, I find it > > > >> paradoxical that you are concerned > > > >> > > > >> that our > > > >> > > > >> monist approach risks turning > > > >> perezhivanie into a useless > > > >> > > > >> category > > > >> > > > >> because it may be used to > > > >> explain everything and nothing, > > > >> > > > >> and yet you > > > >> > > > >> do not seem to have a problem > > > >> using the term mediation to > > > >> > > > >> account for > > > >> > > > >> the transformation of > > > >> perezhivanie without clearly > > > >> > > > >> elaborating on how > > > >> > > > >> mediation does change > > > >> anything or what it looks like as a > > > >> > > > >> real > > > >> > > > >> process. How is it different > > > >> saying that a perezhivanie > > > >> > > > >> mediates the > > > >> > > > >> experiencing-as-struggle from > > > >> simply saying that it > > > >> > > > >> "affects" or > > > >> > > > >> "determines" it? Indeed, if > > > >> perezhivanie mediates > > > >> > > > >> experiencing-as-struggle, > > > >> does not experiencing-as-struglgle > > > >> > > > >> too > > > >> > > > >> mediate perezhivanie? And do > > > >> not both may be said to mediate > > > >> > > > >> development, or development mediate them? Is > > > >> not this explaining everything > > > >> and nothing? > > > >> > > > >> I do believe you can argue > > > >> that there is a difference between > > > >> > > > >> mediation and classical > > > >> psychology's cause-effect relations, > > > >> > > > >> but to > > > >> > > > >> show this you need to dig > > > >> into the dialectical underpinnings > > > >> > > > >> of the > > > >> > > > >> theory. In your paper, you > > > >> offer a nice analysis of a lovely > > > >> > > > >> case of > > > >> > > > >> a teacher who, in dealing > > > >> with a challenge with one of her > > > >> > > > >> students, > > > >> > > > >> changes her perezhivanie. I > > > >> think you can rightly argue that > > > >> > > > >> there is > > > >> > > > >> a semiotic transformation, > > > >> and I fully support your > > > >> > > > >> statement that by > > > >> > > > >> studying discourse we can > > > >> empirically approach questions of > > > >> > > > >> psychological development. > > > >> The contradictions you show as > > > >> > > > >> being > > > >> > > > >> involved and resolved > > > >> resonate really well with what I > > > >> > > > >> experience as > > > >> > > > >> a parent or as a teacher in > > > >> the classroom. Yet, without > > > >> > > > >> unpacking > > > >> > > > >> what this "mediation" taking > > > >> place between one perezhivanie > > > >> > > > >> and the > > > >> > > > >> next one means as a concrete > > > >> and real, the same analysis > > > >> > > > >> could be done taking an information processing > > > >> approach: > > > >> > > > >> there is an situation that is > > > >> processed (represented?) in > > > >> > > > >> one way, > > > >> > > > >> which then leads to a > > > >> (cognitive) dissonance, and then there > > > >> > > > >> is a > > > >> > > > >> cognitive resolution by means > > > >> of which the situation is > > > >> > > > >> presented > > > >> > > > >> differently in consciousness > > > >> (indeed, when seen in this way, > > > >> > > > >> the term > > > >> > > > >> perezhivanie and the term > > > >> "representation" become almost > > > >> > > > >> indistinguishable). How is > > > >> mediation, as an analytical > > > >> > > > >> concept, > > > >> > > > >> helping here? And most > > > >> importantly to the question of > > > >> > > > >> perezhivanie, > > > >> > > > >> how is this analysis going to > > > >> show the internal connection > > > >> > > > >> between > > > >> > > > >> intellect and affect that > > > >> Vygotsky formulates as > > > >> > > > >> constitutive of the notion of perezhivanie? > > > >> > > > >> I believe that the key lies > > > >> in understanding what Vygotsky > > > >> > > > >> means when > > > >> > > > >> he says that perezhivanie is > > > >> a unit of analysis. I will not > > > >> > > > >> repeat > > > >> > > > >> here what already is written > > > >> in at least a couple of the > > > >> > > > >> articles in > > > >> > > > >> the special issue (Blunden, > > > >> ours), that is the difference > > > >> > > > >> between > > > >> > > > >> analysis by elements and unit > > > >> analysis (Vygotsky 1987). A > > > >> > > > >> unit > > > >> > > > >> analysis approach is > > > >> consistent with Spinoza, for whom > > > >> > > > >> cause-effect > > > >> > > > >> explanations were not > > > >> adequate, requiring instead an > > > >> > > > >> understanding of > > > >> > > > >> self-development, > > > >> perezhivanie as a kernel cell for the > > > >> > > > >> development > > > >> > > > >> of personality. And I think > > > >> you may be after this in your > > > >> > > > >> article in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From lpscholar2@gmail.com Wed Jan 18 12:55:51 2017 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2017 12:55:51 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Fw: author articles MCA Issue 4 Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: References: <1484327382734.77186@iped.uio.no> <1484524342219.11085@iped.uio.no> <587c5eeb.4379630a.d3d04.fbd3@mx.google.com> <587e7a32.514f620a.25cb3.6a39@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <587fd681.972a620a.f75d3.83fa@mx.google.com> When exploring the multiple films for an understanding of perezhivanie i want to hightlight what Beth and Monica on page 2 of their article indicate is NOT a perezhivanie?: A perezhivanie is NOT the frame of birth and dying that delineates life and thus allows a life to ?become? art for people who are still alive, BUT rather (perezhivanie is) the frame that gives us the perfect distance from which to view the TWO two-dimensional slides. This alternative perezhivanie framing takes TWO differing times as overlapping times and in this way makes life LIKE art. Perezhivanie takes the frame of birth and dying as one kind of time that designates ?life? and overlays the frame of perezhivanie as another type of time and in this action overlays these TWO times so as to create the perfect distance from which to view the TWO frames (anatomy, structures?) associated with human consciousness as the overlapping aesthetic having ?an? experience. Not sure if I am reading Beth and Monica?s article as intended? My way of working through the multiple articles. Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: mike cole Sent: January 17, 2017 4:52 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Cc: Alfredo Jornet Gil Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Fw: author articles MCA Issue 4 Perezhivanie Thanks for the heads up on the Highlander film, Robert. I'll definitely be on the lookout for it. From the discussions a while back that included the Highlander school is clearly a monumental achievement. Seems like we have a lot of movie watching we get to do at XMCA. :-) Whatever their shortcomings, Russian films seem like rich territory for discussing the polysemous pererzhivanie. Something about their historical experience perhaps. Seems like the Highlander film might also provide such opportunities, given its history of struggle. mike On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 1:37 PM, Robert Lake wrote: > Hi All, > If you have Turner Classic Movies in your cable, Roku, Amazon Stick or Dish > TV configuration > you might want to look at *You Got to Move - Stories of Change in the > South (*1985) > ?. It is the story of Highlander > Folk School and related activist movements from the 1930's to 1985 > and will available on demand until Tuesday, > Jan 24, 201 > ?7. > > *Robert Lake* > > > ? > > On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 3:09 PM, wrote: > > > I was unsure where to post my reflection of Beth and Monica?s paper. > > I decided that this thread held all this month?s article?s as a place for > > rehearsals. > > > > Beth and Monica, in their section on PERFORMANCE reference Schechner and > > the workshop-rehearsal process in three stages. > > The first stage breaks down a performer?s resistance, making him a kind > of > > tabula rasa. To do this requires the need for separation, for (sacred) or > > special space, and for a use of time different than that prevailing in > the > > ordinary. > > > > My question is if this sacred or special place can be developed as a > > disposition such that a person comes to experience the ordinary as > > (extraordinary) in the way Cavell uses the term the extraordinary IN the > > ordinary. > > What Schechner describes as the 1st stage as the need for separation > > within a sacred or special place becomes a practice of living vitality > > immanent and prevailing IN the ordinary? > > A way of life > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > From: lpscholar2@gmail.com > > Sent: January 15, 2017 9:49 PM > > To: Alfredo Jornet Gil; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: RE: [Xmca-l] Fw: author articles MCA Issue 4 Perezhivanie > > > > Alfredo, Thanks for sending the 87 pages that are exploring the > > multifaceted threads exploring perezhivanie. I believe we must also be > > closing in on another 87 pages generated in our discussions. I have now > > printed out the 87 pages of the journal and also many pages of the XMCA > > threads. > > THIS rich resource opens up multiple doors to enter into. I assume these > > are first steps and each separate article feels like a doorway into this > > common theme moving through multiple traditions. > > > > Yes, a symposium and also a symphony of questions & listening being > played. > > > > Sent from Mail for Windows 10 > > > > From: Alfredo Jornet Gil > > Sent: January 15, 2017 3:56 PM > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Fw: author articles MCA Issue 4 Perezhivanie > > > > ?I meant to send this e-mail last week, but it seems it did not go > > through, I am trying again > > > > Alfredo > > > > ________________________________ > > From: Alfredo Jornet Gil > > Sent: 13 January 2017 18:09 > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: author articles MCA Issue 4 Perezhivanie > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > as a complement to our ongoing perezhivanie discussion, and since the > > discussion has nicely taken the symposium form that also is present in > the > > special issue, all the authors have now agreed that we share their author > > versions. These are the versions accepted for publication before the > > proofs. That means that the ?articles attached may differ slightly from > the > > ones published, but they should be accurate enough to grant access to > > everyone who, like Larry and others, do not have institutional access to > > the T&F pages. > > > > > > Alfredo > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Robert Lake Ed.D. > Associate Professor > Social Foundations of Education > Dept. of Curriculum, Foundations, and Reading > Georgia Southern University > P. O. Box 8144, Statesboro, GA 30460 > Secretary/Treasurer-AERA- Paulo Freire Special Interest Group > Webpage: https://georgiasouthern.academia.edu/RobertLake*Democracy must be > born anew in every generation, and education is its midwife.* John > Dewey-*Democracy > and Education*,1916, p. 139 > From ajrajala@gmail.com Wed Jan 18 13:31:39 2017 From: ajrajala@gmail.com (Antti Rajala) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2017 23:31:39 +0200 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! In-Reply-To: <587fb753.1aa3630a.f3dd3.63b0@mx.google.com> References: <1483344752182.40904@iped.uio.no> <1483467423798.57819@iped.uio.no> <1483601196884.31418@iped.uio.no> <5df5e870-3ef8-70d6-0c17-f8647ba17e62@mira.net> <587124d9.d957620a.4a5a8.bd56@mx.google.com> <1483820996800.91513@iped.uio.no> <1484253698990.7728@iped.uio.no> <1484328718783.79382@iped.uio.no> <587cfc5a.4e38630a.aa4eb.5a5d@mx.google.com> <587fb753.1aa3630a.f3dd3.63b0@mx.google.com> Message-ID: Hi Alfredo, Thanks a lot for your thoughtful response and for articulating your thoughts. Trying to make sense of these nuanced distinctions. I wonder if you use the notion of conscious experience in a different sense than in Leontiev's scheme where actions are by definition conscious. Or do you mean conscious experience as involving some active process of reflection and going-through as in Vasilyuk's experience-as-struggle (to use Marc's term)? Your emphasis of 'uniquely human' and the choice of the word drama (as well as emphasis on the aesthetic aspects of experience) seem to have some traces of (or at least resonance with) the humanistic tradition in which Art and Literature serve as models for human life in general. Kozulin interprets Vygotsky and Vasilyuk as proponents of Russian humanistic tradition (1991: Life as authoring: The humanistic tradition in Russian psychology). Best, Antti On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 8:42 PM, wrote: > David, > To not loose the thread where you say : > > Applying care and compassion to non-sentient and non-conscious nature only > serves to destroy the real content of care and compassion applied to that > part of nature that has become sentient and aware... > > The notion of care as more active and compassion as more passive seem to > be central to perezhivanie. > Where we express the extent of care and compassion is an open question. I > hear in your response care and compassion being a humanist response? > > This aligns with Beth and Monica highlighting the ?pivot? AS person. > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > From: David Kellogg > Sent: January 17, 2017 4:33 PM > To: Lplarry > Cc: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: Re: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > Larry: > > I think that being a functionalist doesn't just mean that you like to get > things done, or that you look to outcomes to explain structure instead of > looking to structure to explain outcomes. Being a functionalist means that > the key to the anatomy of the ape is in man--but not vice versa. This is > because we share most of the bodily and even psychic functions that apes > have, but not the other way around. > > The key to the anatomy of man is not even in man, but in artificial limbs > and even artificial organs. And since the key to the anatomy of man is not > in man, we can't expect to adapt nature to our present needs; the > irrationality of the way the world economy is now run will not be solved > simply by replacing the remnants of hunting and gathering (e.g. fly > fishing) with husbandry and horticulture (e.g. farmed salmon). > > It seems to me that applying care and compassion to non-sentient and > non-conscious nature only serves to destroy the real content of care and > compassion applied to that part of nature that has become sentient and > consciously aware (animals and humans). Looking to what already exists in > our psychic make up as a model for what should exist in our relationship to > the environment is a little like looking to child behaviour as a model for > an adult relationship with society. > > I think that the society I have personally lived in which was closest to > equilibrium with the environment was China in the early eighties, where the > vast majority of the country was still practicing subsistence agriculture. > We recycled everything and never dreamed of calling it that; > we economized sheepishly rather than smugly (my wife still obeys the old > adage: "Wear it three years new, three years old, and three years patched > up and stictched together" which is saying a lot when you only have two or > three changes of clothes). When Xi Jinping denounces "nativism" and > "economic nationalism" and insists that China too has a right to the > commodities that it produces for Western consumption, I absolutely agree. > > Perhaps the place we should look for "exaptations" that can save both our > personalities and our environment is not in our evolved needs, but in yet > to be designed quasi-needs. Artificial organs, after all, always suggest > new and ever more artificial functions, like chess and language. As Ruqaiya > Hasan used to say, the meaning of "not" is not in "not". > > David Kellogg > Macquarie University > > > On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 2:00 AM, wrote: > David addressing Alfredo. > > A wonderful metaphor and nod to Alfredo helping us move from small prey to > a substantial prey worth pursuing. > > David, you describe the process of development as moving through the stage > of adapting the environment to human needs. (a possible perezhivanie > relation?). > > However, is it possible we are now developing beyond this notion of > adapting the environment FOR human needs and becoming aware of the vice > versa movement. The movement of adapting human needs to environmental > needs. Still within conscious awareness requiring our focused (and possibly > also unfocused) attention but less human centric, more focused upon the > ?relation? honouring and possibly experiencing as ?sacred? the ?relation? > and through the ?relation? experiencing the environmental ?element? of > perizhivanie as living vitality. This focus on the ?relation? shifting > focus away from human needs or environmental needs as either/or as > ?things? that exist outside of each other that must be ?connected?. > There is no actual separation except imaginally and this is the ?heart? of > the matter. The place of not only compassion as such but the heart as the > place of CARE AND CONCERN. More active than compassion but not human > centric only. CARE AND CONCERN for the ?relation? whether imagined as > subject, object, subject&object, or the relation existing prior to this > subject/object differentiation. > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > From: David Kellogg > Sent: January 16, 2017 2:56 AM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > Alfredo: > > Well, I think that you are doing the really difficult and beautiful work, > filling in Mike's ten league boots and keeping the cats in a coherent herd. > Contrary to the popular expression, though, it is possible to herd cats. > Lions, for example, herd themselves, apparently because the prey they > consume is too large to consume individually before it goes bad, and if > they work in a pride, they don't have to work every day. House cats, on the > other hand, feed on small prey in individual portions and so they are > notoriously selfish and competitive. It seems to me that with the > "perezhivanie" symposium, we have at last begun to hunt lion-sized prey. > Perhaps I am still doing mousework, though: I think we actually disagree > more than we agree. > > Unlike Andy, I am very willing to embrace both the label "structuralist" > and the label "functionalist", so long as I can embrace them together, and > add the label developmentalist: structures are as they are because they > function as they do, but sometimes they function as they do for historical, > developmental reasons rather than obvious and immediate ones. In the second > chapter of HDHMF, Vygotsky invokes what he calls the "Jennings" principle: > that is, that functions are always "functions of structure": organisms do > what they are allowed to do by their organic structure and no more. For > example, cats cannot herd themselves because their prey is too small. But > he points out that a) organic structure is itself a product of doing things > over thousands and millions of years, b) structures can be "borrowed" to do > more than they are adapted for (what S.J. Gould called "exaptation") and c) > none of this applies to "artificial organs", such as tools and signs, > because mediational means are precisely structures "borrowed" from the > environment to do more than they are adapted for. One of these > supra-adaptive functions is to adapt the environment to human needs instead > of vice versa. This by definition cannot be something that a tool or a sign > is adapted for; you don't get tools or signs simply by adapting to the > environment: you only get them by imagining how the environment can be made > different and acting accordingly. Both tools and signs are the product of > some quantum of conscious awareness, and neither is a creation of habit. > > And that is why, again quite unlike Andy, I am also happy to embrace the > label of semiotic as opposed to activity theoretic. I think that although > both tools and signs involve an idealization of the environment, they do > not do so equally. Signs, for example, include conscious > attentive idealization of the self as well (the self as part of the > environment, as part of perizhivanie--as Vygotsky points out, what endures > from the crisis at seven is the "self" in self-esteem and the "self" in > "self respect", not the self of posing, mannerism and acting out). The flaw > in Greimas is that he is uninterested this functional, this developmental > aspect of structural semantics, and it is precisely this that allows us to > distinguish, at three, between the child who is interested in changing the > chess board as environment by playing with the pieces and the child who is > interested in changing the semiotic structure of the board by playing the > game, and to distinguish, at seven, between the child who is disappointed > with the inferior affordances for constructing himself as a first person > shooter that a chess board offers and the child who is excited by the > superior affordances for constructing himself as a future grand master. . > > I was very interested in what you said about attention versus perception. > They are developmentally linked, in Vygotsky, but functionally and thus > structurally quite distinct. Volitional attention is so much a part of > adult life we sometimes have to work at nonvolitional attention (!). But > volitional perception occurs only in rare circumstances, e.g. the Edgar > Rubin vases, Necker's cube, etc. I find myself straining to see every > passing mouse as a zebra. > > David Kellogg > Macquarie University > . > > On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 2:31 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > wrote: > > > Thanks, David, for such a beautiful and clarifying post. You have such a > > brilliant manner to language Vygotsky in Vygotsky's language! > > > > I think we agree much more than we disagree, and before I turn to Andy's > > very timely link to the "Fate of a Man", this may be a nice tutorial on > > terminology, at least for me. > > > > My only problem had been seeing what to me had looked like an all too > > empiricist treatment of the notion of perception in your prior post(s) > > (including some older posts on micro-genesis). But I think you still > agree > > that part of what it takes to become an experienced chess player is being > > able to ATTEND (and *attention* may be a better term than perception) to > > the pieces and their position in the board in front of her in much closer > > detail than the child who merely plays "with" the pieces. Thus the > > "perception" in the expert may be said to be much more rich and > *concrete* > > than what one "perceives" by merely attending to (abstracting) color and > > shape relations. But I keep thinking that perception is not the right > word > > here, is it? Certainly not one "element" (I use your wording below) in > the > > unit. But this may just be a wording problem. > > > > I really like your very important observation that chess produces > > life-long learners, whereas the child that merely plays "with" the chess > > pieces will soon find the game uninteresting. But again I don't think > that > > the key here is an opposition between perceiving and semiosis, but > perhaps > > between habit and conscious awareness (which at the end may be just > > different words for saying the same thing). As a habit, the task of > > grouping pieces by color involves a person-environment relation in which > > the *need* for consciousness (and thereby interest!) to awaken is lesser, > > thereby offering less possibilities for development. I think it is this > > that you would phrase as "the environment seems to dominate". The way > > habits are formed in chess, however, are such that they require of > > consciousness for the operation to continue (which you may phrase as > > "personality dominates more"). The relation between habit and awareness > is > > transformed in the higher-order activity (or form of human consciousness) > > that is chess-playing. Same thing, different words? > > > > Alfredo > > > > ________________________________________ > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > on behalf of David Kellogg > > Sent: 13 January 2017 01:02 > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > > > Alfredo: > > > > Let's apply your reasoning to the distinction between non-language, > > proto-language, and language proper. Imagine a nursery in which there are > > three beds, one with a child who is only week old and who responds with > > pleasure to a nipple and with pain to being shaken or dropped, one with a > > child who is about ten months old and has worked out a system of squeaks > > and directed cries in order to get attention and deliver an affective > > response, and one with a child who is nearly two and can ask for objects, > > evaluate them, and reject them. As you say, perception and semiosis are > at > > work in each situation. But contrary to what you say, they are not > equally > > at work, and the outcomes are very different. > > > > There is a good reason why children develop: it's in their interests, > both > > in the long term sense in that it allows a much wider variety of outcomes > > and in the short term sense in that it allows an escape from ennui. A > child > > who plays the "game" of putting black pieces on black squares and white > > pieces on white squares will find this game very dull in a matter of > hours. > > A child who plays the game of chess will, in many cases, find a lifetime > > vocation. Yes, there are "structures" that include perception and > semiosis > > in both cases, but the precise make-up isn't insignificant or irrelevant. > > > > One important reason why perezhivanie is such an important unit of > > structure is that it at last allows us to assign real, concrete, specific > > values to the influence of its two elements, personality and environment. > > These vary from period to period--for example, in periods of crisis, the > > personality always appears to play a leading role (e.g. proto-language in > > the Crisis at One, negativism in the Crisis at Three, "acting out" in the > > Crisis at Seven). During stable periods, the environment always appears > to > > dominate (e.g. speech proper in early childhood, play in preschool, and > > thinking but not thinking-about-thinking in school age). > > > > Some "child-centred" pedagogies would like to treat childhood as one long > > crisis. I think this is a disservice to the child, because it is > precisely > > during the stable periods that the critical neoformations (e.g. > > protospeech) find a supporting but absolutely crucial role. The child > > doesn't forget the expressiveness of intonation and stress learned in > > proto-language, any more than the child who plays chess no longer > > distinguishes white squares from black ones. > > > > David Kellogg > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 7:41 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > > > wrote: > > > > > David, I admire much of what you write in your first three examples in > > > your prior post. But I am reacting to your latter post on Chess. It is > > the > > > second or third time that you bring the CHESS example to bear in xmca, > > and > > > I always feel uneasy about it. > > > > > > I see the point that there are different developmental stages and that > > > these can be best categorised according to the type of generalisation > > that > > > the child can engage into. Obviously, treating a piece of marble "as > if" > > it > > > was a piece in the game of chess involves a different type of > > > generalization than treating the same piece of marble as if it was a > > piece > > > in the game of "let's put the black pieces in black squares and white > > > pieces in white squares". But I do not think that my 20 months daughter > > > will put black pieces on black squares in any systematic manner simply > > > because she can PERCEIVE and act upon the difference between black and > > > white; and indeed I do not think that my 7 years old first daughter > will > > do > > > any of these things with the chess pieces, considering she has never > > > learned to play chess. Indeed, why would any child do that? I do > strongly > > > believe that to get any of my daughters to arrange the pieces by color, > > > there would have first to be a TEACHING/LEARNING situation, which > itself > > > would involve establishing a semantic field, a field that perhaps out > of > > my > > > ignorance I would call semiotic (sign). > > > > > > In my view, in both cases there are rules and therefore imagination, > if > > > we listen to Vygotsky's writings on play, and perhaps, as Vygotsky > notes, > > > there may be a difference in the "moral attitude", but I would be > > cautious > > > by gross divisions between perceptual and semantic structures. > Yes,there > > > are different levels, types, or stages in the way semantic fields are > > > organised, and that playing the chess pieces as pieces of the CHESS > game > > > involves a qualitative leap compared to playing them as pieces in the > > game > > > of putting them together by shape or color; but there is a game going > on > > in > > > both cases, and therefore a perceptual as much as a semiotic structure > > > being at play. These are different semiotic contexts, as you say at the > > end > > > of your e-mail, but I do think that your assertion that in playing with > > the > > > chess pieces by color "the structure would be visual but not semiotic" > > can > > > be problematic and may lead to what I consider an incorrect view of the > > > relation between higher and lower functions in development. > > > > > > Alfredo > > > ________________________________________ > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > on behalf of David Kellogg > > > Sent: 11 January 2017 04:50 > > > To: Andy Blunden; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! > > > > > > Vygotsky's got a terrific metaphor for how "perezhivanie" is > > internalized: > > > it is like internalizing the rules of the game of chess. > > > > > > The child who doesn't know how to play chess simply plays WITH the > pieces > > > instead of playing them. She or he might try to create a piece-board > > > structure by putting black pieces on black squares and white pieces on > > > white squares, but the structure is a visual one and not a semiotic > one; > > > it's about color and not about meaning. The child who DOES know how to > > play > > > chess plays the pieces instead of playing with them. She or he too > > creates > > > "structures" but this time they are semiotic ones: a black knight in a > > > completely different column and a completely different row, can > capture a > > > white pawn. > > > > > > The board is the same and so are the kids; the children may have very > > > similar biological and very similar cultural endowments, but they do > not > > > have the same semiotic context at all. Hence different perezhivanie and > > > different personalities. > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 11:54 AM, Andy Blunden > > wrote: > > > > > > > How to understand the personality? ... i.e., the *development* of the > > > > personality? > > > > > > > > The subject's inheritance, and The subject's experiences > > > (/perezhivaniya/) > > > > > > > > ... just think of how you'd go about writing a good biography or > > > > Bildungsroman. > > > > > > > > Andy > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > Andy Blunden > > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective- > decision-making > > > > On 11/01/2017 10:24 AM, David Kellogg wrote: > > > > > > > >> Andy: > > > >> > > > >> A good paradox! Word meaning is a unit, but the spoken word itself > is > > > >> just an element--a thing. We can see that this is, on the face of > it, > > > >> impossible: within a single holistic analysis, an element can be a > > part > > > of > > > >> a unit, but a unit can never be a part of an element. So what you > are > > > >> referring to when you say that the word is a thing is the "sonic" or > > > >> "phasal" quality of the word: its "acoustic" properties, its > > > "phonetics". > > > >> > > > >> But not its phonology. The word that Vygotsky uses for "phoneme" > > refers > > > >> to the 1929 work of the Prague Circle, originally the Moscow Circle. > > He > > > is > > > >> a LITTLE coy about this, because the founders, Jakobson and > > Trubetskoy, > > > >> were not very popular with the authorities and Vygotsky already had > > > plenty > > > >> of heterodox acquaintances to worry about. Nevertheless, whenever > > > Vygotsky > > > >> says "phoneme", we know he really means what Jakobson and Trubetskoy > > > called > > > >> "morphophonemes". We know this because the examples he actually > > > >> gives--Russian case endings--are morpho-phonemes and not simply > > > phonemes: > > > >> so for example in English the sound /s/ is a simple phoneme when I > say > > > the > > > >> word "self" but if I say "Andy's" the sound /s/ is a > morpho-phoneme: a > > > >> difference in sounding that makes a difference in meaning. The > system > > > (that > > > >> is, the paradigmatic menu) of these differences in soundings are > what > > > the > > > >> Moscow and Prague Circles called "phonology" (as OPPOSED to > > phonetics), > > > and > > > >> this is the kind of "phoneme" that Vygotsky is really talking about. > > > >> > > > >> Still, you can see that it is not what he is talking about when he > > says > > > >> word meaning, because these units are still nowhere near big enough > to > > > >> describe the kinds of changes which must occur when verbal thinking > > > >> develops. I feel the same way about a lot of the examples offered of > > > >> "perezhivanie", including Marc's. If MacDuff's grief or Carla's > > epiphany > > > >> about the misbehavior of her kids being due to "outside influences" > > > really > > > >> is the unit of personality and experience that Vygotsky wants us to > > use > > > >> when we analyse the ontogenesis of personality, then it is no more > > > >> appropriate than using the morpho-phoneme to analyse the whole of > > verbal > > > >> thinking. Just as evolution (of species) requires very different > units > > > from > > > >> history (of classes), development, whether we are talking about > verbal > > > >> thinking or the personality as a whole, is going to require very > > > different > > > >> units from learning, whether we are talking about MacDuff or Carla. > > The > > > >> units must be able to develop; that is, the relationship of the > > elements > > > >> within them must be susceptible to many changes over time. > > > >> > > > >> Let me give three examples of how this happens in different > > > >> "perezhivanie". They are not mine; they are Vygotsky's, and they are > > all > > > >> from the Pedological Lectures. > > > >> > > > >> First, the Crisis at One. Neither the biological nor the social > > > endowment > > > >> of the child greatly changes in the acquisition of speech; > > nevertheless, > > > >> the relationship between the personality and the environment, of > which > > > both > > > >> personality moments and environmental ones are constituent elements, > > is > > > >> entirely transformed. Here we are not talking about phonemes, or > even > > > >> morpho-phonemes: we are talking about "wordings"--whole utterances. > In > > > >> Melbourne I presented some data that demonstrated this > beautifully--a > > > >> child's first word is actually an attempt to imitate a whole > > > conversation. > > > >> > > > >> Second, the Crisis at Three. Vygotsky spends a lot of time > discussing > > > the > > > >> "Seven Stars"--the symptoms of the "Terrible Twos" and > "Threenagehood" > > > >> noted by harried parents everywhere. But by the end of his analysis > > it's > > > >> clear that what really happens is a new relationship between wish > and > > > will: > > > >> in extreme cases, the child actually wishes for one thing (e.g. > > > compromise) > > > >> and wills the opposite (the everlasting "No!"). Again, neither the > > > >> personality moments as such nor the environmental ones change, but > > > there is > > > >> a separation and a sorting which allows the subordination of wish to > > > will > > > >> that we see in play. This isn't the kind of "aha" moment that Marc > is > > > >> offering us at all: Vygotsky actually calls it the "antipode" of > > future > > > >> will, because instead of enabling will it actually paralyzes it. But > > it > > > is > > > >> indubitably a key moment in the development of the relation of > > > personality > > > >> to environmental moments that we see in "perizhivanie". > > > >> > > > >> Thirdly, the Crisis at Seven. I think Gonzalez Rey makes a total > hash > > of > > > >> this, and I get very cross when I read his article. It is not true > > that > > > the > > > >> essence of perizhivanie remained a mystery to Vygotsky simply > because > > > he no > > > >> longer subscribes to "the aesthetic reaction" and "catharsis" and > > other > > > >> notions that he toyed with in Psych of Art (he's no longer doing > > > >> experiments on changes in breathing rate when people read the works > of > > > >> Bunin either!). It might be true that he never offered a system of > > facts > > > >> and methodological procedures for perezivanie, but that was only > > because > > > >> one already existed, for example in the work of Wallon and Stern and > > > >> others. It is demonstrably not true that when Vygotsky says that the > > > speech > > > >> environment of those around him does not change when the child > learns > > to > > > >> talk at one, he is not "profoundly contradictory with the concept of > > > >> sense": when you read the quotation in context, it is very clear > that > > > what > > > >> he is referring to are the kinds of absolute indicators used by > > Zalkind: > > > >> how often the parents read the newspapers, the dialect they speak, > and > > > >> their educational background. These do not change, and if the child > > > wants > > > >> to make sense, these are the factors the child will have to relate > to. > > > >> > > > >> Vygotsky gives the example of a child who is severely retarded. The > > > child > > > >> wants to play with other children and is rejected. The child walks > > down > > > the > > > >> street and the other children follow, laughing. The child is > shrieked > > > at, > > > >> insulted, but as soon as the humiliation stops, the child is > perfectly > > > >> happy with himself. Vygotsky points out that the child is not able > to > > > >> "co-generalize" the "perizhivanie" of the humiliations: each is > > > unpleasant, > > > >> but they are entirely separate and cannot be connected with any > > internal > > > >> sense of inferiority. A normal child, however, is able to > > "internalize" > > > >> these humiliations and consequently develops a sense of inferiority. > > We > > > can > > > >> see that what has happened is the insertion of what Vygotsky calls > an > > > >> "intellectual" moment: an inner layer, which is what distinguishes > > later > > > >> Chaplin movies from earlier ones (again, Vygotsky's example, not > > mine!) > > > and > > > >> what brings about the "loss of directness and naivete" that we see > in > > > >> pre-schoolers. > > > >> > > > >> I think that the reason people find "perizhivanie" so hard to work > > with > > > >> is the same reason that they find "word meaning" hard to work with: > it > > > >> develops. The feeling of drinking milk as the infant drinks it is > > > >> perizhivanie, and the thought of being humiliated when you are > mulling > > > it > > > >> over and contemplating revenge is also perizhivanie, and only a > > profound > > > >> analysis which includes ontogenetic development and not just > learning > > > will > > > >> show the inner link between them. It's for that reason that I think > > that > > > >> "activity" is not a useful unit of analysis and I am much more > > inclined > > > to > > > >> use your word "project", so long as it can include what Vygotsky > calls > > > >> "inner activeness". > > > >> > > > >> Vygotsky says: > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> ????? ? ?????????, ?????????? ? ?. ?., ? ???? ???? ? ?????????? > > > >> ???????????, ??? ?????????? ???????????? ??????????????? ????????? > > > >> ??????????????? ?? ??????? ? ??????? ?????????????. ??? ??? ????? > > ????? > > > >> ?????????? ?????????? ? ???????? ???????? ??????????? ? ???, ???, ? > ?? > > > >> ????? ??? ? ?????????? ???????? ??? ?????????? ???????????? > > ???????????? > > > >> ???????????????? ????? ? ?????????, ??????? ???????????, ? ???????? > > > >> ???????? ?? ????? ???????????? ?????????????? ???????????, > > ???????????? > > > >> ??????????? ?????????? ?????????? ?? ????????? ? ??????? > ????????????. > > > ??? > > > >> ??? ???????, ??????? ????? ??????????, ? ?? ????? ????? ?? ?????? > ??? > > > ????? > > > >> ???-??????, ???, ? ???????? ????????? ?????????????? ??????? ? > > > ?????????? > > > >> ????????????. > > > >> > > > >> When I think, remember, etc. I am dealing withinner activeness; this > > > >> psychological process of inner activity is not directly linked to > any > > > >> external activity. The new form of inner activeness in the School > Age > > > >> consists of this: that while during the preschool years these inner > > > >> activities demonstrated an immediate link with action, with external > > > >> activeness, in the school years we have a relative autonomy which > > > emerges, > > > >> inner activeness which is relatively independent of external > > activities. > > > >> Here is already a child who can think, at the same time when he is > > > doing or > > > >> seeing something, one in whom has emerged a differentiation of inner > > and > > > >> outer activities. > > > >> > > > >> David Kellogg > > > >> Macquarie University > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 10:07 AM, Andy Blunden > > > > >> ablunden@mira.net>> wrote: > > > >> > > > >> David: "Are words really units?" > > > >> > > > >> Well, firstly, "units" is a *relative* term. That is, > > > >> the question is: are words units of something, some > > > >> complex process subject to analysis. And which? > > > >> > > > >> Secondly, according to Vygotsky, "no." The concept > > > >> Vygotsky proposes as a unit is "word meaning" which he > > > >> says is a unity of sound and meaning. The sound is an > > > >> artefact, which, detached from its meaningful > > > >> utterance in a transactional context is just a thing, > > > >> viz., a word. Whereas "word meaning" is an > > > >> arrtefact-mediated action, a unit of human social > > > >> activity. > > > >> > > > >> It is true that words can be countable or mass > > > >> according to context, but I wasn't talking about words > > > >> was I? I was talking about word meaning. > > > >> > > > >> Andy > > > >> > > > >> ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > >> Andy Blunden > > > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy > > > >> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective- > > > decision-making > > > >> > > >> decision-making> > > > >> > > > >> On 8/01/2017 7:59 AM, David Kellogg wrote: > > > >> > > > >> Are words really units? When we look at their > > > >> ideational meaning (that is, > > > >> their logical and experiential content--their > > > >> capacity for representing and > > > >> linking together human experiences) they seem to > > > >> fall into two very > > > >> different categories: lexical words like > > > >> "perezhivanie" or "sense" or > > > >> "personality" of "individual" and grammatical > > > >> words like "of", or "might", > > > >> or "is". The lexical words seem to behave like > > > >> units--they are bounded, > > > >> discrete, and, as Andy would say, "countable" (the > > > >> problem is that almost > > > >> all nouns are both countable and uncountable > > > >> depending on the context you > > > >> put them in, so this distinction is really not as > > > >> essential as Andy seems > > > >> to assume). But the more grammatical words seem to > > > >> be elements of some > > > >> larger unit, which we can call wording. > > > >> > > > >> Veresov and Fleer come up against this problem > > > >> with "edintsvo" and > > > >> "edintsa". Of course, as they say, the two words > > > >> are distinct. But this > > > >> doesn't necessarily mean that the former always > > > >> corresponds to "unity" in > > > >> English and the latter is always "unit". If you > > > >> look at the paragraph they > > > >> translate on 330, you can see that Vygotsky starts > > > >> with an idea that is > > > >> quite "synoptic" and is well expressed by "unit". > > > >> But in the last sentence > > > >> there is a sense that "perezhivanie" is a > > > >> meta-stable unit--one that > > > >> remains self-similar only through a process of > > > >> thorough change, like a > > > >> bicycle whose every part is replaced--and in > > > >> English is it is better to > > > >> express this idea with "unity". The problem is > > > >> that the differences between > > > >> "edintsvo" and "edintsva" in Russian is a matter > > > >> of gender (I think) and > > > >> not simply abstractness, and as a result the > > > >> English version, which cannot > > > >> use the resource of gender,has to rely on > > > >> abstractness, so the words > > > >> "unity" and "unit" are somewhat more distinct and > > > >> less linked than > > > >> "edintsvo" and "edintsva". > > > >> > > > >> There are other problems that are similar. When > > > >> Gonzalez Rey uses the word > > > >> "final moment" to refer to the final period of > > > >> Vygotsky's thinking, he > > > >> leaves the anglophone reader the impression that > > > >> he is referring to > > > >> Vygotsky's deathbed thoughts. On the other hand, > > > >> when Veresov and Fleer use > > > >> "factor" to translate the same Russian word that > > > >> Gonzalez Rey is using, > > > >> they are giving us something more quantitative > > > >> than Vygotsky intended, and > > > >> their translation of "dalee nerazloshim'im > > > >> chastyami etava edinstva" > > > >> into "vital and further indivisible part of the > > > >> whole" is quite opaque in > > > >> English (notice that here Veresov and Fleer use > > > >> "whole" to translate > > > >> "edinstva" rather than "unit"!) At some point you > > > >> have to accept that you > > > >> can change Russian words into English words as if > > > >> you were exchanging > > > >> rubles for dollars, but you still won't be able to > > > >> buy a samovar at Walmart. > > > >> > > > >> David Kellogg > > > >> Macquarie University > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 5:21 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > > > >> > > > > >> wrote: > > > >> > > > >> Larry, all, > > > >> > > > >> our arguments in the 2014 address a science > > > >> education literature in which > > > >> the constructivist perspective is the leading > > > >> perspective; We note that the > > > >> assertion that people learn from experience is > > > >> everywhere taken for granted > > > >> but nowhere accounted for. We resort to > > > >> pragmatist and phenomenological > > > >> literature along with Vygotsky's insights to > > > >> point out the need to account > > > >> for learning as something that cannot be the > > > >> result of an individual's > > > >> construction; in experience there is always > > > >> something in excess of what you > > > >> intended, and this is a basic feature of > > > >> doing, of performing. I take that > > > >> to be your "trans" in the trans/zhivanie word, > > > >> Larry, which already is > > > >> denoted in the word PERezhivanie. > > > >> > > > >> But I do not wish to move our discussion too > > > >> far away from Marc's paper > > > >> and the Perezhivanie special issue. We also > > > >> risk disengaging many that have > > > >> not have the privilege we've had to have the > > > >> time to read so many articles > > > >> in just few days into the new year. I think we > > > >> are a point in the > > > >> discussion where a pretty clear point of > > > >> agreement/disagreement, and > > > >> therefore of possibility for growth, has been > > > >> reached with regard to the > > > >> view of perezhivanie as "an experience" and as > > > >> the "working over it". I > > > >> think that to allow as many as possible to > > > >> follow, and hopefully also > > > >> engage, I think it will be helpful to bring > > > >> the diverse perspectives and > > > >> theoretical accounts to matter in accounting > > > >> for some actual material. And > > > >> there are a number of cases described in the > > > >> articles, including Marc's > > > >> case of a teacher, as well as everyday facts, > > > >> such as those brought by > > > >> Beth, and in Beth's article... > > > >> > > > >> I take the task for myself too, but Saturday > > > >> morning need to attend to > > > >> other things! > > > >> A > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> ________________________________________ > > > >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> Sent: 07 January 2017 18:26 > > > >> To: Andy Blunden; Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended > > > >> Mind, Culture, Activity; > > > >> Larry Purss > > > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and > > > >> Perezhivanie! > > > >> > > > >> Andy, Peter, i hope the intention to move > > > >> beyond politeness to struggle > > > >> with this topic materializes. > > > >> In this vein i want to introduce exploration > > > >> of the 'excess' of actual > > > >> over intended meaning as he sketched his > > > >> introduction to 'experience'. > > > >> > > > >> Citing Dewey, Alfredo says that this excess of > > > >> actual learning over > > > >> intended learning INCLUDES what Dewey refers > > > >> to as 'attitudes' and these > > > >> 'attitudes' are FUNDAMENTALLY what count in > > > >> the future. > > > >> Alfredo and Roth then add this summary > > > >> statement : > > > >> > > > >> There is therefore, a need to theorize > > > >> experience in terms that do not > > > >> assume control and rationality as the sine qua > > > >> non of learning. It also > > > >> implies a need to develop analytical accounts > > > >> that retain the 'uncertainty' > > > >> that is an 'integral part' of human experience. > > > >> > > > >> Where are Alfredo and Roth leading us with > > > >> this sketch of experience? To > > > >> highlight 'attitudes' that occur in the excess > > > >> of actual over intended > > > >> learning? The word 'attitudes' generates > > > >> images of (atmosphere) and (moods) > > > >> that 'flow' like cascading waterfalls that can > > > >> be imaged as (force) or as > > > >> (receptive). Attitudes that flow to places > > > >> where they are received within a > > > >> certain attitude of care and concern. Not as > > > >> forceful an image as moving > > > >> only with control and rationality. > Describing > > > >> 'weaker' thought that > > > >> remains uncertain but that also opens us to > > > >> the other's peril and plight. > > > >> Possibly a post-analytic motion that exceeds > > > >> the intended by living-through > > > >> the actual that develops 'attitudes' that are > > > >> fundamentally what count for > > > >> the future. > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > >> > > > >> From: Andy Blunden > > > >> Sent: January 7, 2017 5:00 AM > > > >> To: Peter Smagorinsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, > > > >> Activity > > > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and > > > >> Perezhivanie! > > > >> > > > >> OK Peter, what you say is all very true I am > > > >> sure, but it > > > >> entails conflating activity and action (as > > > >> mass nouns) and > > > >> context and mediation, and makes the required > > > >> distinction > > > >> much like one could find multiple meanings for > > > >> the word > > > >> "and" by listing the different phrases and > > > >> clauses which can > > > >> be linked by "and." > > > >> > > > >> Andy > > > >> > > > >> ------------------------------ > > > ------------------------------ > > > >> Andy Blunden > > > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy > > > >> > > > >> http://www.brill.com/products/ > > > book/origins-collective-decisi > > > >> on-making > > > >> > > >> decision-making> > > > >> > > > >> On 7/01/2017 11:42 PM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > > > >> > > > >> Let me try to illustrate. > > > >> > > > >> Reading as mediated action: The > > > >> cultural-historical > > > >> context of reading mediates how one's > > > >> attention and > > > >> response are channeled in socially > > > >> constructed ways. So, > > > >> in one setting, say at home or reading in > > > >> the company of > > > >> friends, a novel might bring a reader to > > > >> tears, or invite > > > >> readers to share personal stories that > > > >> parallel those of > > > >> the plot lines, or laugh out loud. But > > > >> another setting, a > > > >> formal school or university class, would > > > >> have historical > > > >> values and practices that mute emotional > > > >> and personal > > > >> responses, and promote a more sober, > > > >> analytic way of > > > >> reading and talking that fits with > > > >> specific historical > > > >> critical conventions and genres, and > > > >> discourages others. > > > >> > > > >> Reading as mediating action: The act of > > > >> reading can be > > > >> transformational. In reading about an > > > >> talking about a > > > >> character's actions, a reader might > > > >> reconsider a value > > > >> system, become more sympathetic to real > > > >> people who > > > >> resemble oppressed characters, etc. In > > > >> other words, > > > >> reading a text may serve a mediational > > > >> process in which > > > >> textual ideas and exemplars enable a > > > >> reader to think > > > >> differently. > > > >> > > > >> *From:*Andy Blunden > > > >> [mailto:ablunden@mira.net > > > >> ] > > > >> *Sent:* Saturday, January 7, 2017 6:28 AM > > > >> *To:* Peter Smagorinsky > > >> >; eXtended Mind, > > > >> Culture, Activity > > >> > > > > >> *Subject:* Re: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year > > > >> and Perezhivanie! > > > >> > > > >> Can you explain in a paragraph or two,. > > > >> Peter, rather than > > > >> asking us all to read 10,000 words to > > > >> extract an answer? > > > >> > > > >> Andy > > > >> > > > >> ------------------------------ > > > >> ------------------------------ > > > >> > > > >> Andy Blunden > > > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> http://www.brill.com/products/ > > > >> book/origins-collective-decision-making > > > >> > collective- > > > >> decision-making> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> On 7/01/2017 11:23 PM, Peter Smagorinsky > > > >> wrote: > > > >> > > > >> Andy and others, I tried to work out > > > >> the mediated/mediating question > > > >> > > > >> in the area of reading....see if this helps. > > > >> > > > >> Smagorinsky, P., & O'Donnell-Allen, > > > >> C. (1998). Reading as mediated > > > >> > > > >> and mediating action: Composing meaning for > > > >> literature through multimedia > > > >> interpretive texts. Reading Research > > > >> Quarterly, 33, 198-226. Available > > > >> athttp://www.petersmagorinsky. > > net/About/PDF/RRQ/RRQ1998.pdf > > > >> > net/About/PDF/RRQ/RRQ1998.pdf> > > > >> > > > >> -----Original Message----- > > > >> > > > >> From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > >> > > > >> > > >> .ucsd.edu > > > >> > > > > >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> mailman.ucsd.edu ] On > > > >> Behalf Of Andy Blunden > > > >> > > > >> Sent: Friday, January 6, 2017 7:12 PM > > > >> > > > >> To:xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year > > > >> and Perezhivanie! > > > >> > > > >> I have never understood this supposed > > > >> distinction, Alfredo, between > > > >> > > > >> "mediated activity" and "mediating activity" > > > >> given that all activity is > > > >> mediated and all activity mediates. > > > >> > > > >> Also, could you spell out what you > > > >> mean by the "tension" > > > >> > > > >> between perezhivanie as meaning and > > > >> perezhivanie as struggle. > > > >> > > > >> Andy > > > >> > > > >> ------------------------------ > > > >> ------------------------------ > > > >> > > > >> Andy Blunden > > > >> > > > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> http://www.brill.com/products/ > > book/origins-collective- > > > >> > collective- > > > > > > > >> > > > >> decision-making > > > >> > > > >> On 5/01/2017 6:26 PM, Alfredo Jornet > > > >> Gil wrote: > > > >> > > > >> Thanks Marc for your careful > > > >> response. > > > >> > > > >> I am familiar to Vygotsky's > > > >> notion of cultural mediation and I > > > >> > > > >> am aware and acknowledge that it was > > > >> elaborated as a means to overcome > > > >> dualism, and that it is not analog to a > > > >> computational approach. > > > >> > > > >> When I brought the computing > > > >> analogy, I did so with regard not > > > >> > > > >> to the concept of cultural mediation in > > > >> general, but to the way it can be > > > >> (and is) deployed analytically. I react to > > > >> what it seems to me a dichotomy > > > >> between a "meaning" as something that is > > > >> static (thereby a form of > > > >> "representation" or reflection of the relation > > > >> with the environment instead > > > >> of?refraction)?? and the > > > >> experiencing-as-struggling, which is described > > > >> as?transformation or change. If so, mediation > > > >> here would seem to be part of > > > >> a methodological device that first dissects "a > > > >> type of meaning" from "a > > > >> type of activity" (or a given state from the > > > >> process that changes that > > > >> state), and then unites it by adding the term > > > >> "mediation." And this may be > > > >> my misreading, but in that (mis)reading (which > > > >> perhaps is mostly due to the > > > >> fact that in your empirical illustration only > > > >> the initial and end product, > > > >> i.e., perezhivanie, are described, but not the > > > >> experiencing-as-struggle, > > > >> that is, the moving between the two), > > > >> mediation here seems to do as > > > >> analytical concept precisely what you were > > > >> afraid our monism was doing: > > > >> explaining nothing. Only the end products but > > > >> not the process of producing > > > >> perezhivanie are revealed. This may be > > > >> problematic if one attends to what > > > >> Veresov argues in the paper I shared > > > >> yesterday, where he defends the notion > > > >> of mediation but also specifies that Vygotsky > > > >> speaks of *mediating > > > >> activity* (as opposed to *mediated* activity). > > > >> That is, not mediation by > > > >> signs as products, but mediating activity as > > > >> the activity of producing > > > >> signs (which again is an activity of producing > > > >> social relations, perhaps > > > >> what you refer as "holistic meanings"?). What > > > >> do you think? > > > >> > > > >> I did not think you were trying > > > >> to deny the influence of > > > >> > > > >> Spinoza, and I do not think we ever said that > > > >> Perezhivanie was primarily a > > > >> move from Cartesian Dualism to Monism, as you > > > >> suggest in your post. I copy > > > >> and paste from my prior post: "The fact is > > > >> that Vygotsky was building a > > > >> theory on the unity of the affect and the > > > >> intellect that was to be grounded > > > >> on Spinoza, and what we try to do is to > > > >> explore how perezhivanie, as a > > > >> concept being developed during the same period > > > >> (but not finalised or > > > >> totally settled!), could be seen from the > > > >> perspective of the Spinozist > > > >> Vygotsky." > > > >> > > > >> I totally believe that bringing > > > >> the distinction between > > > >> > > > >> perezhivanie as meaning, and perezhivanie as > > > >> struggle, is totally relevant, > > > >> and Beth Ferholt's vignettes of Where the Wild > > > >> Things Are do indeed > > > >> illustrate this. We really need to address > > > >> this tension, which as Beth's > > > >> examples and as our own everyday experience > > > >> shows, is a tension that > > > >> matters not just to books and to theories but > > > >> to living persons (children, > > > >> teachers), a tension that moreover is present > > > >> and mentioned in all the > > > >> articles of the symposium. The papers offer > > > >> different proposals, and I > > > >> think is so great we have the chance to > > > >> discuss them! I too, as you, am > > > >> very interesting in hearing others about the > > > >> questions you had concerning > > > >> sense and meaning. > > > >> > > > >> Alfredo > > > >> > > > >> From:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > >> > > > >> > xmca-l-bounces@mailman > > > >> .ucsd.edu > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > xmca-l-bounces@mailman > > > >> .ucsd.edu > > > >> > > > > >> on behalf of Marc > > > >> > > > >> Clara > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> Sent: 04 January 2017 22:31 > > > >> > > > >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > >> > > > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New > > > >> Year and Perezhivanie! > > > >> > > > >> Thank you very much, Alfredo, for > > > >> sharing this excellent paper by > > > >> > > > >> Veresov, and thanks also for your > > > >> responses, which really helped > > > >> > > > >> me to > > > >> > > > >> better understand your points. My > > > >> main doubt about your proposal > > > >> > > > >> was/is caused by the statement > > > >> that the idea of cultural > > > >> > > > >> mediation/mediator implies a > > > >> cartesian dualism. This shocks me > > > >> > > > >> because, to me, the idea of > > > >> cultural mediation is absolutely > > > >> > > > >> crucial > > > >> > > > >> (in fact, the keystone) for the > > > >> construction of a monist (and > > > >> > > > >> scientific) psychology that does > > > >> not forget mind -that is, a > > > >> > > > >> cultural > > > >> > > > >> psychology. From your response, > > > >> however, I realized that we may > > > >> > > > >> be > > > >> > > > >> approaching the idea of mediation > > > >> in different ways. I talk of > > > >> > > > >> mediation and mediators in a > > > >> quite restricted way. The starting > > > >> > > > >> point > > > >> > > > >> of my understanding of mediation > > > >> is a dialectical relationship > > > >> > > > >> (organic, transactional) between > > > >> the subject and the world > > > >> > > > >> (Vygotsky departs from the scheme > > > >> stimulus-response, from reflexology). > > > >> > > > >> This relationship, that Vygotsky > > > >> calls primitive psychological > > > >> > > > >> functions, would be basically > > > >> biological. However, in human > > > >> > > > >> beings > > > >> > > > >> this relationship is mediated by > > > >> cultural means: signs and > > > >> > > > >> tools; or > > > >> > > > >> primary, secondary and terciary > > > >> artifacts. These cultural means > > > >> > > > >> reorganize the primitive > > > >> functions (dialectic S-O relationship), > > > >> > > > >> which > > > >> > > > >> become then higher psychological > > > >> functions (S-M-O) (see for > > > >> > > > >> example, > > > >> > > > >> The problem of the cultural > > > >> development of the child, in The > > > >> > > > >> Vygotsky > > > >> > > > >> Reader). Now, the subject, the > > > >> cultural mediators, and the > > > >> > > > >> object form > > > >> > > > >> an inseparable dialectical unit, > > > >> so that the subject acts on > > > >> > > > >> (transforms) the object through > > > >> the prism of the cultural > > > >> > > > >> mediators, > > > >> > > > >> the object acts on (transforms) > > > >> the subject also through the > > > >> > > > >> prism of > > > >> > > > >> the cultural mediators, and the > > > >> cultural means are themselves > > > >> > > > >> also > > > >> > > > >> transformed as a consequence of > > > >> their mediation in this > > > >> > > > >> continuous > > > >> > > > >> dynamic dialectical tension. > > > >> Here, for me, it is important the > > > >> > > > >> idea > > > >> > > > >> that the cultural means are as > > > >> material (if we assume a > > > >> > > > >> materialist > > > >> > > > >> monism) as all the rest of the > > > >> world; in fact, are parts of the > > > >> > > > >> material world which become signs > > > >> or tools (and can be therefore > > > >> > > > >> socially distributed). This > > > >> permits the introduction of the > > > >> > > > >> scientific > > > >> > > > >> study of mind-consciousness (as > > > >> mediating systems of signs), > > > >> > > > >> because > > > >> > > > >> mind is not anymore something > > > >> immaterial and unobservable, but > > > >> > > > >> it is > > > >> > > > >> as material and observable as the > > > >> rest of the natural world. It > > > >> > > > >> is > > > >> > > > >> from this view that, for me, the > > > >> idea of cultural mediation is > > > >> > > > >> the > > > >> > > > >> keystone of a monist psychology > > > >> that includes mind. Thus, when I > > > >> > > > >> speak > > > >> > > > >> of mediators, I refer to the > > > >> cultural means which mediate in the > > > >> > > > >> S-O > > > >> > > > >> dialectics; I am especially > > > >> interested in signs/secondary > > > >> > > > >> artifacts. > > > >> > > > >> Here, it is perhaps necessary to > > > >> insist that when I talk of > > > >> > > > >> studying > > > >> > > > >> mediators (and their semantic > > > >> structure), this doesn't mean that > > > >> > > > >> they > > > >> > > > >> are taken out from the activity > > > >> (the flux of live) in which they > > > >> > > > >> mediate (since out of activity > > > >> they are not signs anymore); > > > >> > > > >> here, I > > > >> > > > >> think Vygotsky tries again to > > > >> overcome another old dichotomy, the > > > >> > > > >> functionalism-structuralism one. > > > >> I hope that all this makes also > > > >> > > > >> clear the difference between this view and > > > >> that of computational > > > >> psychologies (which in general are profoundly > > > >> and explicitly dualist and > > > >> not dialectic). > > > >> > > > >> Back to perezhivanie, I'm not > > > >> obviously trying to deny the > > > >> > > > >> influence > > > >> > > > >> of Spinoza on Vygotsky's thinking > > > >> (this is explicit in Vygotsky's > > > >> > > > >> writings, especially in "The > > > >> teaching about emotions", in the > > > >> > > > >> Vol.6 of > > > >> > > > >> the Collected Works). But I have > > > >> doubts that Vygotsky's > > > >> > > > >> introduction > > > >> > > > >> of the concept of perezhivanie is > > > >> to be regarded primarily as a > > > >> > > > >> movement towards monism (from a > > > >> previous cartesian dualism), and > > > >> > > > >> that > > > >> > > > >> this movement questions the > > > >> concept of cultural mediation. > > > >> > > > >> Instead, > > > >> > > > >> and I think that this is in line > > > >> with some of Gonzalez-Rey > > > >> > > > >> observations in his paper, my > > > >> impression is that the > > > >> > > > >> introduction of > > > >> > > > >> the concept of perezhivanie > > > >> responds more to a movement (a > > > >> > > > >> further > > > >> > > > >> step) towards holism (something > > > >> that, in my understanding, can > > > >> > > > >> also be > > > >> > > > >> found in Spinoza). Thus, I think > > > >> that the word meaning is still > > > >> > > > >> the > > > >> > > > >> unit of analysis in the last > > > >> Vygotsky -and therefore, the idea of > > > >> > > > >> cultural mediation is still > > > >> crucial (in fact, in The problem of > > > >> > > > >> the > > > >> > > > >> environment, he connects the > > > >> concept of perezhivanie, which has > > > >> > > > >> just > > > >> > > > >> introduced, to the development of > > > >> word meaning [p.345-346, also > > > >> > > > >> cited > > > >> > > > >> in my paper]). However, in my > > > >> view, in the last Vygotsky the > > > >> > > > >> focus is > > > >> > > > >> not anymore primarily on the > > > >> word-meaning as formed for things > > > >> > > > >> (or > > > >> > > > >> collections of things, as in the > > > >> ontogenetic research with > > > >> > > > >> Sakharov), but the focus is now in the > > > >> formation of meaning for holistic > > > >> situations. > > > >> > > > >> Best regards, > > > >> > > > >> Marc. > > > >> > > > >> 2017-01-03 19:16 GMT+01:00 > > > >> Alfredo Jornet Gil< > > > >> > > > >> a.j.gil@iped.uio.no > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> >: > > > >> > > > >> Hi Marc, all, > > > >> > > > >> thanks for joining and for > > > >> your interesting work, which I > > > >> > > > >> follow > > > >> > > > >> since I became aware of it. I > > > >> appreciate the way in your > > > >> > > > >> paper you > > > >> > > > >> show careful and honest > > > >> attention to the texts of the authors > > > >> > > > >> involved, but perhaps most of > > > >> all I appreciate that the > > > >> > > > >> paper makes > > > >> > > > >> the transformational > > > >> dimension related to struggle and change > > > >> > > > >> salient, a dimension all > > > >> papers deemed central to > > > >> > > > >> perezhivanie. And I > > > >> > > > >> have learned more about > > > >> Vasilyuk by reading your paper. But > > > >> > > > >> I also > > > >> > > > >> see that we have approached > > > >> the question of perezhivanie > > > >> > > > >> differently > > > >> > > > >> and I think that addressing > > > >> the questions that you raise > > > >> > > > >> concerning > > > >> > > > >> our article may be a good way > > > >> to both respond and discuss > > > >> > > > >> your paper. > > > >> > > > >> I am aware that our use of > > > >> the term monism may be > > > >> > > > >> problematic to > > > >> > > > >> some, and N. Veresov, who has > > > >> recently written about this > > > >> > > > >> (see > > > >> > > > >> attached article), warns > > > >> against the dangers of simply > > > >> > > > >> moving from > > > >> > > > >> dualism into an > > > >> undifferentiating monism that relativizes > > > >> > > > >> everything, > > > >> > > > >> making development > > > >> un-studiable. This seems to be the way in > > > >> > > > >> which > > > >> > > > >> you have understood our > > > >> argument, and of course this is not > > > >> > > > >> what we are or want to be doing. > > > >> > > > >> Probably many will think that > > > >> *dialectical materialism* > > > >> > > > >> rather than > > > >> > > > >> monism is the proper term, > > > >> and I could agree with them; we > > > >> > > > >> do in fact > > > >> > > > >> use dialectical materialism > > > >> there and elsewhere. Yet, we > > > >> > > > >> wanted to > > > >> > > > >> emphasise the Spinozist > > > >> influence (an influence that also > > > >> > > > >> runs > > > >> > > > >> through Marx) and so we found > > > >> it appropriate to use the term > > > >> > > > >> monism, > > > >> > > > >> a term that Vygotsky uses > > > >> before arguing that Spinoza > > > >> > > > >> "develops an essentially materialistic view" > > > >> > > > >> (Collected Works, Vol. 6, p. > > > >> 124). For us, the aim is > > > >> > > > >> working out > > > >> > > > >> ways to empirically examine > > > >> and formulate problems in ways > > > >> > > > >> that do > > > >> > > > >> not reify a mind-body dualism. > > > >> > > > >> Although overcoming dualism > > > >> is foundational to the CHAT > > > >> > > > >> paradigm, I > > > >> > > > >> would however not say that > > > >> Vygotsky did get to solve all of > > > >> > > > >> the > > > >> > > > >> problems that Cartesian > > > >> dualism had created for psychology, > > > >> > > > >> even > > > >> > > > >> though he recognised those > > > >> problems brilliantly as early as > > > >> > > > >> in the > > > >> > > > >> "Crisis". It should suffice > > > >> to cite Vygotsky's own remarks, > > > >> > > > >> which we quote in the paper (and which A.N. > > > >> > > > >> Leont'ev mentions in the > > > >> introduction to the collected > > > >> > > > >> works), where > > > >> > > > >> Vygotsky explicitly critiques > > > >> some of his own prior ideas > > > >> > > > >> for failing > > > >> > > > >> to overcome dualism. We agree > > > >> with those who, like F. G. > > > >> > > > >> Rey, see > > > >> > > > >> Vygotsky's project as a > > > >> developing rather than as a > > > >> > > > >> finalised one. > > > >> > > > >> The fact is that Vygotsky was > > > >> building a theory on the unity > > > >> > > > >> of the > > > >> > > > >> affect and the intellect that > > > >> was to be grounded on Spinoza, > > > >> > > > >> and what > > > >> > > > >> we try to do is to explore > > > >> how perezhivanie, as a concept > > > >> > > > >> being > > > >> > > > >> developed during the same > > > >> period (but not finalised or > > > >> > > > >> totally > > > >> > > > >> settled!), could be seen from > > > >> the perspective of the > > > >> > > > >> Spinozist Vygotsky. > > > >> > > > >> As you note, in our article > > > >> we argue that, if one takes the > > > >> > > > >> Spinozist > > > >> > > > >> one-substance approach, > > > >> classical concepts used in > > > >> > > > >> non-classical > > > >> > > > >> psychology, at least in the > > > >> way they are commonly used in > > > >> > > > >> the current > > > >> > > > >> literature, should be > > > >> revised. One such concept is > > > >> > > > >> mediation. And I > > > >> > > > >> personally do not have much > > > >> of a problem when mediation is > > > >> > > > >> used to > > > >> > > > >> denote the fundamental fact > > > >> that every thing exists always > > > >> > > > >> through > > > >> > > > >> *another*, never in and of > > > >> itself. But I do think that it is > > > >> > > > >> problematic to identify > > > >> MEDIATORS, such as "a meaning", as a > > > >> > > > >> means to > > > >> > > > >> account for or explain > > > >> developmental processes and learning > > > >> > > > >> events, > > > >> > > > >> precisely because it is > > > >> there, at least in my view, that > > > >> > > > >> dualism creeps in. > > > >> > > > >> For example, I find it > > > >> paradoxical that you are concerned > > > >> > > > >> that our > > > >> > > > >> monist approach risks turning > > > >> perezhivanie into a useless > > > >> > > > >> category > > > >> > > > >> because it may be used to > > > >> explain everything and nothing, > > > >> > > > >> and yet you > > > >> > > > >> do not seem to have a problem > > > >> using the term mediation to > > > >> > > > >> account for > > > >> > > > >> the transformation of > > > >> perezhivanie without clearly > > > >> > > > >> elaborating on how > > > >> > > > >> mediation does change > > > >> anything or what it looks like as a > > > >> > > > >> real > > > >> > > > >> process. How is it different > > > >> saying that a perezhivanie > > > >> > > > >> mediates the > > > >> > > > >> experiencing-as-struggle from > > > >> simply saying that it > > > >> > > > >> "affects" or > > > >> > > > >> "determines" it? Indeed, if > > > >> perezhivanie mediates > > > >> > > > >> experiencing-as-struggle, > > > >> does not experiencing-as-struglgle > > > >> > > > >> too > > > >> > > > >> mediate perezhivanie? And do > > > >> not both may be said to mediate > > > >> > > > >> development, or development mediate them? Is > > > >> not this explaining everything > > > >> and nothing? > > > >> > > > >> I do believe you can argue > > > >> that there is a difference between > > > >> > > > >> mediation and classical > > > >> psychology's cause-effect relations, > > > >> > > > >> but to > > > >> > > > >> show this you need to dig > > > >> into the dialectical underpinnings > > > >> > > > >> of the > > > >> > > > >> theory. In your paper, you > > > >> offer a nice analysis of a lovely > > > >> > > > >> case of > > > >> > > > >> a teacher who, in dealing > > > >> with a challenge with one of her > > > >> > > > >> students, > > > >> > > > >> changes her perezhivanie. I > > > >> think you can rightly argue that > > > >> > > > >> there is > > > >> > > > >> a semiotic transformation, > > > >> and I fully support your > > > >> > > > >> statement that by > > > >> > > > >> studying discourse we can > > > >> empirically approach questions of > > > >> > > > >> psychological development. > > > >> The contradictions you show as > > > >> > > > >> being > > > >> > > > >> involved and resolved > > > >> resonate really well with what I > > > >> > > > >> experience as > > > >> > > > >> a parent or as a teacher in > > > >> the classroom. Yet, without > > > >> > > > >> unpacking > > > >> > > > >> what this "mediation" taking > > > >> place between one perezhivanie > > > >> > > > >> and the > > > >> > > > >> next one means as a concrete > > > >> and real, the same analysis > > > >> > > > >> could be done taking an information processing > > > >> approach: > > > >> > > > >> there is an situation that is > > > >> processed (represented?) in > > > >> > > > >> one way, > > > >> > > > >> which then leads to a > > > >> (cognitive) dissonance, and then there > > > >> > > > >> is a > > > >> > > > >> cognitive resolution by means > > > >> of which the situation is > > > >> > > > >> presented > > > >> > > > >> differently in consciousness > > > >> (indeed, when seen in this way, > > > >> > > > >> the term > > > >> > > > >> perezhivanie and the term > > > >> "representation" become almost > > > >> > > > >> indistinguishable). How is > > > >> mediation, as an analytical > > > >> > > > >> concept, > > > >> > > > >> helping here? And most > > > >> importantly to the question of > > > >> > > > >> perezhivanie, > > > >> > > > >> how is this analysis going to > > > >> show the internal connection > > > >> > > > >> between > > > >> > > > >> intellect and affect that > > > >> Vygotsky formulates as > > > >> > > > >> constitutive of the notion of perezhivanie? > > > >> > > > >> I believe that the key lies > > > >> in understanding what Vygotsky > > > >> > > > >> means when > > > >> > > > >> he says that perezhivanie is > > > >> a unit of analysis. I will not > > > >> > > > >> repeat > > > >> > > > >> here what already is written > > > >> in at least a couple of the > > > >> > > > >> articles in > > > >> > > > >> the special issue (Blunden, > > > >> ours), that is the difference > > > >> > > > >> between > > > >> > > > >> analysis by elements and unit > > > >> analysis (Vygotsky 1987). A > > > >> > > > >> unit > > > >> > > > >> analysis approach is > > > >> consistent with Spinoza, for whom > > > >> > > > >> cause-effect > > > >> > > > >> explanations were not > > > >> adequate, requiring instead an > > > >> > > > >> understanding of > > > >> > > > >> self-development, > > > >> perezhivanie as a kernel cell for the > > > >> > > > >> development > > > >> > > > >> of personality. And I think > > > >> you may be after this in your > > > >> > > > >> article in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From ablunden@mira.net Wed Jan 18 15:53:03 2017 From: ablunden@mira.net (Andy Blunden) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2017 10:53:03 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Fate of a Man (from Misha) In-Reply-To: <89d467ea-8552-c627-b265-0c646e961f09@mira.net> References: <048522a2-cca0-3e56-cae2-f2142b9fbd5a@mira.net> <1484427999407.2877@iped.uio.no> <2270f5e7-7d82-5150-89a3-808a4e20b89b@mira.net> <89d467ea-8552-c627-b265-0c646e961f09@mira.net> Message-ID: <01c4d310-e4f8-d79b-bacf-284438c6e76d@mira.net> Misha went on to criticise my characterisation of the boy's life-world, and I have to say that I was mistaken about that. The boy's life world is also "difficult" in Vasilyuk's terms. ... Andy ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making On 18/01/2017 7:50 PM, Andy Blunden wrote: > Misha, a Russian psychologist who has assisted Mike and me > in analysing previous movies, offers this comment on "Fate > of a Man." > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > I need to re-watch this emotional film. After a while I > can write something regarding your theme. Glad to hear > you. I think we'll have a lot of discussions. Only one > thing I want to say now - This movie is not an > /illustration/ of perezhivanie but it /is/ really the > perezhivanie. > > I re-watched the movie. Had a wonderful, unforgettable > experience. Andrey, being a simple Soviet carpenter before > the War, fell into the millstone of hard, bloody war by > fate. He miraculously managed to survive, losing his son > on the front, his beloved wife and two daughters in his > native village near Voronezh. The war has warped him, > forced to endure emotional anguish, physical pain and > spiritual suffering. The war has truly wounded his soul, > humiliated him as a man, but he remained a man of great > kindness, taking care of the orphan boy, treating him like > his own son. The film shows massive heroism of the Soviet > people. Reading the story /Destiny of a Man/ by Mikhail > Sholokhov and watching the movie of Sergey Bondarchuk with > the same name, you can understand what it means to love > the Motherland truly. Pain and anxiety for homeland and > personal tragedy of the individual and the specific family > were organically fused in the fate of Andrei Sokolov. > > Andrey's suffering is simultaneously private and public. > But the hero of the film found the strength in himself not > to fall down, and continue to work for the use and benefit > of the country in the post-war period, and, staying alone, > to raise the kid without assistants, the child who had > experienced the intensive grief because of losing parents. > The peculiarity of perezhivanie in this film is closely > interwoven with the social disaster caused by the > treachery and cruelty of the Germans in the great > Patriotic war, and personal grief associated with the loss > of his beloved family. The score of V. Basner naturally > complements and musically ornaments this movie. It > resembles the mood of Shostakovich's symphonies, where you > can observe fear, terror and mental confusion, but it > remains with kind and optimistic fundamentals. Sincere, > not-sugary kindness and human warmth emanates from this > strong and powerful film. The power of the spirit of this > man is the good (kind and strong) character of such > person, united with the solid beliefs of a healthy moral > order. > > The film triggers a strong, intense perezhivanie from the > audience, where an experience of art even gives priority > way to perezhivanie of life itself, without losing at the > same time tonality of high art. > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > On 18/01/2017 12:39 PM, Andy Blunden wrote: >> Thank you Marc! It was the third "plane" which was my >> intention in providing "Fate of a Man" for discussion. >> You picked out what were for me also the main (but by no >> means the only) instances of perezhivanija in this movie. >> >> It seems to me that Sokolov (the author) offers one >> perezhivanie in particular as the main theme of the >> movie. At the beginning of the movie, the man and boy >> walk up the path to the camera and at the end of the >> movie they walk off together again. So this is the >> central theme. As you say, when Sokolov's family has all >> been killed, even his talented war-hero son who was going >> to be a famous mathematician, his life has become >> meaningless. I really liked your reflections of Sokolov's >> reflections too. He sees the young orphan boy who, he >> discovers, has no family and doesn't even know what town >> he comes from, but is aimlessly living on pieces of >> rubbish. He sees that the two of them are in the same >> situation. So after some time mulling this over a they >> sit together in the truck, he lies to the boy and tells >> him that he is the boy's father, and they embrace. But >> the boy questions this and he reasserts his claim and the >> boy accepts this. The man is able to define a new meaning >> for his life; he has done this autonomously without the >> help of a therapist, but he still needs another, the boy, >> to embody that meaning. But he knows it is his own >> invention. The boy on the other hand has to be made to >> believe it is true; he is not sufficiently mature to >> manufacture this meaning himself, but as a child he can >> be guided by an adult. As you say, Marc, it is very >> significant when Sokolov tells us how he is now, again, >> worried about his own death. What if I died in my sleep? >> that would be a shock for my son! >> >> For me, this reflection causes me to look back on the >> man's whole struggle during the war: in the first phase >> he does not differentiate between his life as a father >> and husband and his life as a Soviet citizen - war is his >> duty and he is confident, as is everyone else, of >> victory. His bravery in driving his truck to the front >> line under fire reflects the fact that he has never >> imagined his own death. Then he finds himself prostrate >> before 2 Nazi soldiers who we assume are going among the >> wounded shooting anyone who has survived. But >> surprisingly, he is allowed to live, but is to be used as >> a slave. Sokolov has been confronted by his own mortality >> for the first time and he chooses life, but accepts >> slavery (Sartre and Hegel both thematize this moment in >> their philosophy). In this second phase of Sokolov's life >> he is a survivor. Everything hinges on surviving and >> returning to his wife and family. As you point out, Marc, >> his later reflections on this are particularly poignant, >> when he discovers the futility of this hope. Eventually, >> the life of forced labour becomes unbearable. He cries >> out: "Why are we forced to dig 3 cubic metres when 1 >> cubic meter is enough for a grave!" Sokolov has accepted >> and embraced death after all. (Transition to the third >> phase.) To his German masters this is an unendurable act >> of defiance. As David points out, there are flaws in the >> scene which follows, but ... he confronts his own death >> defiantly, stares it in the eye, spits on it, and his >> life again gains meaning as a "brave Soviet soldier" >> unafraid of death even in such an impossible moment. Not >> only does he survive, but takes the Nazi Colonel prisoner >> and hands the war plans over to the Red Army. Now, when >> he is offered the chance to return to his wife as a war >> hero he declines and asks to be sent back to the front. >> His life has adopted this new meaning which casts his >> life as a father into the shade. He no longer fears >> death. But he is persuaded to take time off and learns of >> the death of his family. As Marc relates, the continued >> survival of his son, who is now also a war hero, provides >> continued meaning and integrates the two themes in his >> life. This takes work, as Marc points out, and he has the >> assistance of an older man, in achieving this >> redefinition of his life. But tragically, with the death >> of his son (and NB the end of the war, albeit in victory) >> his life is again without meaning. Fourth phase. He has >> survived, but has no purpose. By becoming a father again >> (Fifth phase), he regains the fear of death and meaning >> in his life. It is real work, and we witness this >> psychological turmoil as he copes with the idea that this >> scruffy orphan boy could be a son to him, and eventually >> he manages it. >> >> The transition between each phase is a critical period >> during which Sokolov's personality is transformed. Note >> also, that there is a premonition of this perezhivanie in >> Sokolov's earlier life: his family is wiped out in the >> Civil War and the famine of 1922, then he meets his >> wife-to-be, also raised in an orphanage, and they >> together create a life and have 17 happy years before the >> Nazi invasion intrudes. So from the beginning of the >> movie we are introduced to the main theme. >> >> These are the main moments in the movie, which caused me >> to select it for discussion rather than any other movie. >> Also, there is no doubt that in producing this movie in >> 1958 the Soviet government was engaged with its people, >> in a process of collective perezhivanie and by reflecting >> on the collective perezhivanie during the period of the >> war, before and after, they aim to assist the people in >> collectively assigning meaning to this terrible suffering >> and like the man and his "son" walking again into the >> future. As a propaganda movie, of course, it is open to >> much criticism, but that is hardly the point. I >> appreciate Marc's analysis in terms of the other concepts >> he has introduced. I wouldn't mind a recap on these. In >> terms of Vasilyuk's concepts, Sokolov's life-world is >> *simple and difficult*. The boy's life world is *simple >> and easy*. >> >> Can we continue to discuss "Fate of a Man", while I open >> another movie for analysis? I think there are at least 10 >> subscribers to this list who have published in learned >> journals on the topic of perezhivanie in childhood. >> Perhaps one of you would like to reflect on the boy's >> perezhivanija? >> >> Andy >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------ >> Andy Blunden >> http://home.mira.net/~andy >> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making >> >> On 18/01/2017 5:14 AM, Marc Clar? wrote: >>> Hi, all, >>> >>> and thank you, Andy, for sharing this amazing film, >>> which I didn't know. I >>> think it will be very useful to share and discuss our >>> respective views on >>> perezhivanie. >>> >>> In my view, the film could be analyzed in terms of >>> perezhivanie in three >>> different planes. First, we could consider the person >>> who watches the film, >>> and we could study how the meaning she forms for the >>> film restructures her >>> relationship with aspects of her real life -such as, for >>> example, her own >>> death or the death of a beloved one, etc. (perhaps this >>> is a little bit >>> like what Beth and Monica, or Veresov and Fleer, do with >>> their study of >>> playworlds?). In this plane, which would be perhaps the >>> most naturalistic >>> one, the film could be studied as an human-made cultural >>> artifact which >>> restuctures psychological functions; here, the meaning >>> formed for the film >>> by who watches it and uses it as mediator in her >>> relation to her real life >>> would be an m-perezhivanie. >>> >>> In a second plane, we could proceed as if the film was >>> real life, and we >>> could consider Sokolov telling his story to the man he >>> meets by the river >>> (a little bit like Carla telling her story to me). In >>> this plane, Sokolov's >>> narrative (i.e., what is showed to us as narrated >>> flashback) could be >>> considered as a cultural artifact that Sokolov uses to >>> relate to all what >>> happened to him. At this plane, the meaning of this >>> narrative would be the >>> m-perezhivanie that, in that moment, mediates the >>> relationship between >>> Sokolov and the war events he experienced years ago (but >>> these events are >>> still very present to him, so although relating to past >>> events, there is >>> here a Sokolov's activity [towards the past war events] >>> which is in present >>> -this echoes Christopher when, within our conversations, >>> said: ?Part of >>> this might also be a question of what it means to >>> describe and represent >>> one's own perezhivanie figuratively/narratively (whether >>> to others, or to >>> oneself), as opposed to living that perezhivanie. >>> Especially if the attempt >>> to capture/represent one's own perezhivanie is, perhaps, >>> also central to >>> the living of it?? >>> >>> In a third plane, we could proceed as if Sokolov's >>> narration was not a >>> retrospective narration, but the on-time sequence of >>> events with on-time >>> Sokolov's explanation of these events (in the moments in >>> which the narrator >>> voice is assumed within the flashback). In this plane, >>> there are several >>> interesting perezhivanie phenomena. Clearly, there is a >>> Sokolov's activity >>> of experiencing-as-struggle, which initiates when he >>> realizes that all his >>> family, except one son, had been killed 2 years ago. At >>> this moment, his >>> life becomes meaningless; the meaning (m-perezhivanie) >>> he uses to relate to >>> all his life (including the past) at this moment is >>> expressed in his >>> conversation with his oncle: ?it's got to be that this >>> life of mine is >>> nothing but a nightmare!?. In this moment, Sokolov's >>> past in the prision >>> camp becomes also meaningless: then, his link to life >>> (the m-perezhivanie >>> that made being alive meaningful to him) was meeting his >>> family; but at >>> that time his family was already dead, so when he >>> discovers it, he realizes >>> that this m-perezhivanie (the idea of meeting his >>> family) was linking him >>> to death, not to life, so all his efforts to surviving >>> become meaningless: >>> ?Every night, when I was a prisioner, I talked with >>> them. Now it turns out >>> that for two years I was talking with the dead??. In >>> this conversation, >>> however, his oncle offers him an alternative >>> m-perezhivanie to relate to >>> his life: he still has a son, so the m-perehivanie of >>> meeting his family >>> can still turns Sokolov's life meaningful: ?you've got >>> to go on living. You >>> have to find Anatoly. When the war is over, your son >>> will get married, you >>> will live with them. You will take up your carpentry >>> again, play with your >>> grandkids?. It takes some time to Sokolov to enter into >>> this >>> m-perezhivanie, but he does it and his life becomes >>> meaningful again: ?and >>> then, unexpectedly, I've got a gleam of sunlight?. But, >>> then, Anatoly also >>> dies. How to keep living? Here, Sokolov holds the >>> m-perezhivanie that >>> linked him to life until that moment, and therefore, he >>> needs a son; >>> pretending being the father of Vanya turns his life >>> meaningful again. >>> >>> Another interesting thing, still at that level, is how >>> Sokolov's relation >>> with his own immediate death changes along the different >>> occasions in which >>> he faces it. I thing here there are examples of >>> experiencing-as-contemplation -in my view, this is not >>> experiencing-as-struggle because the situation of >>> impossibility (the >>> immediate death) is removed existentially (Sokolov's >>> life is given back to >>> him), so that there is not a permanent situation of >>> impossibility which is >>> initially meaningless and is turned into meaningful. In >>> each occasion in >>> which Sokolov is faced with his immediate death, the >>> m-perezhivanie that >>> mediates this relationship is different. When he is >>> captured, his >>> m-perezhivanie is expressed as: ?here's my death coming >>> after me?. When he >>> is conducted to meet the nazi official, the >>> m-perezhivanie is expressed as: >>> ?the end of your misery?, ?to my death and my release of >>> this torment, I >>> will drink?. In the first, the death is running after >>> Sokolov; in the >>> second, it is Sokolov happily going to meet death. >>> Later, at the end of the >>> film, he faces his immediate death again, and the >>> m-perezhivanie is >>> expressed as: ?I'm really worried that I might die in my >>> sleep, and that >>> would frighten my little son?. >>> >>> Well, just some thoughts after watching this wonderful >>> film. >>> >>> Best regards, >>> >>> Marc. >>> >>> 2017-01-15 0:06 GMT+01:00 Christopher Schuck >>> : >>> >>>> Yes, definitely that article! And specifically, when I >>>> used "pivoting" I >>>> couldn't help but think of Beth's earlier example about >>>> how a child will >>>> use a stick as a pivot for a horse. Perhaps a somewhat >>>> different >>>> application but related, no? >>>> >>>> On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 4:06 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >>>> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Chris, all, >>>>> >>>>> your post is totally relevant to Beth's and Monica's >>>>> article in the >>>>> special issue. They write about film and perezhivanie >>>>> (quoting Sobchack) >>>>> the following: >>>>> >>>>> The reason that film allows us to glimpse the future >>>>> is that there is a >>>>> connection between filmic time and ?real? time: ?The >>>>> images of a film >>>> exist >>>>> in the world as a temporal flow, within finitude and >>>>> situation. Indeed, >>>> the >>>>> fascination of the film is that it does not transcend our >>>> lived-experience >>>>> of temporality, but rather that it seems to partake of >>>>> it, to share it? >>>>> (1992, p. 60). >>>>> >>>>> And later >>>>> >>>>> "Specifically, the way that the flow of time becomes >>>>> multidirectional is >>>>> that ?rehearsals make it necessary to think of the >>>>> future in such a way >>>> as >>>>> to create a past? (1985, p. 39). As Schechner >>>>> ex-plains: ?In a very real >>>>> way the future ? the project coming into existence >>>>> through the process of >>>>> rehearsal ? determines the past: what will be kept >>>>> from earlier >>>> rehearsals >>>>> or from the ?source ma-terials? (1985, p. 39)." >>>>> >>>>> Alfredo >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ________________________________________ >>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>> >>>>> on behalf of Christopher Schuck >>>>> Sent: 14 January 2017 21:43 >>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Fate of a Man >>>>> >>>>> But that's both the limitation and strength of art or >>>>> fictional narrative >>>>> as opposed to real life, isn't it? That art focuses >>>>> our attention and >>>>> highlights certain features in a way that is idealized >>>>> and artificially >>>>> "designed" to convey something more clearly and purely >>>>> (but less >>>>> organically and authentically) than it would be >>>>> conveyed in the course of >>>>> living it, or observing someone else living it? One >>>>> way to get around >>>> this >>>>> would be, as David says, to analyze the film in terms >>>>> of clues as to the >>>>> stages of emergence. But maybe another way to use the >>>>> film would be to >>>> view >>>>> it not so much as a complete, self-sufficient >>>>> "example" of perezhivanie, >>>> as >>>>> a *tool *for pivoting back and forth between the >>>>> concept of perezhivanie >>>> as >>>>> imaginatively constructed (through fiction), and the >>>>> concept of >>>>> perezhivanie as imaginatively constructed (through our >>>>> real living >>>>> experience and observation of it). So, it would be the >>>>> *pivoting* between >>>>> these two manifestations of the concept (designed vs. >>>>> evolved, as David >>>> put >>>>> it) that reveals new insights about perezhivanie, >>>>> rather than >>>> understanding >>>>> the concept from the film per se. >>>>> >>>>> On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 3:08 PM, David Kellogg >>>>> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I think there's a good reason why Andy started a new >>>>>> thread on this: >>>>> he's a >>>>>> very tidy thinker (quite unlike yours truly) and he >>>>>> knows that one >>>> reason >>>>>> why xmca threads are seldom cumulative is that they >>>>>> digress to related >>>>>> problems without solving the immmediate ones. >>>>>> >>>>>> Yes, of course, a film allows us to consider an >>>>>> example of >>>>> "perezhivanie", >>>>>> but it is a designed perezhivanie rather than an >>>>>> evolved one; it >>>> doesn't >>>>>> explicitly display the various stages of emergence >>>>>> required for a >>>> genetic >>>>>> analysis, unless we analyze it not as a complete and >>>>>> finished work of >>>> art >>>>>> but instead for clues as to the stages of its >>>>>> creation (the way that, >>>> for >>>>>> example, "Quietly Flows the Don" was analyzed to >>>>>> determine its >>>>>> authenticity). >>>>>> >>>>>> I remember that In the original short story, the >>>>>> schnapps drinking >>>>>> scene seemed like pure sleight of hand: an >>>>>> artistically gratuitous >>>>> example >>>>>> of what eventually gave Soviet social realism such a >>>>>> bad name. >>>>>> >>>>>> David Kellogg >>>>>> Macquarie University >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 10:04 PM, Carol Macdonald < >>>> carolmacdon@gmail.com >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Fellow XMCa-ers >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I have watched it through now, thank you Andy, but >>>>>>> right now only >>>>>> empirical >>>>>>> psychological categories come to mind. I will watch >>>>>>> it again and in >>>>> the >>>>>>> meanwhile let my fellows with more recent experience of >>>> /perezhivanie/ >>>>>> take >>>>>>> the discussion further. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It is a kind of timeless story, and modern film >>>>>>> techniques would >>>>> perhaps >>>>>> be >>>>>>> more explicit. At the least I would say it has for >>>>>>> me a Russian >>>>>>> understanding of suffering, perhaps because of their >>>>>>> unique >>>> experience >>>>> of >>>>>>> it. But having said that, WWII must have generated >>>>>>> other similar >>>>>>> experiences, apart from the first part about >>>>>>> Andrei's family dying in >>>>> the >>>>>>> famine. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Carol >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 14 January 2017 at 02:15, Andy Blunden >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I watched it in two parts with subtitles: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x16w7fg_destiny-of-a-man- >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 1959-pt-1_creation >>>>>>>> http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x16wat4_destiny-of-a-man- >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 1959-pt-2_creation >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Andy >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Andy Blunden >>>>>>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy >>>>>>>> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective- >>>>> decision-making >>>>>>>> On 14/01/2017 2:35 AM, Beth Ferholt wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Thank you for taking us to a shared example. I >>>>>>>>>>> think that >>>>> having a >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Carol A Macdonald Ph.D (Edin) >>>>>>> Cultural Historical Activity Theory >>>>>>> Honorary Research Fellow: Department of Linguistics, >>>>>>> Unisa >>>>>>> alternative email address: tmacdoca@unisa.ac.za >>>>>>> >>> >> >> >> > > > From ablunden@mira.net Wed Jan 18 16:49:30 2017 From: ablunden@mira.net (Andy Blunden) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2017 11:49:30 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! In-Reply-To: References: <1483344752182.40904@iped.uio.no> <587124d9.d957620a.4a5a8.bd56@mx.google.com> <1483820996800.91513@iped.uio.no> <1484253698990.7728@iped.uio.no> <1484328718783.79382@iped.uio.no> <587cfc5a.4e38630a.aa4eb.5a5d@mx.google.com> <587fb753.1aa3630a.f3dd3.63b0@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <99f438f6-47f7-7bd2-174b-6f9625ae15e8@mira.net> Antti, firstly on "functionalism." There is an issue about conceiving of the mind as an aggregate of various psychological functions, as opposed to an integrated "system" in which every psychological function (e.g. perceiving, acting, cognising, reading, ...) entails a particular configuration of the entire system, and related issues. In this sense Vygotsky could be said to be a structuralist and definitely not a functionalist. Except of course, that as a Marxist he took the mind as the subjective aspect of a subject-object which includes social relations as its objective aspect. That is never what I have in mind when I talk about functionalism and structuralism however. By "functionalism" I am always referring to the sociological theory of Talcott Parsons and the tendency among Soviet Marxists to integrate this functionalist view into Marxist dogma. E.g., "the role of the petit bourgeoisie is to ..." By "structuralism" I mean the current of social theory growing out of Saussure's linguistics, Levy-Strauss's anthropology and Althusser's anti-Humanist Marxism. One must, of course, appreciate the insights which these currents of thinking bring to us, but when you get to the theories of social stasis of American Functionalism and the anti-Humanism of Louis Althusser, I confess it generates a visceral negative reaction from me. Like Anthony Giddens, I see functionalism and structuralism, together, as a bundle of theories of the world which pretends that there are "social forces" which act independently of the consciousness, intentions and understanding of the human actors through which they are active. Functionalism and structuralism are together one side of a polarity, the other of which is "hermeneutics" which lays all the emphasis on the interpretation of the world by individuals, whether by means of Freudian ideas, linguistic theories, literary criticism or "social psychology." Like Giddens I look for a third way, but unlike Giddens I look to a serious theory of cultural psychology, not a do-it-yourself psychology based on my own personal intuitions. I haven't followed the views of Alex Kozulin, Antti, so I will simply abstain on that question, but the Fedor Vasilyuk of today is emphatically not a Marxist. He emphasises the power of prayer, which is something quite foreign to the Marxist tradition. In 1984, when he wrote "The Psychology of Perezhivanie," however, his views reflected to an extent the view of Leontyev and his following, so in that sense and to that degree, he was a Marxist. But he did not interpret Marxism dogmatically in the way Vygotsky criticised in his day, and he was critical of Leontyev. BY turning to the tradition of Russian Orthodox Christianity, it does seem that Vasilyuk turned away from Marxism. Whether that is some kind of "humanism" I don't know. "Humanism" is a very polysemous word. Andy ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden On 19/01/2017 7:53 AM, Antti Rajala wrote: > .... > > I wonder if there is some confusion regarding the notion of functionalism. > Andy seems to refer to functionalism in social theory whereas David refers > to functionalistic psychological theory. Maybe they do not speak of the > same functionalism. Kozulin, suggested by Andy, seems to draw upon yet > another tradition, Russian humanism, in which life is seen as literature or > art. Perhaps, the preference for the notion of drama by Alfredo and > Nikolai, has some resonance with this tradition. > > Andy, Kozulin depicts Vasilyuk's humanism in sharp contrast with Marxism. > Do you agree? > > From mcole@ucsd.edu Wed Jan 18 17:07:37 2017 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2017 17:07:37 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] =?utf-8?q?Fwd=3A_Fw=3A_The_Learning_Sciences_and_Trump=E2=80=99s?= =?utf-8?q?_Presidency?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear Colleagues - This thrice forwarded note seems to warrant adding this essay as a subject line to consider the perezhivanie of American citizens who remain sleepless with fear for the future. Its quite amazing, really. So how do we, as professionals in our disciplines, address this issue? As David pointed out at the end of a recent post, humans have survived by the creation of "new mediational means" to confront their always changing environment. Yrjo Engestrom's work over along period of time has been devoted to studying conditions under which people, collectively, can take actions that improves the welfare of those participating. I'll be happy to follow along with the perezhivanie discussion, and I finally got a chance to watch Fate of a Man (actually, in Russian, the Fate of Mankind seems a possible proper translation). I am going to post the article link on a separate threat about the Forwarded message ---------- From: Allan Luke Date: Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 4:31 PM Subject: Fw: The Learning Sciences and Trump?s Presidency this in from Thomas Phillip and colleagues at UCLA Allan Luke https://www.reverbnation.com/allanluke https://eprints.qut.edu.au/view/person/Luke,_Allan.html https://scholar.google.com.au/citations?user=O8--Jr8AAAAJ&hl=en https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Allan_Luke ------------------------------ *From:* Thomas M. Philip *Sent:* Thursday, 19 January 2017 08:09 *To:* Aachey Susan Jurow; Shirin Vossoughi; Megan Bang; Zavala, Miguel *Subject:* The Learning Sciences and Trump?s Presidency Dear colleagues, The U.S. general election last November made prominent to many the deep-seated tensions and hostilities we face as a nation. With the hope of seeding a dialogue within our community of scholars, we?ve written an essay that explores the role of research on learning, particularly the Learning Sciences, in the wake of Trump?s election and the proliferation of far-right populist nationalism across the globe. The essay will be published in the next issue of Cognition and Instruction. In the meantime, it is available on the journal?s blog (link provided below if the hyperlink doesn't work). We hope the ideas and questions in the essay will stimulate a sustained conversation that forges new, politically relevant paths for our field. We invite you to join this discussion through the *moderated* comment section on the blog. We look forward to hearing your thoughts. Please feel free to share this email and invite other researchers and educators into this conversation. *The Politics of Learning Writing Collective* Thomas M. Philip, Susan Jurow, Shirin Vossoughi, Megan Bang, and Miguel Zavala http://cognitionandinstruction.com/engagements-the-learning- sciences-in-a-new-era-of-u-s-nationalism/ From mcole@ucsd.edu Wed Jan 18 17:12:37 2017 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2017 17:12:37 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism Message-ID: This is a new thread. To participate, check the journal blog link. From mcole@ucsd.edu Wed Jan 18 17:31:15 2017 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2017 17:31:15 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism Message-ID: In following the perezhivanie thread I encountered the note I re-membered. And interestingly mis-remembered. A translation into my focus on mediational means. He places the starting point of the process of transformative action at the emergence of quasi-needs (from Kurt Lewin). That seems correct to me. The new mediational means emerge under environmental presses. Ever functionalist ego need a goal(!). (The problem with functionalism) In David's words, Perhaps the place we should look for "exaptations" that can save both our personalities and our environment is not in our evolved needs, but in yet to be designed quasi-needs. Artificial organs, after all, always suggest new and ever more artificial functions, like chess and language. This point seems worth keeping in mind as we look at where this group of critical scholars who work within the Learning Sciences disciplinary framework would like to lead us. mike From mcole@ucsd.edu Wed Jan 18 18:02:20 2017 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2017 18:02:20 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Fate of a Man (from Misha) In-Reply-To: <01c4d310-e4f8-d79b-bacf-284438c6e76d@mira.net> References: <048522a2-cca0-3e56-cae2-f2142b9fbd5a@mira.net> <1484427999407.2877@iped.uio.no> <2270f5e7-7d82-5150-89a3-808a4e20b89b@mira.net> <89d467ea-8552-c627-b265-0c646e961f09@mira.net> <01c4d310-e4f8-d79b-bacf-284438c6e76d@mira.net> Message-ID: It was extremely interesting to read Misha's interpretation of Fate of a Man. It provides evidence against my speculation that it might have been interpreted as Destiny of Mankind. If I understand correctly, Misha is saying that the perezhivanie of entire populations is reflected in the individual consciousness of the character. And the film, combining multiple media and a strong, patriotic narrative, creates perezhivanie in the viewer. I did not, personally, experience perezhivanie, while watching the film, at least not perezhivanie of the sort that Misha is referring to. My orientation toward viewing it, and my own cultural-historical background interfered. I was viewing it through the lens of our discussion and my acute awareness of the elisions and misrepresentations of these events in historical time. This lens got in the way. Misha's note is a good reminder of the difficulties of interpretation that we all face in dealing with this topic! At the same time, there was no missing different forms that correspond to different "kinds" or "conceptions of kinds" of perezhivanie in the film. mike On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 3:53 PM, Andy Blunden wrote: > Misha went on to criticise my characterisation of the boy's life-world, > and I have to say that I was mistaken about that. The boy's life world is > also "difficult" in Vasilyuk's terms. ... Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Andy Blunden > http://home.mira.net/~andy > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > On 18/01/2017 7:50 PM, Andy Blunden wrote: > >> Misha, a Russian psychologist who has assisted Mike and me in analysing >> previous movies, offers this comment on "Fate of a Man." >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------ >> I need to re-watch this emotional film. After a while I can write >> something regarding your theme. Glad to hear you. I think we'll have a lot >> of discussions. Only one thing I want to say now - This movie is not an >> /illustration/ of perezhivanie but it /is/ really the perezhivanie. >> >> I re-watched the movie. Had a wonderful, unforgettable experience. >> Andrey, being a simple Soviet carpenter before the War, fell into the >> millstone of hard, bloody war by fate. He miraculously managed to survive, >> losing his son on the front, his beloved wife and two daughters in his >> native village near Voronezh. The war has warped him, forced to endure >> emotional anguish, physical pain and spiritual suffering. The war has truly >> wounded his soul, humiliated him as a man, but he remained a man of great >> kindness, taking care of the orphan boy, treating him like his own son. The >> film shows massive heroism of the Soviet people. Reading the story /Destiny >> of a Man/ by Mikhail Sholokhov and watching the movie of Sergey Bondarchuk >> with the same name, you can understand what it means to love the Motherland >> truly. Pain and anxiety for homeland and personal tragedy of the individual >> and the specific family were organically fused in the fate of Andrei >> Sokolov. >> >> Andrey's suffering is simultaneously private and public. But the hero of >> the film found the strength in himself not to fall down, and continue to >> work for the use and benefit of the country in the post-war period, and, >> staying alone, to raise the kid without assistants, the child who had >> experienced the intensive grief because of losing parents. The peculiarity >> of perezhivanie in this film is closely interwoven with the social disaster >> caused by the treachery and cruelty of the Germans in the great Patriotic >> war, and personal grief associated with the loss of his beloved family. The >> score of V. Basner naturally complements and musically ornaments this >> movie. It resembles the mood of Shostakovich's symphonies, where you can >> observe fear, terror and mental confusion, but it remains with kind and >> optimistic fundamentals. Sincere, not-sugary kindness and human warmth >> emanates from this strong and powerful film. The power of the spirit of >> this man is the good (kind and strong) character of such person, united >> with the solid beliefs of a healthy moral order. >> >> The film triggers a strong, intense perezhivanie from the audience, where >> an experience of art even gives priority way to perezhivanie of life >> itself, without losing at the same time tonality of high art. >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------ >> On 18/01/2017 12:39 PM, Andy Blunden wrote: >> >>> Thank you Marc! It was the third "plane" which was my intention in >>> providing "Fate of a Man" for discussion. You picked out what were for me >>> also the main (but by no means the only) instances of perezhivanija in this >>> movie. >>> >>> It seems to me that Sokolov (the author) offers one perezhivanie in >>> particular as the main theme of the movie. At the beginning of the movie, >>> the man and boy walk up the path to the camera and at the end of the movie >>> they walk off together again. So this is the central theme. As you say, >>> when Sokolov's family has all been killed, even his talented war-hero son >>> who was going to be a famous mathematician, his life has become >>> meaningless. I really liked your reflections of Sokolov's reflections too. >>> He sees the young orphan boy who, he discovers, has no family and doesn't >>> even know what town he comes from, but is aimlessly living on pieces of >>> rubbish. He sees that the two of them are in the same situation. So after >>> some time mulling this over a they sit together in the truck, he lies to >>> the boy and tells him that he is the boy's father, and they embrace. But >>> the boy questions this and he reasserts his claim and the boy accepts this. >>> The man is able to define a new meaning for his life; he has done this >>> autonomously without the help of a therapist, but he still needs another, >>> the boy, to embody that meaning. But he knows it is his own invention. The >>> boy on the other hand has to be made to believe it is true; he is not >>> sufficiently mature to manufacture this meaning himself, but as a child he >>> can be guided by an adult. As you say, Marc, it is very significant when >>> Sokolov tells us how he is now, again, worried about his own death. What if >>> I died in my sleep? that would be a shock for my son! >>> >>> For me, this reflection causes me to look back on the man's whole >>> struggle during the war: in the first phase he does not differentiate >>> between his life as a father and husband and his life as a Soviet citizen - >>> war is his duty and he is confident, as is everyone else, of victory. His >>> bravery in driving his truck to the front line under fire reflects the fact >>> that he has never imagined his own death. Then he finds himself prostrate >>> before 2 Nazi soldiers who we assume are going among the wounded shooting >>> anyone who has survived. But surprisingly, he is allowed to live, but is to >>> be used as a slave. Sokolov has been confronted by his own mortality for >>> the first time and he chooses life, but accepts slavery (Sartre and Hegel >>> both thematize this moment in their philosophy). In this second phase of >>> Sokolov's life he is a survivor. Everything hinges on surviving and >>> returning to his wife and family. As you point out, Marc, his later >>> reflections on this are particularly poignant, when he discovers the >>> futility of this hope. Eventually, the life of forced labour becomes >>> unbearable. He cries out: "Why are we forced to dig 3 cubic metres when 1 >>> cubic meter is enough for a grave!" Sokolov has accepted and embraced death >>> after all. (Transition to the third phase.) To his German masters this is >>> an unendurable act of defiance. As David points out, there are flaws in the >>> scene which follows, but ... he confronts his own death defiantly, stares >>> it in the eye, spits on it, and his life again gains meaning as a "brave >>> Soviet soldier" unafraid of death even in such an impossible moment. Not >>> only does he survive, but takes the Nazi Colonel prisoner and hands the war >>> plans over to the Red Army. Now, when he is offered the chance to return to >>> his wife as a war hero he declines and asks to be sent back to the front. >>> His life has adopted this new meaning which casts his life as a father into >>> the shade. He no longer fears death. But he is persuaded to take time off >>> and learns of the death of his family. As Marc relates, the continued >>> survival of his son, who is now also a war hero, provides continued meaning >>> and integrates the two themes in his life. This takes work, as Marc points >>> out, and he has the assistance of an older man, in achieving this >>> redefinition of his life. But tragically, with the death of his son (and NB >>> the end of the war, albeit in victory) his life is again without meaning. >>> Fourth phase. He has survived, but has no purpose. By becoming a father >>> again (Fifth phase), he regains the fear of death and meaning in his life. >>> It is real work, and we witness this psychological turmoil as he copes with >>> the idea that this scruffy orphan boy could be a son to him, and eventually >>> he manages it. >>> >>> The transition between each phase is a critical period during which >>> Sokolov's personality is transformed. Note also, that there is a >>> premonition of this perezhivanie in Sokolov's earlier life: his family is >>> wiped out in the Civil War and the famine of 1922, then he meets his >>> wife-to-be, also raised in an orphanage, and they together create a life >>> and have 17 happy years before the Nazi invasion intrudes. So from the >>> beginning of the movie we are introduced to the main theme. >>> >>> These are the main moments in the movie, which caused me to select it >>> for discussion rather than any other movie. Also, there is no doubt that in >>> producing this movie in 1958 the Soviet government was engaged with its >>> people, in a process of collective perezhivanie and by reflecting on the >>> collective perezhivanie during the period of the war, before and after, >>> they aim to assist the people in collectively assigning meaning to this >>> terrible suffering and like the man and his "son" walking again into the >>> future. As a propaganda movie, of course, it is open to much criticism, but >>> that is hardly the point. I appreciate Marc's analysis in terms of the >>> other concepts he has introduced. I wouldn't mind a recap on these. In >>> terms of Vasilyuk's concepts, Sokolov's life-world is *simple and >>> difficult*. The boy's life world is *simple and easy*. >>> >>> Can we continue to discuss "Fate of a Man", while I open another movie >>> for analysis? I think there are at least 10 subscribers to this list who >>> have published in learned journals on the topic of perezhivanie in >>> childhood. Perhaps one of you would like to reflect on the boy's >>> perezhivanija? >>> >>> Andy >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>> Andy Blunden >>> http://home.mira.net/~andy >>> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making >>> On 18/01/2017 5:14 AM, Marc Clar? wrote: >>> >>>> Hi, all, >>>> >>>> and thank you, Andy, for sharing this amazing film, which I didn't >>>> know. I >>>> think it will be very useful to share and discuss our respective views >>>> on >>>> perezhivanie. >>>> >>>> In my view, the film could be analyzed in terms of perezhivanie in three >>>> different planes. First, we could consider the person who watches the >>>> film, >>>> and we could study how the meaning she forms for the film restructures >>>> her >>>> relationship with aspects of her real life -such as, for example, her >>>> own >>>> death or the death of a beloved one, etc. (perhaps this is a little bit >>>> like what Beth and Monica, or Veresov and Fleer, do with their study of >>>> playworlds?). In this plane, which would be perhaps the most >>>> naturalistic >>>> one, the film could be studied as an human-made cultural artifact which >>>> restuctures psychological functions; here, the meaning formed for the >>>> film >>>> by who watches it and uses it as mediator in her relation to her real >>>> life >>>> would be an m-perezhivanie. >>>> >>>> In a second plane, we could proceed as if the film was real life, and we >>>> could consider Sokolov telling his story to the man he meets by the >>>> river >>>> (a little bit like Carla telling her story to me). In this plane, >>>> Sokolov's >>>> narrative (i.e., what is showed to us as narrated flashback) could be >>>> considered as a cultural artifact that Sokolov uses to relate to all >>>> what >>>> happened to him. At this plane, the meaning of this narrative would be >>>> the >>>> m-perezhivanie that, in that moment, mediates the relationship between >>>> Sokolov and the war events he experienced years ago (but these events >>>> are >>>> still very present to him, so although relating to past events, there is >>>> here a Sokolov's activity [towards the past war events] which is in >>>> present >>>> -this echoes Christopher when, within our conversations, said: ?Part of >>>> this might also be a question of what it means to describe and represent >>>> one's own perezhivanie figuratively/narratively (whether to others, or >>>> to >>>> oneself), as opposed to living that perezhivanie. Especially if the >>>> attempt >>>> to capture/represent one's own perezhivanie is, perhaps, also central to >>>> the living of it?? >>>> >>>> In a third plane, we could proceed as if Sokolov's narration was not a >>>> retrospective narration, but the on-time sequence of events with on-time >>>> Sokolov's explanation of these events (in the moments in which the >>>> narrator >>>> voice is assumed within the flashback). In this plane, there are several >>>> interesting perezhivanie phenomena. Clearly, there is a Sokolov's >>>> activity >>>> of experiencing-as-struggle, which initiates when he realizes that all >>>> his >>>> family, except one son, had been killed 2 years ago. At this moment, his >>>> life becomes meaningless; the meaning (m-perezhivanie) he uses to >>>> relate to >>>> all his life (including the past) at this moment is expressed in his >>>> conversation with his oncle: ?it's got to be that this life of mine is >>>> nothing but a nightmare!?. In this moment, Sokolov's past in the prision >>>> camp becomes also meaningless: then, his link to life (the >>>> m-perezhivanie >>>> that made being alive meaningful to him) was meeting his family; but at >>>> that time his family was already dead, so when he discovers it, he >>>> realizes >>>> that this m-perezhivanie (the idea of meeting his family) was linking >>>> him >>>> to death, not to life, so all his efforts to surviving become >>>> meaningless: >>>> ?Every night, when I was a prisioner, I talked with them. Now it turns >>>> out >>>> that for two years I was talking with the dead??. In this conversation, >>>> however, his oncle offers him an alternative m-perezhivanie to relate to >>>> his life: he still has a son, so the m-perehivanie of meeting his family >>>> can still turns Sokolov's life meaningful: ?you've got to go on living. >>>> You >>>> have to find Anatoly. When the war is over, your son will get married, >>>> you >>>> will live with them. You will take up your carpentry again, play with >>>> your >>>> grandkids?. It takes some time to Sokolov to enter into this >>>> m-perezhivanie, but he does it and his life becomes meaningful again: >>>> ?and >>>> then, unexpectedly, I've got a gleam of sunlight?. But, then, Anatoly >>>> also >>>> dies. How to keep living? Here, Sokolov holds the m-perezhivanie that >>>> linked him to life until that moment, and therefore, he needs a son; >>>> pretending being the father of Vanya turns his life meaningful again. >>>> >>>> Another interesting thing, still at that level, is how Sokolov's >>>> relation >>>> with his own immediate death changes along the different occasions in >>>> which >>>> he faces it. I thing here there are examples of >>>> experiencing-as-contemplation -in my view, this is not >>>> experiencing-as-struggle because the situation of impossibility (the >>>> immediate death) is removed existentially (Sokolov's life is given back >>>> to >>>> him), so that there is not a permanent situation of impossibility which >>>> is >>>> initially meaningless and is turned into meaningful. In each occasion in >>>> which Sokolov is faced with his immediate death, the m-perezhivanie that >>>> mediates this relationship is different. When he is captured, his >>>> m-perezhivanie is expressed as: ?here's my death coming after me?. When >>>> he >>>> is conducted to meet the nazi official, the m-perezhivanie is expressed >>>> as: >>>> ?the end of your misery?, ?to my death and my release of this torment, I >>>> will drink?. In the first, the death is running after Sokolov; in the >>>> second, it is Sokolov happily going to meet death. Later, at the end of >>>> the >>>> film, he faces his immediate death again, and the m-perezhivanie is >>>> expressed as: ?I'm really worried that I might die in my sleep, and that >>>> would frighten my little son?. >>>> >>>> Well, just some thoughts after watching this wonderful film. >>>> >>>> Best regards, >>>> >>>> Marc. >>>> >>>> 2017-01-15 0:06 GMT+01:00 Christopher Schuck : >>>> >>>> Yes, definitely that article! And specifically, when I used "pivoting" I >>>>> couldn't help but think of Beth's earlier example about how a child >>>>> will >>>>> use a stick as a pivot for a horse. Perhaps a somewhat different >>>>> application but related, no? >>>>> >>>>> On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 4:06 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil < >>>>> a.j.gil@iped.uio.no> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Chris, all, >>>>>> >>>>>> your post is totally relevant to Beth's and Monica's article in the >>>>>> special issue. They write about film and perezhivanie (quoting >>>>>> Sobchack) >>>>>> the following: >>>>>> >>>>>> The reason that film allows us to glimpse the future is that there is >>>>>> a >>>>>> connection between filmic time and ?real? time: ?The images of a film >>>>>> >>>>> exist >>>>> >>>>>> in the world as a temporal flow, within finitude and situation. >>>>>> Indeed, >>>>>> >>>>> the >>>>> >>>>>> fascination of the film is that it does not transcend our >>>>>> >>>>> lived-experience >>>>> >>>>>> of temporality, but rather that it seems to partake of it, to share >>>>>> it? >>>>>> (1992, p. 60). >>>>>> >>>>>> And later >>>>>> >>>>>> "Specifically, the way that the flow of time becomes multidirectional >>>>>> is >>>>>> that ?rehearsals make it necessary to think of the future in such a >>>>>> way >>>>>> >>>>> as >>>>> >>>>>> to create a past? (1985, p. 39). As Schechner ex-plains: ?In a very >>>>>> real >>>>>> way the future ? the project coming into existence through the >>>>>> process of >>>>>> rehearsal ? determines the past: what will be kept from earlier >>>>>> >>>>> rehearsals >>>>> >>>>>> or from the ?source ma-terials? (1985, p. 39)." >>>>>> >>>>>> Alfredo >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> ________________________________________ >>>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>> du> >>>>>> on behalf of Christopher Schuck >>>>>> Sent: 14 January 2017 21:43 >>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Fate of a Man >>>>>> >>>>>> But that's both the limitation and strength of art or fictional >>>>>> narrative >>>>>> as opposed to real life, isn't it? That art focuses our attention and >>>>>> highlights certain features in a way that is idealized and >>>>>> artificially >>>>>> "designed" to convey something more clearly and purely (but less >>>>>> organically and authentically) than it would be conveyed in the >>>>>> course of >>>>>> living it, or observing someone else living it? One way to get around >>>>>> >>>>> this >>>>> >>>>>> would be, as David says, to analyze the film in terms of clues as to >>>>>> the >>>>>> stages of emergence. But maybe another way to use the film would be to >>>>>> >>>>> view >>>>> >>>>>> it not so much as a complete, self-sufficient "example" of >>>>>> perezhivanie, >>>>>> >>>>> as >>>>> >>>>>> a *tool *for pivoting back and forth between the concept of >>>>>> perezhivanie >>>>>> >>>>> as >>>>> >>>>>> imaginatively constructed (through fiction), and the concept of >>>>>> perezhivanie as imaginatively constructed (through our real living >>>>>> experience and observation of it). So, it would be the *pivoting* >>>>>> between >>>>>> these two manifestations of the concept (designed vs. evolved, as >>>>>> David >>>>>> >>>>> put >>>>> >>>>>> it) that reveals new insights about perezhivanie, rather than >>>>>> >>>>> understanding >>>>> >>>>>> the concept from the film per se. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 3:08 PM, David Kellogg >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> I think there's a good reason why Andy started a new thread on this: >>>>>>> >>>>>> he's a >>>>>> >>>>>>> very tidy thinker (quite unlike yours truly) and he knows that one >>>>>>> >>>>>> reason >>>>> >>>>>> why xmca threads are seldom cumulative is that they digress to related >>>>>>> problems without solving the immmediate ones. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Yes, of course, a film allows us to consider an example of >>>>>>> >>>>>> "perezhivanie", >>>>>> >>>>>>> but it is a designed perezhivanie rather than an evolved one; it >>>>>>> >>>>>> doesn't >>>>> >>>>>> explicitly display the various stages of emergence required for a >>>>>>> >>>>>> genetic >>>>> >>>>>> analysis, unless we analyze it not as a complete and finished work of >>>>>>> >>>>>> art >>>>> >>>>>> but instead for clues as to the stages of its creation (the way that, >>>>>>> >>>>>> for >>>>> >>>>>> example, "Quietly Flows the Don" was analyzed to determine its >>>>>>> authenticity). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I remember that In the original short story, the schnapps drinking >>>>>>> scene seemed like pure sleight of hand: an artistically gratuitous >>>>>>> >>>>>> example >>>>>> >>>>>>> of what eventually gave Soviet social realism such a bad name. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> David Kellogg >>>>>>> Macquarie University >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 10:04 PM, Carol Macdonald < >>>>>>> >>>>>> carolmacdon@gmail.com >>>>> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Fellow XMCa-ers >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I have watched it through now, thank you Andy, but right now only >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> empirical >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> psychological categories come to mind. I will watch it again and in >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> the >>>>>> >>>>>>> meanwhile let my fellows with more recent experience of >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> /perezhivanie/ >>>>> >>>>>> take >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> the discussion further. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> It is a kind of timeless story, and modern film techniques would >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> perhaps >>>>>> >>>>>>> be >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> more explicit. At the least I would say it has for me a Russian >>>>>>>> understanding of suffering, perhaps because of their unique >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> experience >>>>> >>>>>> of >>>>>> >>>>>>> it. But having said that, WWII must have generated other similar >>>>>>>> experiences, apart from the first part about Andrei's family dying >>>>>>>> in >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> the >>>>>> >>>>>>> famine. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Carol >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 14 January 2017 at 02:15, Andy Blunden >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I watched it in two parts with subtitles: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x16w7fg_destiny-of-a-man- >>>>>>>>> 1959-pt-1_creation >>>>>>>>> http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x16wat4_destiny-of-a-man- >>>>>>>>> 1959-pt-2_creation >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Andy >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>>>>> Andy Blunden >>>>>>>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy >>>>>>>>> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective- >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> decision-making >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 14/01/2017 2:35 AM, Beth Ferholt wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Thank you for taking us to a shared example. I think that >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> having a >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> Carol A Macdonald Ph.D (Edin) >>>>>>>> Cultural Historical Activity Theory >>>>>>>> Honorary Research Fellow: Department of Linguistics, Unisa >>>>>>>> alternative email address: tmacdoca@unisa.ac.za >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> > From ablunden@mira.net Wed Jan 18 18:09:30 2017 From: ablunden@mira.net (Andy Blunden) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2017 13:09:30 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Fate of a Man (from Misha) In-Reply-To: References: <048522a2-cca0-3e56-cae2-f2142b9fbd5a@mira.net> <1484427999407.2877@iped.uio.no> <2270f5e7-7d82-5150-89a3-808a4e20b89b@mira.net> <89d467ea-8552-c627-b265-0c646e961f09@mira.net> <01c4d310-e4f8-d79b-bacf-284438c6e76d@mira.net> Message-ID: <5f02c4f1-3a4f-d67f-5284-e7fdb75112ce@mira.net> Misha's own childhood he saw represented in the boy in the movie. A 1958 Soviet audience was still struggling with the experience of the war. For the movie to function as a part of a perezhivanie for the watcher, it has to be reflecting and repeating something in the watcher's own experience. I think this is a partial answer to the question you opened in another thread - the use of story-telling, movies, etc., - "mediational means" - to help Americans in surviving the coming period of Trump's America. ... Andy ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy On 19/01/2017 1:02 PM, mike cole wrote: > It was extremely interesting to read Misha's > interpretation of Fate of a Man. It provides evidence > against my speculation that it might have been interpreted > as Destiny of Mankind. If I understand correctly, Misha is > saying that the perezhivanie of entire populations is > reflected in the individual consciousness of the > character. And the film, combining multiple media and a > strong, patriotic narrative, creates perezhivanie in the > viewer. > > I did not, personally, experience perezhivanie, while > watching the film, at least not perezhivanie of the sort > that Misha is referring to. My orientation toward viewing > it, and my own cultural-historical background interfered. > I was viewing it through the lens of our discussion and my > acute awareness of the elisions and misrepresentations of > these events in historical time. This lens got in the way. > > Misha's note is a good reminder of the difficulties of > interpretation that we all face in dealing with this > topic! At the same time, there was no missing different > forms that correspond to different "kinds" or "conceptions > of kinds" of perezhivanie in the film. > mike > > > > On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 3:53 PM, Andy Blunden > > wrote: > > Misha went on to criticise my characterisation of the > boy's life-world, and I have to say that I was > mistaken about that. The boy's life world is also > "difficult" in Vasilyuk's terms. ... Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Andy Blunden > http://home.mira.net/~andy > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > > On 18/01/2017 7:50 PM, Andy Blunden wrote: > > Misha, a Russian psychologist who has assisted > Mike and me in analysing previous movies, offers > this comment on "Fate of a Man." > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > I need to re-watch this emotional film. After a > while I can write something regarding your theme. > Glad to hear you. I think we'll have a lot of > discussions. Only one thing I want to say now - > This movie is not an /illustration/ of > perezhivanie but it /is/ really the perezhivanie. > > I re-watched the movie. Had a wonderful, > unforgettable experience. Andrey, being a simple > Soviet carpenter before the War, fell into the > millstone of hard, bloody war by fate. He > miraculously managed to survive, losing his son on > the front, his beloved wife and two daughters in > his native village near Voronezh. The war has > warped him, forced to endure emotional anguish, > physical pain and spiritual suffering. The war has > truly wounded his soul, humiliated him as a man, > but he remained a man of great kindness, taking > care of the orphan boy, treating him like his own > son. The film shows massive heroism of the Soviet > people. Reading the story /Destiny of a Man/ by > Mikhail Sholokhov and watching the movie of Sergey > Bondarchuk with the same name, you can understand > what it means to love the Motherland truly. Pain > and anxiety for homeland and personal tragedy of > the individual and the specific family were > organically fused in the fate of Andrei Sokolov. > > Andrey's suffering is simultaneously private and > public. But the hero of the film found the > strength in himself not to fall down, and continue > to work for the use and benefit of the country in > the post-war period, and, staying alone, to raise > the kid without assistants, the child who had > experienced the intensive grief because of losing > parents. The peculiarity of perezhivanie in this > film is closely interwoven with the social > disaster caused by the treachery and cruelty of > the Germans in the great Patriotic war, and > personal grief associated with the loss of his > beloved family. The score of V. Basner naturally > complements and musically ornaments this movie. It > resembles the mood of Shostakovich's symphonies, > where you can observe fear, terror and mental > confusion, but it remains with kind and optimistic > fundamentals. Sincere, not-sugary kindness and > human warmth emanates from this strong and > powerful film. The power of the spirit of this man > is the good (kind and strong) character of such > person, united with the solid beliefs of a healthy > moral order. > > The film triggers a strong, intense perezhivanie > from the audience, where an experience of art even > gives priority way to perezhivanie of life itself, > without losing at the same time tonality of high art. > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > On 18/01/2017 12:39 PM, Andy Blunden wrote: > > Thank you Marc! It was the third "plane" which > was my intention in providing "Fate of a Man" > for discussion. You picked out what were for > me also the main (but by no means the only) > instances of perezhivanija in this movie. > > It seems to me that Sokolov (the author) > offers one perezhivanie in particular as the > main theme of the movie. At the beginning of > the movie, the man and boy walk up the path to > the camera and at the end of the movie they > walk off together again. So this is the > central theme. As you say, when Sokolov's > family has all been killed, even his talented > war-hero son who was going to be a famous > mathematician, his life has become > meaningless. I really liked your reflections > of Sokolov's reflections too. He sees the > young orphan boy who, he discovers, has no > family and doesn't even know what town he > comes from, but is aimlessly living on pieces > of rubbish. He sees that the two of them are > in the same situation. So after some time > mulling this over a they sit together in the > truck, he lies to the boy and tells him that > he is the boy's father, and they embrace. But > the boy questions this and he reasserts his > claim and the boy accepts this. The man is > able to define a new meaning for his life; he > has done this autonomously without the help of > a therapist, but he still needs another, the > boy, to embody that meaning. But he knows it > is his own invention. The boy on the other > hand has to be made to believe it is true; he > is not sufficiently mature to manufacture this > meaning himself, but as a child he can be > guided by an adult. As you say, Marc, it is > very significant when Sokolov tells us how he > is now, again, worried about his own death. > What if I died in my sleep? that would be a > shock for my son! > > For me, this reflection causes me to look back > on the man's whole struggle during the war: in > the first phase he does not differentiate > between his life as a father and husband and > his life as a Soviet citizen - war is his duty > and he is confident, as is everyone else, of > victory. His bravery in driving his truck to > the front line under fire reflects the fact > that he has never imagined his own death. Then > he finds himself prostrate before 2 Nazi > soldiers who we assume are going among the > wounded shooting anyone who has survived. But > surprisingly, he is allowed to live, but is to > be used as a slave. Sokolov has been > confronted by his own mortality for the first > time and he chooses life, but accepts slavery > (Sartre and Hegel both thematize this moment > in their philosophy). In this second phase of > Sokolov's life he is a survivor. Everything > hinges on surviving and returning to his wife > and family. As you point out, Marc, his later > reflections on this are particularly poignant, > when he discovers the futility of this hope. > Eventually, the life of forced labour becomes > unbearable. He cries out: "Why are we forced > to dig 3 cubic metres when 1 cubic meter is > enough for a grave!" Sokolov has accepted and > embraced death after all. (Transition to the > third phase.) To his German masters this is an > unendurable act of defiance. As David points > out, there are flaws in the scene which > follows, but ... he confronts his own death > defiantly, stares it in the eye, spits on it, > and his life again gains meaning as a "brave > Soviet soldier" unafraid of death even in such > an impossible moment. Not only does he > survive, but takes the Nazi Colonel prisoner > and hands the war plans over to the Red Army. > Now, when he is offered the chance to return > to his wife as a war hero he declines and asks > to be sent back to the front. His life has > adopted this new meaning which casts his life > as a father into the shade. He no longer fears > death. But he is persuaded to take time off > and learns of the death of his family. As Marc > relates, the continued survival of his son, > who is now also a war hero, provides continued > meaning and integrates the two themes in his > life. This takes work, as Marc points out, and > he has the assistance of an older man, in > achieving this redefinition of his life. But > tragically, with the death of his son (and NB > the end of the war, albeit in victory) his > life is again without meaning. Fourth phase. > He has survived, but has no purpose. By > becoming a father again (Fifth phase), he > regains the fear of death and meaning in his > life. It is real work, and we witness this > psychological turmoil as he copes with the > idea that this scruffy orphan boy could be a > son to him, and eventually he manages it. > > The transition between each phase is a > critical period during which Sokolov's > personality is transformed. Note also, that > there is a premonition of this perezhivanie in > Sokolov's earlier life: his family is wiped > out in the Civil War and the famine of 1922, > then he meets his wife-to-be, also raised in > an orphanage, and they together create a life > and have 17 happy years before the Nazi > invasion intrudes. So from the beginning of > the movie we are introduced to the main theme. > > These are the main moments in the movie, which > caused me to select it for discussion rather > than any other movie. Also, there is no doubt > that in producing this movie in 1958 the > Soviet government was engaged with its people, > in a process of collective perezhivanie and by > reflecting on the collective perezhivanie > during the period of the war, before and > after, they aim to assist the people in > collectively assigning meaning to this > terrible suffering and like the man and his > "son" walking again into the future. As a > propaganda movie, of course, it is open to > much criticism, but that is hardly the point. > I appreciate Marc's analysis in terms of the > other concepts he has introduced. I wouldn't > mind a recap on these. In terms of Vasilyuk's > concepts, Sokolov's life-world is *simple and > difficult*. The boy's life world is *simple > and easy*. > > Can we continue to discuss "Fate of a Man", > while I open another movie for analysis? I > think there are at least 10 subscribers to > this list who have published in learned > journals on the topic of perezhivanie in > childhood. Perhaps one of you would like to > reflect on the boy's perezhivanija? > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Andy Blunden > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > > On 18/01/2017 5:14 AM, Marc Clar? wrote: > > Hi, all, > > and thank you, Andy, for sharing this > amazing film, which I didn't know. I > think it will be very useful to share and > discuss our respective views on > perezhivanie. > > In my view, the film could be analyzed in > terms of perezhivanie in three > different planes. First, we could consider > the person who watches the film, > and we could study how the meaning she > forms for the film restructures her > relationship with aspects of her real life > -such as, for example, her own > death or the death of a beloved one, etc. > (perhaps this is a little bit > like what Beth and Monica, or Veresov and > Fleer, do with their study of > playworlds?). In this plane, which would > be perhaps the most naturalistic > one, the film could be studied as an > human-made cultural artifact which > restuctures psychological functions; here, > the meaning formed for the film > by who watches it and uses it as mediator > in her relation to her real life > would be an m-perezhivanie. > > In a second plane, we could proceed as if > the film was real life, and we > could consider Sokolov telling his story > to the man he meets by the river > (a little bit like Carla telling her story > to me). In this plane, Sokolov's > narrative (i.e., what is showed to us as > narrated flashback) could be > considered as a cultural artifact that > Sokolov uses to relate to all what > happened to him. At this plane, the > meaning of this narrative would be the > m-perezhivanie that, in that moment, > mediates the relationship between > Sokolov and the war events he experienced > years ago (but these events are > still very present to him, so although > relating to past events, there is > here a Sokolov's activity [towards the > past war events] which is in present > -this echoes Christopher when, within our > conversations, said: ?Part of > this might also be a question of what it > means to describe and represent > one's own perezhivanie > figuratively/narratively (whether to > others, or to > oneself), as opposed to living that > perezhivanie. Especially if the attempt > to capture/represent one's own > perezhivanie is, perhaps, also central to > the living of it?? > > In a third plane, we could proceed as if > Sokolov's narration was not a > retrospective narration, but the on-time > sequence of events with on-time > Sokolov's explanation of these events (in > the moments in which the narrator > voice is assumed within the flashback). In > this plane, there are several > interesting perezhivanie phenomena. > Clearly, there is a Sokolov's activity > of experiencing-as-struggle, which > initiates when he realizes that all his > family, except one son, had been killed 2 > years ago. At this moment, his > life becomes meaningless; the meaning > (m-perezhivanie) he uses to relate to > all his life (including the past) at this > moment is expressed in his > conversation with his oncle: ?it's got to > be that this life of mine is > nothing but a nightmare!?. In this moment, > Sokolov's past in the prision > camp becomes also meaningless: then, his > link to life (the m-perezhivanie > that made being alive meaningful to him) > was meeting his family; but at > that time his family was already dead, so > when he discovers it, he realizes > that this m-perezhivanie (the idea of > meeting his family) was linking him > to death, not to life, so all his efforts > to surviving become meaningless: > ?Every night, when I was a prisioner, I > talked with them. Now it turns out > that for two years I was talking with the > dead??. In this conversation, > however, his oncle offers him an > alternative m-perezhivanie to relate to > his life: he still has a son, so the > m-perehivanie of meeting his family > can still turns Sokolov's life meaningful: > ?you've got to go on living. You > have to find Anatoly. When the war is > over, your son will get married, you > will live with them. You will take up your > carpentry again, play with your > grandkids?. It takes some time to Sokolov > to enter into this > m-perezhivanie, but he does it and his > life becomes meaningful again: ?and > then, unexpectedly, I've got a gleam of > sunlight?. But, then, Anatoly also > dies. How to keep living? Here, Sokolov > holds the m-perezhivanie that > linked him to life until that moment, and > therefore, he needs a son; > pretending being the father of Vanya turns > his life meaningful again. > > Another interesting thing, still at that > level, is how Sokolov's relation > with his own immediate death changes along > the different occasions in which > he faces it. I thing here there are > examples of > experiencing-as-contemplation -in my view, > this is not > experiencing-as-struggle because the > situation of impossibility (the > immediate death) is removed existentially > (Sokolov's life is given back to > him), so that there is not a permanent > situation of impossibility which is > initially meaningless and is turned into > meaningful. In each occasion in > which Sokolov is faced with his immediate > death, the m-perezhivanie that > mediates this relationship is different. > When he is captured, his > m-perezhivanie is expressed as: ?here's my > death coming after me?. When he > is conducted to meet the nazi official, > the m-perezhivanie is expressed as: > ?the end of your misery?, ?to my death and > my release of this torment, I > will drink?. In the first, the death is > running after Sokolov; in the > second, it is Sokolov happily going to > meet death. Later, at the end of the > film, he faces his immediate death again, > and the m-perezhivanie is > expressed as: ?I'm really worried that I > might die in my sleep, and that > would frighten my little son?. > > Well, just some thoughts after watching > this wonderful film. > > Best regards, > > Marc. > > 2017-01-15 0:06 GMT+01:00 Christopher > Schuck >: > > Yes, definitely that article! And > specifically, when I used "pivoting" I > couldn't help but think of Beth's > earlier example about how a child will > use a stick as a pivot for a horse. > Perhaps a somewhat different > application but related, no? > > On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 4:06 PM, > Alfredo Jornet Gil > > > wrote: > > Chris, all, > > your post is totally relevant to > Beth's and Monica's article in the > special issue. They write about > film and perezhivanie (quoting > Sobchack) > the following: > > The reason that film allows us to > glimpse the future is that there is a > connection between filmic time and > ?real? time: ?The images of a film > > exist > > in the world as a temporal flow, > within finitude and situation. Indeed, > > the > > fascination of the film is that it > does not transcend our > > lived-experience > > of temporality, but rather that it > seems to partake of it, to share it? > (1992, p. 60). > > And later > > "Specifically, the way that the > flow of time becomes > multidirectional is > that ?rehearsals make it necessary > to think of the future in such a way > > as > > to create a past? (1985, p. 39). > As Schechner ex-plains: ?In a very > real > way the future ? the project > coming into existence through the > process of > rehearsal ? determines the past: > what will be kept from earlier > > rehearsals > > or from the ?source ma-terials? > (1985, p. 39)." > > Alfredo > > > ________________________________________ > From: > xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > on behalf of Christopher Schuck > > > Sent: 14 January 2017 21:43 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Fate of a Man > > But that's both the limitation and > strength of art or fictional narrative > as opposed to real life, isn't it? > That art focuses our attention and > highlights certain features in a > way that is idealized and artificially > "designed" to convey something > more clearly and purely (but less > organically and authentically) > than it would be conveyed in the > course of > living it, or observing someone > else living it? One way to get around > > this > > would be, as David says, to > analyze the film in terms of clues > as to the > stages of emergence. But maybe > another way to use the film would > be to > > view > > it not so much as a complete, > self-sufficient "example" of > perezhivanie, > > as > > a *tool *for pivoting back and > forth between the concept of > perezhivanie > > as > > imaginatively constructed (through > fiction), and the concept of > perezhivanie as imaginatively > constructed (through our real living > experience and observation of it). > So, it would be the *pivoting* between > these two manifestations of the > concept (designed vs. evolved, as > David > > put > > it) that reveals new insights > about perezhivanie, rather than > > understanding > > the concept from the film per se. > > On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 3:08 PM, > David Kellogg > > > wrote: > > I think there's a good reason > why Andy started a new thread > on this: > > he's a > > very tidy thinker (quite > unlike yours truly) and he > knows that one > > reason > > why xmca threads are seldom > cumulative is that they > digress to related > problems without solving the > immmediate ones. > > Yes, of course, a film allows > us to consider an example of > > "perezhivanie", > > but it is a designed > perezhivanie rather than an > evolved one; it > > doesn't > > explicitly display the various > stages of emergence required for a > > genetic > > analysis, unless we analyze it > not as a complete and finished > work of > > art > > but instead for clues as to > the stages of its creation > (the way that, > > for > > example, "Quietly Flows the > Don" was analyzed to determine its > authenticity). > > I remember that In the > original short story, the > schnapps drinking > scene seemed like pure sleight > of hand: an artistically > gratuitous > > example > > of what eventually gave Soviet > social realism such a bad name. > > David Kellogg > Macquarie University > > On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 10:04 > PM, Carol Macdonald < > > carolmacdon@gmail.com > > > wrote: > > Fellow XMCa-ers > > I have watched it through > now, thank you Andy, but > right now only > > empirical > > psychological categories > come to mind. I will > watch it again and in > > the > > meanwhile let my fellows > with more recent experience of > > /perezhivanie/ > > take > > the discussion further. > > It is a kind of timeless > story, and modern film > techniques would > > perhaps > > be > > more explicit. At the > least I would say it has > for me a Russian > understanding of > suffering, perhaps because > of their unique > > experience > > of > > it. But having said that, > WWII must have generated > other similar > experiences, apart from > the first part about > Andrei's family dying in > > the > > famine. > > Carol > > On 14 January 2017 at > 02:15, Andy Blunden > > > wrote: > > I watched it in two > parts with subtitles: > > http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x16w7fg_destiny-of-a-man- > > > 1959-pt-1_creation > http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x16wat4_destiny-of-a-man- > > > 1959-pt-2_creation > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > Andy Blunden > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective- > > > decision-making > > On 14/01/2017 2:35 AM, > Beth Ferholt wrote: > > Thank you > for taking > us to a > shared > example. > I think that > > having a > > > > -- > Carol A Macdonald Ph.D (Edin) > Cultural Historical > Activity Theory > Honorary Research Fellow: > Department of Linguistics, > Unisa > alternative email address: > tmacdoca@unisa.ac.za > > > > > > > > > > > From glassman.13@osu.edu Wed Jan 18 18:18:13 2017 From: glassman.13@osu.edu (Glassman, Michael) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2017 02:18:13 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C71964@CIO-KRC-D1MBX04.osuad.osu.edu> Mike It was so interesting to read this note after reading the Cognition and Instruction essay. All the way through it I kept thinking we have been here before. It reminded me of the scholars, especially those who had escaped from Germany, trying to make sense of what had happened to their society during World War II. The foremost in my mind was Lewin. Except I wonder if he would say the process of transformative action starts not with emergence of quasi-needs, but our willingness and abilities to step back from our quasi-needs and the ways that they drive us, often to dysfunctional behaviors that it ultimately destructive to both our society and to us as individuals. How hard this is to do, we have to keep going back again and again. The quasi-needs, tribalism, acceptance, standing are always there. It is how they shape us that is critical. Michael -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 8:31 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism In following the perezhivanie thread I encountered the note I re-membered. And interestingly mis-remembered. A translation into my focus on mediational means. He places the starting point of the process of transformative action at the emergence of quasi-needs (from Kurt Lewin). That seems correct to me. The new mediational means emerge under environmental presses. Ever functionalist ego need a goal(!). (The problem with functionalism) In David's words, Perhaps the place we should look for "exaptations" that can save both our personalities and our environment is not in our evolved needs, but in yet to be designed quasi-needs. Artificial organs, after all, always suggest new and ever more artificial functions, like chess and language. This point seems worth keeping in mind as we look at where this group of critical scholars who work within the Learning Sciences disciplinary framework would like to lead us. mike From mcole@ucsd.edu Wed Jan 18 19:51:50 2017 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2017 03:51:50 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism In-Reply-To: <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C71964@CIO-KRC-D1MBX04.osuad.osu.edu> References: <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C71964@CIO-KRC-D1MBX04.osuad.osu.edu> Message-ID: Yes Michael, It feels like the world of the later 1930's about the time I was born as that period came down to me through the prism of a family of "premature anti fascists." For a great re-creation of those times see the highly ambivalent film by Frank Capra, "meet John Doe." It has American big capital interconnected with fascism combined with populist collectivism in a manner that points at the media (as then experienced) as the bad guys in disguise. Happy Ending, Beethoven Ode to Joy and all. It's come round again, nastier this time. Mike On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 6:20 PM Glassman, Michael wrote: > Mike > > > > It was so interesting to read this note after reading the Cognition and > Instruction essay. All the way through it I kept thinking we have been > here before. It reminded me of the scholars, especially those who had > escaped from Germany, trying to make sense of what had happened to their > society during World War II. The foremost in my mind was Lewin. Except I > wonder if he would say the process of transformative action starts not with > emergence of quasi-needs, but our willingness and abilities to step back > from our quasi-needs and the ways that they drive us, often to > dysfunctional behaviors that it ultimately destructive to both our society > and to us as individuals. How hard this is to do, we have to keep going > back again and again. The quasi-needs, tribalism, acceptance, standing are > always there. It is how they shape us that is critical. > > > > Michael > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto: > xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole > > Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 8:31 PM > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism > > > > In following the perezhivanie thread I encountered the note I re-membered. > > And interestingly mis-remembered. A translation into my focus on > mediational means. He places the starting point of the process of > transformative action at the emergence of quasi-needs (from Kurt Lewin). > > That seems correct to me. The new mediational means emerge under > environmental presses. Ever functionalist ego need a goal(!). (The problem > with functionalism) In David's words, > > > > Perhaps the place we should look for "exaptations" that can save both our > personalities and our environment is not in our evolved needs, but in yet > to be designed quasi-needs. Artificial organs, after all, always suggest > new and ever more artificial functions, like chess and language. > > > > This point seems worth keeping in mind as we look at where this group of > critical scholars who work within the Learning Sciences disciplinary > framework would like to lead us. > > > > mike > > > > From mcole@ucsd.edu Wed Jan 18 19:55:58 2017 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2017 03:55:58 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Fate of a Man (from Misha) In-Reply-To: <5f02c4f1-3a4f-d67f-5284-e7fdb75112ce@mira.net> References: <048522a2-cca0-3e56-cae2-f2142b9fbd5a@mira.net> <1484427999407.2877@iped.uio.no> <2270f5e7-7d82-5150-89a3-808a4e20b89b@mira.net> <89d467ea-8552-c627-b265-0c646e961f09@mira.net> <01c4d310-e4f8-d79b-bacf-284438c6e76d@mira.net> <5f02c4f1-3a4f-d67f-5284-e7fdb75112ce@mira.net> Message-ID: I agree that in order for a film to generate The kind of perezhivanie that Misha experienced, one needs to be re-living the represented experienced. Mike On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 6:09 PM Andy Blunden wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Misha's own childhood he saw represented in the boy in the movie. > > A 1958 Soviet audience was still struggling with the experience of > > the war. For the movie to function as a part of a perezhivanie for > > the watcher, it has to be reflecting and repeating something in > > the watcher's own experience. I think this is a partial answer to > > the question you opened in another thread - the use of > > story-telling, movies, etc., - "mediational means" - to help > > Americans in surviving the coming period of Trump's America. ... > > Andy > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > Andy Blunden > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > > > > On 19/01/2017 1:02 PM, mike cole wrote: > > > > > > > > > It was > > extremely interesting to read Misha's interpretation of Fate > > of a Man. It provides evidence against my speculation that it > > might have been interpreted as Destiny of Mankind. If I > > understand correctly, Misha is saying that the perezhivanie of > > entire populations is reflected in the individual > > consciousness of the character. And the film, combining > > multiple media and a strong, patriotic narrative, creates > > perezhivanie in the viewer. > > > > > > > > I did not, > > personally, experience perezhivanie, while watching the film, > > at least not perezhivanie of the sort that Misha is referring > > to. My orientation toward viewing it, and my own > > cultural-historical background interfered. I was viewing it > > through the lens of our discussion and my acute awareness of > > the elisions and misrepresentations of these events in > > historical time. This lens got in the way. > > > > > > > > Misha's note > > is a good reminder of the difficulties of interpretation that > > we all face in dealing with this topic! At the same time, > > there was no missing different forms that correspond to > > different "kinds" or "conceptions of kinds" of perezhivanie in > > the film. > > > mike > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 3:53 PM, Andy > > Blunden > > wrote: > > > Misha went > > on to criticise my characterisation of the boy's life-world, > > and I have to say that I was mistaken about that. The boy's > > life world is also "difficult" in Vasilyuk's terms. ... Andy > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > Andy Blunden > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > > > > > > > > > > On 18/01/2017 7:50 PM, Andy Blunden wrote: > > > > > Misha, a Russian psychologist who has assisted Mike > > and me in analysing previous movies, offers this > > comment on "Fate of a Man." > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > I need to re-watch this emotional film. After a while > > I can write something regarding your theme. Glad to > > hear you. I think we'll have a lot of discussions. > > Only one thing I want to say now - This movie is not > > an /illustration/ of perezhivanie but it /is/ really > > the perezhivanie. > > > > > > I re-watched the movie. Had a wonderful, unforgettable > > experience. Andrey, being a simple Soviet carpenter > > before the War, fell into the millstone of hard, > > bloody war by fate. He miraculously managed to > > survive, losing his son on the front, his beloved wife > > and two daughters in his native village near Voronezh. > > The war has warped him, forced to endure emotional > > anguish, physical pain and spiritual suffering. The > > war has truly wounded his soul, humiliated him as a > > man, but he remained a man of great kindness, taking > > care of the orphan boy, treating him like his own son. > > The film shows massive heroism of the Soviet people. > > Reading the story /Destiny of a Man/ by Mikhail > > Sholokhov and watching the movie of Sergey Bondarchuk > > with the same name, you can understand what it means > > to love the Motherland truly. Pain and anxiety for > > homeland and personal tragedy of the individual and > > the specific family were organically fused in the fate > > of Andrei Sokolov. > > > > > > Andrey's suffering is simultaneously private and > > public. But the hero of the film found the strength in > > himself not to fall down, and continue to work for the > > use and benefit of the country in the post-war period, > > and, staying alone, to raise the kid without > > assistants, the child who had experienced the > > intensive grief because of losing parents. The > > peculiarity of perezhivanie in this film is closely > > interwoven with the social disaster caused by the > > treachery and cruelty of the Germans in the great > > Patriotic war, and personal grief associated with the > > loss of his beloved family. The score of V. Basner > > naturally complements and musically ornaments this > > movie. It resembles the mood of Shostakovich's > > symphonies, where you can observe fear, terror and > > mental confusion, but it remains with kind and > > optimistic fundamentals. Sincere, not-sugary kindness > > and human warmth emanates from this strong and > > powerful film. The power of the spirit of this man is > > the good (kind and strong) character of such person, > > united with the solid beliefs of a healthy moral > > order. > > > > > > The film triggers a strong, intense perezhivanie from > > the audience, where an experience of art even gives > > priority way to perezhivanie of life itself, without > > losing at the same time tonality of high art. > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > On 18/01/2017 12:39 PM, Andy Blunden wrote: > > > > > Thank you Marc! It was the third "plane" which was > > my intention in providing "Fate of a Man" for > > discussion. You picked out what were for me also the > > main (but by no means the only) instances of > > perezhivanija in this movie. > > > > > > It seems to me that Sokolov (the author) offers one > > perezhivanie in particular as the main theme of the > > movie. At the beginning of the movie, the man and > > boy walk up the path to the camera and at the end of > > the movie they walk off together again. So this is > > the central theme. As you say, when Sokolov's family > > has all been killed, even his talented war-hero son > > who was going to be a famous mathematician, his life > > has become meaningless. I really liked your > > reflections of Sokolov's reflections too. He sees > > the young orphan boy who, he discovers, has no > > family and doesn't even know what town he comes > > from, but is aimlessly living on pieces of rubbish. > > He sees that the two of them are in the same > > situation. So after some time mulling this over a > > they sit together in the truck, he lies to the boy > > and tells him that he is the boy's father, and they > > embrace. But the boy questions this and he reasserts > > his claim and the boy accepts this. The man is able > > to define a new meaning for his life; he has done > > this autonomously without the help of a therapist, > > but he still needs another, the boy, to embody that > > meaning. But he knows it is his own invention. The > > boy on the other hand has to be made to believe it > > is true; he is not sufficiently mature to > > manufacture this meaning himself, but as a child he > > can be guided by an adult. As you say, Marc, it is > > very significant when Sokolov tells us how he is > > now, again, worried about his own death. What if I > > died in my sleep? that would be a shock for my son! > > > > > > For me, this reflection causes me to look back on > > the man's whole struggle during the war: in the > > first phase he does not differentiate between his > > life as a father and husband and his life as a > > Soviet citizen - war is his duty and he is > > confident, as is everyone else, of victory. His > > bravery in driving his truck to the front line under > > fire reflects the fact that he has never imagined > > his own death. Then he finds himself prostrate > > before 2 Nazi soldiers who we assume are going among > > the wounded shooting anyone who has survived. But > > surprisingly, he is allowed to live, but is to be > > used as a slave. Sokolov has been confronted by his > > own mortality for the first time and he chooses > > life, but accepts slavery (Sartre and Hegel both > > thematize this moment in their philosophy). In this > > second phase of Sokolov's life he is a survivor. > > Everything hinges on surviving and returning to his > > wife and family. As you point out, Marc, his later > > reflections on this are particularly poignant, when > > he discovers the futility of this hope. Eventually, > > the life of forced labour becomes unbearable. He > > cries out: "Why are we forced to dig 3 cubic metres > > when 1 cubic meter is enough for a grave!" Sokolov > > has accepted and embraced death after all. > > (Transition to the third phase.) To his German > > masters this is an unendurable act of defiance. As > > David points out, there are flaws in the scene which > > follows, but ... he confronts his own death > > defiantly, stares it in the eye, spits on it, and > > his life again gains meaning as a "brave Soviet > > soldier" unafraid of death even in such an > > impossible moment. Not only does he survive, but > > takes the Nazi Colonel prisoner and hands the war > > plans over to the Red Army. Now, when he is offered > > the chance to return to his wife as a war hero he > > declines and asks to be sent back to the front. His > > life has adopted this new meaning which casts his > > life as a father into the shade. He no longer fears > > death. But he is persuaded to take time off and > > learns of the death of his family. As Marc relates, > > the continued survival of his son, who is now also a > > war hero, provides continued meaning and integrates > > the two themes in his life. This takes work, as Marc > > points out, and he has the assistance of an older > > man, in achieving this redefinition of his life. But > > tragically, with the death of his son (and NB the > > end of the war, albeit in victory) his life is again > > without meaning. Fourth phase. He has survived, but > > has no purpose. By becoming a father again (Fifth > > phase), he regains the fear of death and meaning in > > his life. It is real work, and we witness this > > psychological turmoil as he copes with the idea that > > this scruffy orphan boy could be a son to him, and > > eventually he manages it. > > > > > > The transition between each phase is a critical > > period during which Sokolov's personality is > > transformed. Note also, that there is a premonition > > of this perezhivanie in Sokolov's earlier life: his > > family is wiped out in the Civil War and the famine > > of 1922, then he meets his wife-to-be, also raised > > in an orphanage, and they together create a life and > > have 17 happy years before the Nazi invasion > > intrudes. So from the beginning of the movie we are > > introduced to the main theme. > > > > > > These are the main moments in the movie, which > > caused me to select it for discussion rather than > > any other movie. Also, there is no doubt that in > > producing this movie in 1958 the Soviet government > > was engaged with its people, in a process of > > collective perezhivanie and by reflecting on the > > collective perezhivanie during the period of the > > war, before and after, they aim to assist the people > > in collectively assigning meaning to this terrible > > suffering and like the man and his "son" walking > > again into the future. As a propaganda movie, of > > course, it is open to much criticism, but that is > > hardly the point. I appreciate Marc's analysis in > > terms of the other concepts he has introduced. I > > wouldn't mind a recap on these. In terms of > > Vasilyuk's concepts, Sokolov's life-world is *simple > > and difficult*. The boy's life world is *simple and > > easy*. > > > > > > Can we continue to discuss "Fate of a Man", while I > > open another movie for analysis? I think there are > > at least 10 subscribers to this list who have > > published in learned journals on the topic of > > perezhivanie in childhood. Perhaps one of you would > > like to reflect on the boy's perezhivanija? > > > > > > Andy > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > Andy Blunden > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > > > > On 18/01/2017 5:14 AM, Marc Clar? wrote: > > > > > Hi, all, > > > > > > and thank you, Andy, for sharing this amazing > > film, which I didn't know. I > > > think it will be very useful to share and discuss > > our respective views on > > > perezhivanie. > > > > > > In my view, the film could be analyzed in terms of > > perezhivanie in three > > > different planes. First, we could consider the > > person who watches the film, > > > and we could study how the meaning she forms for > > the film restructures her > > > relationship with aspects of her real life -such > > as, for example, her own > > > death or the death of a beloved one, etc. (perhaps > > this is a little bit > > > like what Beth and Monica, or Veresov and Fleer, > > do with their study of > > > playworlds?). In this plane, which would be > > perhaps the most naturalistic > > > one, the film could be studied as an human-made > > cultural artifact which > > > restuctures psychological functions; here, the > > meaning formed for the film > > > by who watches it and uses it as mediator in her > > relation to her real life > > > would be an m-perezhivanie. > > > > > > In a second plane, we could proceed as if the film > > was real life, and we > > > could consider Sokolov telling his story to the > > man he meets by the river > > > (a little bit like Carla telling her story to me). > > In this plane, Sokolov's > > > narrative (i.e., what is showed to us as narrated > > flashback) could be > > > considered as a cultural artifact that Sokolov > > uses to relate to all what > > > happened to him. At this plane, the meaning of > > this narrative would be the > > > m-perezhivanie that, in that moment, mediates the > > relationship between > > > Sokolov and the war events he experienced years > > ago (but these events are > > > still very present to him, so although relating to > > past events, there is > > > here a Sokolov's activity [towards the past war > > events] which is in present > > > -this echoes Christopher when, within our > > conversations, said: ?Part of > > > this might also be a question of what it means to > > describe and represent > > > one's own perezhivanie figuratively/narratively > > (whether to others, or to > > > oneself), as opposed to living that perezhivanie. > > Especially if the attempt > > > to capture/represent one's own perezhivanie is, > > perhaps, also central to > > > the living of it?? > > > > > > In a third plane, we could proceed as if Sokolov's > > narration was not a > > > retrospective narration, but the on-time sequence > > of events with on-time > > > Sokolov's explanation of these events (in the > > moments in which the narrator > > > voice is assumed within the flashback). In this > > plane, there are several > > > interesting perezhivanie phenomena. Clearly, there > > is a Sokolov's activity > > > of experiencing-as-struggle, which initiates when > > he realizes that all his > > > family, except one son, had been killed 2 years > > ago. At this moment, his > > > life becomes meaningless; the meaning > > (m-perezhivanie) he uses to relate to > > > all his life (including the past) at this moment > > is expressed in his > > > conversation with his oncle: ?it's got to be that > > this life of mine is > > > nothing but a nightmare!?. In this moment, > > Sokolov's past in the prision > > > camp becomes also meaningless: then, his link to > > life (the m-perezhivanie > > > that made being alive meaningful to him) was > > meeting his family; but at > > > that time his family was already dead, so when he > > discovers it, he realizes > > > that this m-perezhivanie (the idea of meeting his > > family) was linking him > > > to death, not to life, so all his efforts to > > surviving become meaningless: > > > ?Every night, when I was a prisioner, I talked > > with them. Now it turns out > > > that for two years I was talking with the dead??. > > In this conversation, > > > however, his oncle offers him an alternative > > m-perezhivanie to relate to > > > his life: he still has a son, so the m-perehivanie > > of meeting his family > > > can still turns Sokolov's life meaningful: ?you've > > got to go on living. You > > > have to find Anatoly. When the war is over, your > > son will get married, you > > > will live with them. You will take up your > > carpentry again, play with your > > > grandkids?. It takes some time to Sokolov to enter > > into this > > > m-perezhivanie, but he does it and his life > > becomes meaningful again: ?and > > > then, unexpectedly, I've got a gleam of sunlight?. > > But, then, Anatoly also > > > dies. How to keep living? Here, Sokolov holds the > > m-perezhivanie that > > > linked him to life until that moment, and > > therefore, he needs a son; > > > pretending being the father of Vanya turns his > > life meaningful again. > > > > > > Another interesting thing, still at that level, is > > how Sokolov's relation > > > with his own immediate death changes along the > > different occasions in which > > > he faces it. I thing here there are examples of > > > experiencing-as-contemplation -in my view, this is > > not > > > experiencing-as-struggle because the situation of > > impossibility (the > > > immediate death) is removed existentially > > (Sokolov's life is given back to > > > him), so that there is not a permanent situation > > of impossibility which is > > > initially meaningless and is turned into > > meaningful. In each occasion in > > > which Sokolov is faced with his immediate death, > > the m-perezhivanie that > > > mediates this relationship is different. When he > > is captured, his > > > m-perezhivanie is expressed as: ?here's my death > > coming after me?. When he > > > is conducted to meet the nazi official, the > > m-perezhivanie is expressed as: > > > ?the end of your misery?, ?to my death and my > > release of this torment, I > > > will drink?. In the first, the death is running > > after Sokolov; in the > > > second, it is Sokolov happily going to meet death. > > Later, at the end of the > > > film, he faces his immediate death again, and the > > m-perezhivanie is > > > expressed as: ?I'm really worried that I might die > > in my sleep, and that > > > would frighten my little son?. > > > > > > Well, just some thoughts after watching this > > wonderful film. > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > > Marc. > > > > > > 2017-01-15 0:06 GMT+01:00 Christopher Schuck < > schuckcschuck@gmail.com>: > > > > > > > > Yes, definitely that article! And specifically, > > when I used "pivoting" I > > > couldn't help but think of Beth's earlier > > example about how a child will > > > use a stick as a pivot for a horse. Perhaps a > > somewhat different > > > application but related, no? > > > > > > On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 4:06 PM, Alfredo Jornet > > Gil > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Chris, all, > > > > > > your post is totally relevant to Beth's and > > Monica's article in the > > > special issue. They write about film and > > perezhivanie (quoting Sobchack) > > > the following: > > > > > > The reason that film allows us to glimpse the > > future is that there is a > > > connection between filmic time and ?real? > > time: ?The images of a film > > > > > exist > > > > > in the world as a temporal flow, within > > finitude and situation. Indeed, > > > > > the > > > > > fascination of the film is that it does not > > transcend our > > > > > lived-experience > > > > > of temporality, but rather that it seems to > > partake of it, to share it? > > > (1992, p. 60). > > > > > > And later > > > > > > "Specifically, the way that the flow of time > > becomes multidirectional is > > > that ?rehearsals make it necessary to think of > > the future in such a way > > > > > as > > > > > to create a past? (1985, p. 39). As Schechner > > ex-plains: ?In a very real > > > way the future ? the project coming into > > existence through the process of > > > rehearsal ? determines the past: what will be > > kept from earlier > > > > > rehearsals > > > > > or from the ?source ma-terials? (1985, p. > > 39)." > > > > > > Alfredo > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________ > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > on behalf of Christopher Schuck < > schuckcschuck@gmail.com> > > > Sent: 14 January 2017 21:43 > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Fate of a Man > > > > > > But that's both the limitation and strength of > > art or fictional narrative > > > as opposed to real life, isn't it? That art > > focuses our attention and > > > highlights certain features in a way that is > > idealized and artificially > > > "designed" to convey something more clearly > > and purely (but less > > > organically and authentically) than it would > > be conveyed in the course of > > > living it, or observing someone else living > > it? One way to get around > > > > > this > > > > > would be, as David says, to analyze the film > > in terms of clues as to the > > > stages of emergence. But maybe another way to > > use the film would be to > > > > > view > > > > > it not so much as a complete, self-sufficient > > "example" of perezhivanie, > > > > > as > > > > > a *tool *for pivoting back and forth between > > the concept of perezhivanie > > > > > as > > > > > imaginatively constructed (through fiction), > > and the concept of > > > perezhivanie as imaginatively constructed > > (through our real living > > > experience and observation of it). So, it > > would be the *pivoting* between > > > these two manifestations of the concept > > (designed vs. evolved, as David > > > > > put > > > > > it) that reveals new insights about > > perezhivanie, rather than > > > > > understanding > > > > > the concept from the film per se. > > > > > > On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 3:08 PM, David Kellogg > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > I think there's a good reason why Andy > > started a new thread on this: > > > > > he's a > > > > > very tidy thinker (quite unlike yours truly) > > and he knows that one > > > > > > > reason > > > > > > > why xmca threads are seldom cumulative is > > that they digress to related > > > problems without solving the immmediate > > ones. > > > > > > Yes, of course, a film allows us to consider > > an example of > > > > > "perezhivanie", > > > > > but it is a designed perezhivanie rather > > than an evolved one; it > > > > > > > doesn't > > > > > > > explicitly display the various stages of > > emergence required for a > > > > > > > genetic > > > > > > > analysis, unless we analyze it not as a > > complete and finished work of > > > > > > > art > > > > > > > but instead for clues as to the stages of > > its creation (the way that, > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > example, "Quietly Flows the Don" was > > analyzed to determine its > > > authenticity). > > > > > > I remember that In the original short story, > > the schnapps drinking > > > scene seemed like pure sleight of hand: an > > artistically gratuitous > > > > > example > > > > > of what eventually gave Soviet social > > realism such a bad name. > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 10:04 PM, Carol > > Macdonald < > > > > > > > carolmacdon@gmail.com > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Fellow XMCa-ers > > > > > > I have watched it through now, thank you > > Andy, but right now only > > > > > empirical > > > > > psychological categories come to mind. I > > will watch it again and in > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > meanwhile let my fellows with more recent > > experience of > > > > > > > > > /perezhivanie/ > > > > > > > take > > > > > the discussion further. > > > > > > It is a kind of timeless story, and modern > > film techniques would > > > > > > > perhaps > > > > > be > > > > > more explicit. At the least I would say it > > has for me a Russian > > > understanding of suffering, perhaps > > because of their unique > > > > > > > > > experience > > > > > of > > > > > > > it. But having said that, WWII must have > > generated other similar > > > experiences, apart from the first part > > about Andrei's family dying in > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > famine. > > > > > > Carol > > > > > > On 14 January 2017 at 02:15, Andy Blunden > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > I watched it in two parts with > > subtitles: > > > > > > http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x16w7fg_destiny-of-a-man- > > > > > 1959-pt-1_creation > > > http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x16wat4_destiny-of-a-man- > > > > > 1959-pt-2_creation > > > > > > Andy > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > Andy Blunden > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective- > > > > > > > > > decision-making > > > > > > > > > On 14/01/2017 2:35 AM, Beth Ferholt > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Thank you for taking us to a > > shared example. I think that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > having a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Carol A Macdonald Ph.D (Edin) > > > Cultural Historical Activity Theory > > > Honorary Research Fellow: Department of > > Linguistics, Unisa > > > alternative email address: tmacdoca@unisa.ac.za > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From ajrajala@gmail.com Wed Jan 18 22:47:32 2017 From: ajrajala@gmail.com (Antti Rajala) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2017 08:47:32 +0200 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Happy New Year and Perezhivanie! In-Reply-To: <99f438f6-47f7-7bd2-174b-6f9625ae15e8@mira.net> References: <1483344752182.40904@iped.uio.no> <587124d9.d957620a.4a5a8.bd56@mx.google.com> <1483820996800.91513@iped.uio.no> <1484253698990.7728@iped.uio.no> <1484328718783.79382@iped.uio.no> <587cfc5a.4e38630a.aa4eb.5a5d@mx.google.com> <587fb753.1aa3630a.f3dd3.63b0@mx.google.com> <99f438f6-47f7-7bd2-174b-6f9625ae15e8@mira.net> Message-ID: Thanks Andy for your thoughts on this, very useful. Yes - this way I have also understood functionalism (and your stance in this discussion), that is, as a social/sociological theory. And I agree with your critique of Leontiev's implicit social theory. Good point about Vasilyuk. I read Kozulin's 1991 paper (Life as authoring: The humanistic tradition in Russian psychology) which I first thought was the same one to which you referred in the Academia paper you linked, but then I noticed it was another one, although with quite similar content. Kozulin speaks of "The Psychology of Perezhivanie" and also of Vygotsky, when he uses their ideas to criticize Marxism. But indeed, maybe he was referring to dogmatic interpretations of Marx, which Vygotsky indeed criticized. Kozulin also linked Vygotsky and Kozulin to Bakhtin's dialogism, which is another story. Best, Antti On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 2:49 AM, Andy Blunden wrote: > Antti, firstly on "functionalism." There is an issue about conceiving of > the mind as an aggregate of various psychological functions, as opposed to > an integrated "system" in which every psychological function (e.g. > perceiving, acting, cognising, reading, ...) entails a particular > configuration of the entire system, and related issues. In this sense > Vygotsky could be said to be a structuralist and definitely not a > functionalist. Except of course, that as a Marxist he took the mind as the > subjective aspect of a subject-object which includes social relations as > its objective aspect. That is never what I have in mind when I talk about > functionalism and structuralism however. By "functionalism" I am always > referring to the sociological theory of Talcott Parsons and the tendency > among Soviet Marxists to integrate this functionalist view into Marxist > dogma. E.g., "the role of the petit bourgeoisie is to ..." By > "structuralism" I mean the current of social theory growing out of > Saussure's linguistics, Levy-Strauss's anthropology and Althusser's > anti-Humanist Marxism. One must, of course, appreciate the insights which > these currents of thinking bring to us, but when you get to the theories of > social stasis of American Functionalism and the anti-Humanism of Louis > Althusser, I confess it generates a visceral negative reaction from me. > Like Anthony Giddens, I see functionalism and structuralism, together, as a > bundle of theories of the world which pretends that there are "social > forces" which act independently of the consciousness, intentions and > understanding of the human actors through which they are active. > Functionalism and structuralism are together one side of a polarity, the > other of which is "hermeneutics" which lays all the emphasis on the > interpretation of the world by individuals, whether by means of Freudian > ideas, linguistic theories, literary criticism or "social psychology." Like > Giddens I look for a third way, but unlike Giddens I look to a serious > theory of cultural psychology, not a do-it-yourself psychology based on my > own personal intuitions. > > I haven't followed the views of Alex Kozulin, Antti, so I will simply > abstain on that question, but the Fedor Vasilyuk of today is emphatically > not a Marxist. He emphasises the power of prayer, which is something quite > foreign to the Marxist tradition. In 1984, when he wrote "The Psychology of > Perezhivanie," however, his views reflected to an extent the view of > Leontyev and his following, so in that sense and to that degree, he was a > Marxist. But he did not interpret Marxism dogmatically in the way Vygotsky > criticised in his day, and he was critical of Leontyev. BY turning to the > tradition of Russian Orthodox Christianity, it does seem that Vasilyuk > turned away from Marxism. Whether that is some kind of "humanism" I don't > know. "Humanism" is a very polysemous word. > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Andy Blunden > On 19/01/2017 7:53 AM, Antti Rajala wrote: > >> .... >> >> I wonder if there is some confusion regarding the notion of functionalism. >> Andy seems to refer to functionalism in social theory whereas David refers >> to functionalistic psychological theory. Maybe they do not speak of the >> same functionalism. Kozulin, suggested by Andy, seems to draw upon yet >> another tradition, Russian humanism, in which life is seen as literature >> or >> art. Perhaps, the preference for the notion of drama by Alfredo and >> Nikolai, has some resonance with this tradition. >> >> Andy, Kozulin depicts Vasilyuk's humanism in sharp contrast with Marxism. >> Do you agree? >> >> >> > From mcole@ucsd.edu Thu Jan 19 07:27:38 2017 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2017 15:27:38 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Fwd: [COGDEVSOC] 5 lectureships at University of Portsmouth, deadline 22 Jan In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Jobs ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Vasu Reddy Date: Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 6:48 AM Subject: [COGDEVSOC] 5 lectureships at University of Portsmouth, deadline 22 Jan To: , Dear All Apologies both for any cross-posting and for the short notice if this is the first time you receive this. We have 5 lectureships at Portsmouth, with a deadline of 22nd January. The details of the lectureships can be found at http://www.jobs.ac.uk/job/AWG191/lecturer-in-psychology-x-5/ Applications are invited for five permanent full time posts in the Department of Psychology. The department is expanding due to significant and sustained success in student recruitment and satisfaction, research and innovation. We offer a vibrant and supportive academic community with an excellent research environment and facilities, and opportunities for professional development for staff. We have a track record of providing an exceptional educational experience for our students. The Department is committed to equality and fully engages with Athena SWAN, currently holding a Bronze Award. We have a policy of linking our teaching, research and innovation, and are seeking highly motivated and collegial individuals who are passionate about their research and who can deliver high quality engaging teaching. We welcome applications from candidates in any area of Psychology who will enhance or extend the department's research strengths. We are seeking to make one appointment in the area of Disability and one appointment in the area of Clinical and/or Health Psychology (see: http://www.port.ac.uk/department-of-psychology/). The successful candidates will have demonstrable evidence of research excellence that will enable them to contribute to the Department?s submission to the Research Excellence Framework, and will contribute to the teaching of psychology at undergraduate and postgraduate level. We are aiming to appoint candidates who can be in post by the summer of 2017. For an informal discussion of the above posts please contact Dr James Ost, Interim Head, Department of Psychology (james.ost@port.ac.uk). Best wishes Vasu -- Professor Vasudevi Reddy Centre for Situated Action and Communication Department of Psychology University of Portsmouth King Henry Building King Henry 1st Street Portsmouth PO1 2DY UK Tel: +44 2392 846307 Fax: +44 2392 846300 _______________________________________________ To post to the CDS listserv, send your message to: cogdevsoc@lists.cogdevsoc.org (If you belong to the listserv and have not included any large attachments, your message will be posted without moderation--so be careful!) To subscribe or unsubscribe from the listserv, visit: http://lists.cogdevsoc.org/listinfo.cgi/cogdevsoc-cogdevsoc.org From schuckcschuck@gmail.com Thu Jan 19 16:00:35 2017 From: schuckcschuck@gmail.com (Christopher Schuck) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2017 19:00:35 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Fate of a Man In-Reply-To: <2270f5e7-7d82-5150-89a3-808a4e20b89b@mira.net> References: <048522a2-cca0-3e56-cae2-f2142b9fbd5a@mira.net> <1484427999407.2877@iped.uio.no> <2270f5e7-7d82-5150-89a3-808a4e20b89b@mira.net> Message-ID: For some reason I couldn't see the subtitles showing up in Fate of a Man the first time, so I started to watch it dubbed in English instead. But the mannered Hollywood accents definitely were not exactly helping to convey the "real Russian soul" Robbins talks about! It felt like I was being asked to imagine Cary Grant inhabiting Andrei's perezhivanie-ing body. So, I started over with the subtitled version. Here are some quick initial reflections: wonderful movie, and in Andrei one of the more memorable characters I have seen. But I also found myself thinking how big a difference there is between watching a film on my 12-inch laptop with headphones (my only option at the moment), and sitting back and immersing yourself in a darkened theater or at least on a widescreen TV without any other distractions, allowing ourselves to "fall into this space" by virtue of our very awareness of the illusion generated by the frame, as Beth and Monica put it. This difference becomes even bigger if the screen you're viewing it on also enables you to quickly check email from time to time during the movie, as many people do these days. If we are to consider the film experience as a model (analogy?) for perezhivanie or even a certain kind of simulation of it, this effect that occurs when we lose ourselves in a film would be undermined by an especially small frame or poor viewing conditions. At what point does "the knowledge that the movement we experience is just an illusion" (p. 2 in their article) undermine the perezhivanie-like quality of film as opposed to forming an integral part of it? And, might the way distraction functions to undermine perezhivanie in the context of film in any way mirror how we "distract" ourselves in the course of living lives from conscious engagement with the perezhivanie we are otherwise undergoing? Is viewing a film on a 12-inch screen while checking email and calling it an "experience" in any way analogous to the self-deceptions and escapes we engage in during the course of either experience-as-struggle or experience-as-contemplation? I did not check email while watching Fate of a Man, by the way. Just in case you're wondering. As for the film itself: I was struck by the incidental way in which the earlier loss of his childhood family is introduced and acknowledged at the very outset, and how this contrasts with the dramatic ongoing perezhivanie that ensues going forward: it is as if this early loss is "taken for granted" as also part of the Russian experience. We are not privy to any perezhivanie he might have presumably undergone before that point; it is simply not "within the frame." At several points, I was reminded of Satyajit's World of Apu (last movie in his trilogy), where there was also a set of early losses and a relationship formed with a "son." Have any of you seen it? I think it would also be a good example of perezhivanie. I would not want to overemphasize the use of literary motifs, since Bondarchuk was presumably not making any references to the concept of perezhivanie as such. But there were several devices that evoked Beth and Monica's passage from To The Lighthouse ("Time stand still here"), and their metaphor of a life (or more specifically, a perezhivanie within a life) spiraling back over itself to bring two disparate moments into juxtaposition in a way such that "your life becomes three-dimensional again" (p. 2). One occurs in the various scenes when Andrei gazes up at the sky in reverie and all we see are clouds, or the scene where he lies in the grass after his first escape and the camera pans back as it becomes very quiet, leaving nothing but him swallowed up in the vastness of nature. There is a certain timeless quality to these scenes, a sense that he is momentarily transcending the linear temporal flow of his life as he either stands outside it and "stands still" in it. It could be a thousand years passing by in those clouds, or just the 17 years of his second phase; it suddenly doesn't matter. Another thing I noticed was the use of the two musical themes: the love song the accordionist plays for him and Irina, and the festive music incongruously piped in at the concentration camp during that amazing scene around Part 1, minute 45 where the prisoners are being marched in and the crematorium is going full blast down the road. At some point (I couldn't relocate it) Andrei has a flashback where he revisits the love song and his memories of Irina; then at minute 20 in Part 2, while processing his family's death after coming home from the war, he finds himself hearing the concentration camp song on the record player and is suddenly transported back to that traumatic experience. Yet he does not smash the record right away; he stares at it for a minute, almost as if he is resituating these two moments in relation to each other. Perhaps I am overanalyzing, but I found both these motifs to speak to Beth and Monica's examples in the way they bring two moments back into contact with each other. Finally, Mike and Andy's discussion in the Misha thread about the watching of a film functioning as perezhivanie for those viewers for whom it reflects and repeats their own experience, raises a question about the difference between extended perezhivanie and the personal re-enactment of one's perezhivanie within a much smaller time scale (the two or three hours spent watching the movie). I hope at some point we could delve more into this issue of time frame and time scale in various forms of perezhivanie. Chris On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 8:39 PM, Andy Blunden wrote: > Thank you Marc! It was the third "plane" which was my intention in > providing "Fate of a Man" for discussion. You picked out what were for me > also the main (but by no means the only) instances of perezhivanija in this > movie. > > It seems to me that Sokolov (the author) offers one perezhivanie in > particular as the main theme of the movie. At the beginning of the movie, > the man and boy walk up the path to the camera and at the end of the movie > they walk off together again. So this is the central theme. As you say, > when Sokolov's family has all been killed, even his talented war-hero son > who was going to be a famous mathematician, his life has become > meaningless. I really liked your reflections of Sokolov's reflections too. > He sees the young orphan boy who, he discovers, has no family and doesn't > even know what town he comes from, but is aimlessly living on pieces of > rubbish. He sees that the two of them are in the same situation. So after > some time mulling this over a they sit together in the truck, he lies to > the boy and tells him that he is the boy's father, and they embrace. But > the boy questions this and he reasserts his claim and the boy accepts this. > The man is able to define a new meaning for his life; he has done this > autonomously without the help of a therapist, but he still needs another, > the boy, to embody that meaning. But he knows it is his own invention. The > boy on the other hand has to be made to believe it is true; he is not > sufficiently mature to manufacture this meaning himself, but as a child he > can be guided by an adult. As you say, Marc, it is very significant when > Sokolov tells us how he is now, again, worried about his own death. What if > I died in my sleep? that would be a shock for my son! > > For me, this reflection causes me to look back on the man's whole struggle > during the war: in the first phase he does not differentiate between his > life as a father and husband and his life as a Soviet citizen - war is his > duty and he is confident, as is everyone else, of victory. His bravery in > driving his truck to the front line under fire reflects the fact that he > has never imagined his own death. Then he finds himself prostrate before 2 > Nazi soldiers who we assume are going among the wounded shooting anyone who > has survived. But surprisingly, he is allowed to live, but is to be used as > a slave. Sokolov has been confronted by his own mortality for the first > time and he chooses life, but accepts slavery (Sartre and Hegel both > thematize this moment in their philosophy). In this second phase of > Sokolov's life he is a survivor. Everything hinges on surviving and > returning to his wife and family. As you point out, Marc, his later > reflections on this are particularly poignant, when he discovers the > futility of this hope. Eventually, the life of forced labour becomes > unbearable. He cries out: "Why are we forced to dig 3 cubic metres when 1 > cubic meter is enough for a grave!" Sokolov has accepted and embraced death > after all. (Transition to the third phase.) To his German masters this is > an unendurable act of defiance. As David points out, there are flaws in the > scene which follows, but ... he confronts his own death defiantly, stares > it in the eye, spits on it, and his life again gains meaning as a "brave > Soviet soldier" unafraid of death even in such an impossible moment. Not > only does he survive, but takes the Nazi Colonel prisoner and hands the war > plans over to the Red Army. Now, when he is offered the chance to return to > his wife as a war hero he declines and asks to be sent back to the front. > His life has adopted this new meaning which casts his life as a father into > the shade. He no longer fears death. But he is persuaded to take time off > and learns of the death of his family. As Marc relates, the continued > survival of his son, who is now also a war hero, provides continued meaning > and integrates the two themes in his life. This takes work, as Marc points > out, and he has the assistance of an older man, in achieving this > redefinition of his life. But tragically, with the death of his son (and NB > the end of the war, albeit in victory) his life is again without meaning. > Fourth phase. He has survived, but has no purpose. By becoming a father > again (Fifth phase), he regains the fear of death and meaning in his life. > It is real work, and we witness this psychological turmoil as he copes with > the idea that this scruffy orphan boy could be a son to him, and eventually > he manages it. > > The transition between each phase is a critical period during which > Sokolov's personality is transformed. Note also, that there is a > premonition of this perezhivanie in Sokolov's earlier life: his family is > wiped out in the Civil War and the famine of 1922, then he meets his > wife-to-be, also raised in an orphanage, and they together create a life > and have 17 happy years before the Nazi invasion intrudes. So from the > beginning of the movie we are introduced to the main theme. > > These are the main moments in the movie, which caused me to select it for > discussion rather than any other movie. Also, there is no doubt that in > producing this movie in 1958 the Soviet government was engaged with its > people, in a process of collective perezhivanie and by reflecting on the > collective perezhivanie during the period of the war, before and after, > they aim to assist the people in collectively assigning meaning to this > terrible suffering and like the man and his "son" walking again into the > future. As a propaganda movie, of course, it is open to much criticism, but > that is hardly the point. I appreciate Marc's analysis in terms of the > other concepts he has introduced. I wouldn't mind a recap on these. In > terms of Vasilyuk's concepts, Sokolov's life-world is *simple and > difficult*. The boy's life world is *simple and easy*. > > Can we continue to discuss "Fate of a Man", while I open another movie for > analysis? I think there are at least 10 subscribers to this list who have > published in learned journals on the topic of perezhivanie in childhood. > Perhaps one of you would like to reflect on the boy's perezhivanija? > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Andy Blunden > http://home.mira.net/~andy > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > On 18/01/2017 5:14 AM, Marc Clar? wrote: > >> Hi, all, >> >> and thank you, Andy, for sharing this amazing film, which I didn't know. I >> think it will be very useful to share and discuss our respective views on >> perezhivanie. >> >> In my view, the film could be analyzed in terms of perezhivanie in three >> different planes. First, we could consider the person who watches the >> film, >> and we could study how the meaning she forms for the film restructures her >> relationship with aspects of her real life -such as, for example, her own >> death or the death of a beloved one, etc. (perhaps this is a little bit >> like what Beth and Monica, or Veresov and Fleer, do with their study of >> playworlds?). In this plane, which would be perhaps the most naturalistic >> one, the film could be studied as an human-made cultural artifact which >> restuctures psychological functions; here, the meaning formed for the film >> by who watches it and uses it as mediator in her relation to her real life >> would be an m-perezhivanie. >> >> In a second plane, we could proceed as if the film was real life, and we >> could consider Sokolov telling his story to the man he meets by the river >> (a little bit like Carla telling her story to me). In this plane, >> Sokolov's >> narrative (i.e., what is showed to us as narrated flashback) could be >> considered as a cultural artifact that Sokolov uses to relate to all what >> happened to him. At this plane, the meaning of this narrative would be the >> m-perezhivanie that, in that moment, mediates the relationship between >> Sokolov and the war events he experienced years ago (but these events are >> still very present to him, so although relating to past events, there is >> here a Sokolov's activity [towards the past war events] which is in >> present >> -this echoes Christopher when, within our conversations, said: ?Part of >> this might also be a question of what it means to describe and represent >> one's own perezhivanie figuratively/narratively (whether to others, or to >> oneself), as opposed to living that perezhivanie. Especially if the >> attempt >> to capture/represent one's own perezhivanie is, perhaps, also central to >> the living of it?? >> >> In a third plane, we could proceed as if Sokolov's narration was not a >> retrospective narration, but the on-time sequence of events with on-time >> Sokolov's explanation of these events (in the moments in which the >> narrator >> voice is assumed within the flashback). In this plane, there are several >> interesting perezhivanie phenomena. Clearly, there is a Sokolov's activity >> of experiencing-as-struggle, which initiates when he realizes that all his >> family, except one son, had been killed 2 years ago. At this moment, his >> life becomes meaningless; the meaning (m-perezhivanie) he uses to relate >> to >> all his life (including the past) at this moment is expressed in his >> conversation with his oncle: ?it's got to be that this life of mine is >> nothing but a nightmare!?. In this moment, Sokolov's past in the prision >> camp becomes also meaningless: then, his link to life (the m-perezhivanie >> that made being alive meaningful to him) was meeting his family; but at >> that time his family was already dead, so when he discovers it, he >> realizes >> that this m-perezhivanie (the idea of meeting his family) was linking him >> to death, not to life, so all his efforts to surviving become meaningless: >> ?Every night, when I was a prisioner, I talked with them. Now it turns out >> that for two years I was talking with the dead??. In this conversation, >> however, his oncle offers him an alternative m-perezhivanie to relate to >> his life: he still has a son, so the m-perehivanie of meeting his family >> can still turns Sokolov's life meaningful: ?you've got to go on living. >> You >> have to find Anatoly. When the war is over, your son will get married, you >> will live with them. You will take up your carpentry again, play with your >> grandkids?. It takes some time to Sokolov to enter into this >> m-perezhivanie, but he does it and his life becomes meaningful again: ?and >> then, unexpectedly, I've got a gleam of sunlight?. But, then, Anatoly also >> dies. How to keep living? Here, Sokolov holds the m-perezhivanie that >> linked him to life until that moment, and therefore, he needs a son; >> pretending being the father of Vanya turns his life meaningful again. >> >> Another interesting thing, still at that level, is how Sokolov's relation >> with his own immediate death changes along the different occasions in >> which >> he faces it. I thing here there are examples of >> experiencing-as-contemplation -in my view, this is not >> experiencing-as-struggle because the situation of impossibility (the >> immediate death) is removed existentially (Sokolov's life is given back to >> him), so that there is not a permanent situation of impossibility which is >> initially meaningless and is turned into meaningful. In each occasion in >> which Sokolov is faced with his immediate death, the m-perezhivanie that >> mediates this relationship is different. When he is captured, his >> m-perezhivanie is expressed as: ?here's my death coming after me?. When he >> is conducted to meet the nazi official, the m-perezhivanie is expressed >> as: >> ?the end of your misery?, ?to my death and my release of this torment, I >> will drink?. In the first, the death is running after Sokolov; in the >> second, it is Sokolov happily going to meet death. Later, at the end of >> the >> film, he faces his immediate death again, and the m-perezhivanie is >> expressed as: ?I'm really worried that I might die in my sleep, and that >> would frighten my little son?. >> >> Well, just some thoughts after watching this wonderful film. >> >> Best regards, >> >> Marc. >> >> 2017-01-15 0:06 GMT+01:00 Christopher Schuck : >> >> Yes, definitely that article! And specifically, when I used "pivoting" I >>> couldn't help but think of Beth's earlier example about how a child will >>> use a stick as a pivot for a horse. Perhaps a somewhat different >>> application but related, no? >>> >>> On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 4:06 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >> > >>> wrote: >>> >>> Chris, all, >>>> >>>> your post is totally relevant to Beth's and Monica's article in the >>>> special issue. They write about film and perezhivanie (quoting Sobchack) >>>> the following: >>>> >>>> The reason that film allows us to glimpse the future is that there is a >>>> connection between filmic time and ?real? time: ?The images of a film >>>> >>> exist >>> >>>> in the world as a temporal flow, within finitude and situation. Indeed, >>>> >>> the >>> >>>> fascination of the film is that it does not transcend our >>>> >>> lived-experience >>> >>>> of temporality, but rather that it seems to partake of it, to share it? >>>> (1992, p. 60). >>>> >>>> And later >>>> >>>> "Specifically, the way that the flow of time becomes multidirectional is >>>> that ?rehearsals make it necessary to think of the future in such a way >>>> >>> as >>> >>>> to create a past? (1985, p. 39). As Schechner ex-plains: ?In a very real >>>> way the future ? the project coming into existence through the process >>>> of >>>> rehearsal ? determines the past: what will be kept from earlier >>>> >>> rehearsals >>> >>>> or from the ?source ma-terials? (1985, p. 39)." >>>> >>>> Alfredo >>>> >>>> >>>> ________________________________________ >>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>> on behalf of Christopher Schuck >>>> Sent: 14 January 2017 21:43 >>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Fate of a Man >>>> >>>> But that's both the limitation and strength of art or fictional >>>> narrative >>>> as opposed to real life, isn't it? That art focuses our attention and >>>> highlights certain features in a way that is idealized and artificially >>>> "designed" to convey something more clearly and purely (but less >>>> organically and authentically) than it would be conveyed in the course >>>> of >>>> living it, or observing someone else living it? One way to get around >>>> >>> this >>> >>>> would be, as David says, to analyze the film in terms of clues as to the >>>> stages of emergence. But maybe another way to use the film would be to >>>> >>> view >>> >>>> it not so much as a complete, self-sufficient "example" of perezhivanie, >>>> >>> as >>> >>>> a *tool *for pivoting back and forth between the concept of perezhivanie >>>> >>> as >>> >>>> imaginatively constructed (through fiction), and the concept of >>>> perezhivanie as imaginatively constructed (through our real living >>>> experience and observation of it). So, it would be the *pivoting* >>>> between >>>> these two manifestations of the concept (designed vs. evolved, as David >>>> >>> put >>> >>>> it) that reveals new insights about perezhivanie, rather than >>>> >>> understanding >>> >>>> the concept from the film per se. >>>> >>>> On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 3:08 PM, David Kellogg >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> I think there's a good reason why Andy started a new thread on this: >>>>> >>>> he's a >>>> >>>>> very tidy thinker (quite unlike yours truly) and he knows that one >>>>> >>>> reason >>> >>>> why xmca threads are seldom cumulative is that they digress to related >>>>> problems without solving the immmediate ones. >>>>> >>>>> Yes, of course, a film allows us to consider an example of >>>>> >>>> "perezhivanie", >>>> >>>>> but it is a designed perezhivanie rather than an evolved one; it >>>>> >>>> doesn't >>> >>>> explicitly display the various stages of emergence required for a >>>>> >>>> genetic >>> >>>> analysis, unless we analyze it not as a complete and finished work of >>>>> >>>> art >>> >>>> but instead for clues as to the stages of its creation (the way that, >>>>> >>>> for >>> >>>> example, "Quietly Flows the Don" was analyzed to determine its >>>>> authenticity). >>>>> >>>>> I remember that In the original short story, the schnapps drinking >>>>> scene seemed like pure sleight of hand: an artistically gratuitous >>>>> >>>> example >>>> >>>>> of what eventually gave Soviet social realism such a bad name. >>>>> >>>>> David Kellogg >>>>> Macquarie University >>>>> >>>>> On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 10:04 PM, Carol Macdonald < >>>>> >>>> carolmacdon@gmail.com >>> >>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Fellow XMCa-ers >>>>>> >>>>>> I have watched it through now, thank you Andy, but right now only >>>>>> >>>>> empirical >>>>> >>>>>> psychological categories come to mind. I will watch it again and in >>>>>> >>>>> the >>>> >>>>> meanwhile let my fellows with more recent experience of >>>>>> >>>>> /perezhivanie/ >>> >>>> take >>>>> >>>>>> the discussion further. >>>>>> >>>>>> It is a kind of timeless story, and modern film techniques would >>>>>> >>>>> perhaps >>>> >>>>> be >>>>> >>>>>> more explicit. At the least I would say it has for me a Russian >>>>>> understanding of suffering, perhaps because of their unique >>>>>> >>>>> experience >>> >>>> of >>>> >>>>> it. But having said that, WWII must have generated other similar >>>>>> experiences, apart from the first part about Andrei's family dying in >>>>>> >>>>> the >>>> >>>>> famine. >>>>>> >>>>>> Carol >>>>>> >>>>>> On 14 January 2017 at 02:15, Andy Blunden wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> I watched it in two parts with subtitles: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x16w7fg_destiny-of-a-man- >>>>>>> 1959-pt-1_creation >>>>>>> http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x16wat4_destiny-of-a-man- >>>>>>> 1959-pt-2_creation >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Andy >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>>> Andy Blunden >>>>>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy >>>>>>> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective- >>>>>>> >>>>>> decision-making >>>> >>>>> On 14/01/2017 2:35 AM, Beth Ferholt wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thank you for taking us to a shared example. I think that >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> having a >>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Carol A Macdonald Ph.D (Edin) >>>>>> Cultural Historical Activity Theory >>>>>> Honorary Research Fellow: Department of Linguistics, Unisa >>>>>> alternative email address: tmacdoca@unisa.ac.za >>>>>> >>>>>> >> > From dkellogg60@gmail.com Thu Jan 19 16:01:43 2017 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2017 11:01:43 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism In-Reply-To: References: <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C71964@CIO-KRC-D1MBX04.osuad.osu.edu> Message-ID: I think that the debate over John Lewis's comments and his boycott of the inauguration today shows how quasi-needs are formed in the body politic. Of course, all political needs are quasi-needs: we do not require the vote the way that we require food and drink. But they are also real needs: the right to an equal share of the commodities you produce is a quasi-need, but there's a real need there, for sure. As understand it there are three arguments for boycotting the inauguration: a) Tu quoques. The Republicans have seized control of government by delegitimizing the previous president, by complete and unconditional noncooperation, by taking hostages, and this is now the only way to seize control of government back again. b) False equivalence. The Republicans did not have the consensus of 17 intelligence agencies to show that Barack Obama had forged his birth certificate, and the Electoral College is an explicitly undemocratic anachronism. So what was an illegitimate tactic in Republican hands is now justified. This is Lewis's argument, but it ignores the fact that Russians really did less to win the election for Trump than Australians did (Rupert Murdoch). c) The "peaceful transition of power" is simply not the way in which new quasi-needs come into being. When Obama says that people do not need to "die" for voting rights because our forefathers did so in our stead, he is both acknowledging that votes are a consequence and not a cause and suggesting that now they are a cause and not a consequence: there is one history for our forefathers and a very different one for ourselves. That isn't the way history works. Yes, the bow of history bends towards justice; no, the "peaceful transition of power" is not what bends it. Back during the election, a propos a dispute over peer review, Roth suggested that I was arguing at the level of a) or b). I think c) is much closer to the way I really feel, particularly today. David Kellogg Macquarie University On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 2:51 PM, mike cole wrote: > Yes Michael, > > It feels like the world of the later 1930's about the time I was born as > that period came down to me through the prism of a family of "premature > anti fascists." > > For a great re-creation of those times see the highly ambivalent film by > Frank Capra, "meet John Doe." It has American big capital interconnected > with fascism combined with populist collectivism in a manner that points at > the media (as then experienced) as the bad guys in disguise. Happy Ending, > Beethoven Ode to Joy and all. > > It's come round again, nastier this time. > > Mike > On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 6:20 PM Glassman, Michael > wrote: > > > Mike > > > > > > > > It was so interesting to read this note after reading the Cognition and > > Instruction essay. All the way through it I kept thinking we have been > > here before. It reminded me of the scholars, especially those who had > > escaped from Germany, trying to make sense of what had happened to their > > society during World War II. The foremost in my mind was Lewin. Except > I > > wonder if he would say the process of transformative action starts not > with > > emergence of quasi-needs, but our willingness and abilities to step back > > from our quasi-needs and the ways that they drive us, often to > > dysfunctional behaviors that it ultimately destructive to both our > society > > and to us as individuals. How hard this is to do, we have to keep going > > back again and again. The quasi-needs, tribalism, acceptance, standing > are > > always there. It is how they shape us that is critical. > > > > > > > > Michael > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto: > > xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole > > > > Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 8:31 PM > > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism > > > > > > > > In following the perezhivanie thread I encountered the note I > re-membered. > > > > And interestingly mis-remembered. A translation into my focus on > > mediational means. He places the starting point of the process of > > transformative action at the emergence of quasi-needs (from Kurt Lewin). > > > > That seems correct to me. The new mediational means emerge under > > environmental presses. Ever functionalist ego need a goal(!). (The > problem > > with functionalism) In David's words, > > > > > > > > Perhaps the place we should look for "exaptations" that can save both our > > personalities and our environment is not in our evolved needs, but in yet > > to be designed quasi-needs. Artificial organs, after all, always suggest > > new and ever more artificial functions, like chess and language. > > > > > > > > This point seems worth keeping in mind as we look at where this group of > > critical scholars who work within the Learning Sciences disciplinary > > framework would like to lead us. > > > > > > > > mike > > > > > > > > > From ablunden@mira.net Thu Jan 19 16:39:29 2017 From: ablunden@mira.net (Andy Blunden) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2017 11:39:29 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Fate of a Man In-Reply-To: References: <048522a2-cca0-3e56-cae2-f2142b9fbd5a@mira.net> <1484427999407.2877@iped.uio.no> <2270f5e7-7d82-5150-89a3-808a4e20b89b@mira.net> Message-ID: Thank you for those reflections, Chris! The conditions under which I watched Fate of Man meant that I listened without audio, so I missed all these important allusions that you experienced and analysed. The way the music is used both to represent Andrei's reflection and by allusion, to induce reflection in the audience is very important from the point of view of representing/producing perezhivaniya, and the connections you make with Beth's paper are very appropriate on that point. The other point which I would like to emphasise in your analysis is the "time standing still." Russian psychologists report that this phenomenon, of time appearing to stand still for a moment, is characteristic of perezhivanie in its fullest development. It is also connected I think by the fact that our narrative memory of a course of events is built around these moments. Which brings us to the connection of perezhivaniya to the whole question of the formation of autobiographical narratives and consequently of identity. It also connects with Constantin Stanislavskii's idea of perezhivanie. I will post a text for analysis presently which also alludes to "time standing still." Apart from small screens and iPhones, Chris, of course, watching this movie in 2017 far away from the 1958 USSR in time and space, we *cannot* have the same /perezhivanie/ as the 1958 Soviet audience it was made for. Presumably it is like-experiences in our own lives which are summoned up by the watching of "Fate of a Man," adding a new shade to our own identity and our conception of the experiences of other people and ability to empathise. Andy ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making On 20/01/2017 11:00 AM, Christopher Schuck wrote: > For some reason I couldn't see the subtitles showing up in Fate of a Man > the first time, so I started to watch it dubbed in English instead. But the > mannered Hollywood accents definitely were not exactly helping to convey > the "real Russian soul" Robbins talks about! It felt like I was being asked > to imagine Cary Grant inhabiting Andrei's perezhivanie-ing body. So, I > started over with the subtitled version. > > Here are some quick initial reflections: wonderful movie, and in Andrei one > of the more memorable characters I have seen. But I also found myself > thinking how big a difference there is between watching a film on my > 12-inch laptop with headphones (my only option at the moment), and sitting > back and immersing yourself in a darkened theater or at least on a > widescreen TV without any other distractions, allowing ourselves to "fall > into this space" by virtue of our very awareness of the illusion generated > by the frame, as Beth and Monica put it. This difference becomes even > bigger if the screen you're viewing it on also enables you to quickly check > email from time to time during the movie, as many people do these days. If > we are to consider the film experience as a model (analogy?) for > perezhivanie or even a certain kind of simulation of it, this effect that > occurs when we lose ourselves in a film would be undermined by an > especially small frame or poor viewing conditions. At what point does "the > knowledge that the movement we experience is just an illusion" (p. 2 in > their article) undermine the perezhivanie-like quality of film as opposed > to forming an integral part of it? And, might the way distraction functions > to undermine perezhivanie in the context of film in any way mirror how we > "distract" ourselves in the course of living lives from conscious > engagement with the perezhivanie we are otherwise undergoing? Is viewing a > film on a 12-inch screen while checking email and calling it an > "experience" in any way analogous to the self-deceptions and escapes we > engage in during the course of either experience-as-struggle or > experience-as-contemplation? I did not check email while watching Fate of a > Man, by the way. Just in case you're wondering. > > As for the film itself: I was struck by the incidental way in which the > earlier loss of his childhood family is introduced and acknowledged at the > very outset, and how this contrasts with the dramatic ongoing perezhivanie > that ensues going forward: it is as if this early loss is "taken for > granted" as also part of the Russian experience. We are not privy to any > perezhivanie he might have presumably undergone before that point; it is > simply not "within the frame." At several points, I was reminded of > Satyajit's World of Apu (last movie in his trilogy), where there was also a > set of early losses and a relationship formed with a "son." Have any of you > seen it? I think it would also be a good example of perezhivanie. > > I would not want to overemphasize the use of literary motifs, since > Bondarchuk was presumably not making any references to the concept of > perezhivanie as such. But there were several devices that evoked Beth and > Monica's passage from To The Lighthouse ("Time stand still here"), and > their metaphor of a life (or more specifically, a perezhivanie within a > life) spiraling back over itself to bring two disparate moments into > juxtaposition in a way such that "your life becomes three-dimensional > again" (p. 2). One occurs in the various scenes when Andrei gazes up at the > sky in reverie and all we see are clouds, or the scene where he lies in the > grass after his first escape and the camera pans back as it becomes very > quiet, leaving nothing but him swallowed up in the vastness of nature. > There is a certain timeless quality to these scenes, a sense that he is > momentarily transcending the linear temporal flow of his life as he either > stands outside it and "stands still" in it. It could be a thousand years > passing by in those clouds, or just the 17 years of his second phase; it > suddenly doesn't matter. Another thing I noticed was the use of the two > musical themes: the love song the accordionist plays for him and Irina, and > the festive music incongruously piped in at the concentration camp during > that amazing scene around Part 1, minute 45 where the prisoners are being > marched in and the crematorium is going full blast down the road. At some > point (I couldn't relocate it) Andrei has a flashback where he revisits the > love song and his memories of Irina; then at minute 20 in Part 2, while > processing his family's death after coming home from the war, he finds > himself hearing the concentration camp song on the record player and is > suddenly transported back to that traumatic experience. Yet he does not > smash the record right away; he stares at it for a minute, almost as if he > is resituating these two moments in relation to each other. > > Perhaps I am overanalyzing, but I found both these motifs to speak to Beth > and Monica's examples in the way they bring two moments back into contact > with each other. > > Finally, Mike and Andy's discussion in the Misha thread about the watching > of a film functioning as perezhivanie for those viewers for whom it > reflects and repeats their own experience, raises a question about the > difference between extended perezhivanie and the personal re-enactment of > one's perezhivanie within a much smaller time scale (the two or three hours > spent watching the movie). I hope at some point we could delve more into > this issue of time frame and time scale in various forms of perezhivanie. > > Chris > > > On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 8:39 PM, Andy Blunden wrote: > >> Thank you Marc! It was the third "plane" which was my intention in >> providing "Fate of a Man" for discussion. You picked out what were for me >> also the main (but by no means the only) instances of perezhivanija in this >> movie. >> >> It seems to me that Sokolov (the author) offers one perezhivanie in >> particular as the main theme of the movie. At the beginning of the movie, >> the man and boy walk up the path to the camera and at the end of the movie >> they walk off together again. So this is the central theme. As you say, >> when Sokolov's family has all been killed, even his talented war-hero son >> who was going to be a famous mathematician, his life has become >> meaningless. I really liked your reflections of Sokolov's reflections too. >> He sees the young orphan boy who, he discovers, has no family and doesn't >> even know what town he comes from, but is aimlessly living on pieces of >> rubbish. He sees that the two of them are in the same situation. So after >> some time mulling this over a they sit together in the truck, he lies to >> the boy and tells him that he is the boy's father, and they embrace. But >> the boy questions this and he reasserts his claim and the boy accepts this. >> The man is able to define a new meaning for his life; he has done this >> autonomously without the help of a therapist, but he still needs another, >> the boy, to embody that meaning. But he knows it is his own invention. The >> boy on the other hand has to be made to believe it is true; he is not >> sufficiently mature to manufacture this meaning himself, but as a child he >> can be guided by an adult. As you say, Marc, it is very significant when >> Sokolov tells us how he is now, again, worried about his own death. What if >> I died in my sleep? that would be a shock for my son! >> >> For me, this reflection causes me to look back on the man's whole struggle >> during the war: in the first phase he does not differentiate between his >> life as a father and husband and his life as a Soviet citizen - war is his >> duty and he is confident, as is everyone else, of victory. His bravery in >> driving his truck to the front line under fire reflects the fact that he >> has never imagined his own death. Then he finds himself prostrate before 2 >> Nazi soldiers who we assume are going among the wounded shooting anyone who >> has survived. But surprisingly, he is allowed to live, but is to be used as >> a slave. Sokolov has been confronted by his own mortality for the first >> time and he chooses life, but accepts slavery (Sartre and Hegel both >> thematize this moment in their philosophy). In this second phase of >> Sokolov's life he is a survivor. Everything hinges on surviving and >> returning to his wife and family. As you point out, Marc, his later >> reflections on this are particularly poignant, when he discovers the >> futility of this hope. Eventually, the life of forced labour becomes >> unbearable. He cries out: "Why are we forced to dig 3 cubic metres when 1 >> cubic meter is enough for a grave!" Sokolov has accepted and embraced death >> after all. (Transition to the third phase.) To his German masters this is >> an unendurable act of defiance. As David points out, there are flaws in the >> scene which follows, but ... he confronts his own death defiantly, stares >> it in the eye, spits on it, and his life again gains meaning as a "brave >> Soviet soldier" unafraid of death even in such an impossible moment. Not >> only does he survive, but takes the Nazi Colonel prisoner and hands the war >> plans over to the Red Army. Now, when he is offered the chance to return to >> his wife as a war hero he declines and asks to be sent back to the front. >> His life has adopted this new meaning which casts his life as a father into >> the shade. He no longer fears death. But he is persuaded to take time off >> and learns of the death of his family. As Marc relates, the continued >> survival of his son, who is now also a war hero, provides continued meaning >> and integrates the two themes in his life. This takes work, as Marc points >> out, and he has the assistance of an older man, in achieving this >> redefinition of his life. But tragically, with the death of his son (and NB >> the end of the war, albeit in victory) his life is again without meaning. >> Fourth phase. He has survived, but has no purpose. By becoming a father >> again (Fifth phase), he regains the fear of death and meaning in his life. >> It is real work, and we witness this psychological turmoil as he copes with >> the idea that this scruffy orphan boy could be a son to him, and eventually >> he manages it. >> >> The transition between each phase is a critical period during which >> Sokolov's personality is transformed. Note also, that there is a >> premonition of this perezhivanie in Sokolov's earlier life: his family is >> wiped out in the Civil War and the famine of 1922, then he meets his >> wife-to-be, also raised in an orphanage, and they together create a life >> and have 17 happy years before the Nazi invasion intrudes. So from the >> beginning of the movie we are introduced to the main theme. >> >> These are the main moments in the movie, which caused me to select it for >> discussion rather than any other movie. Also, there is no doubt that in >> producing this movie in 1958 the Soviet government was engaged with its >> people, in a process of collective perezhivanie and by reflecting on the >> collective perezhivanie during the period of the war, before and after, >> they aim to assist the people in collectively assigning meaning to this >> terrible suffering and like the man and his "son" walking again into the >> future. As a propaganda movie, of course, it is open to much criticism, but >> that is hardly the point. I appreciate Marc's analysis in terms of the >> other concepts he has introduced. I wouldn't mind a recap on these. In >> terms of Vasilyuk's concepts, Sokolov's life-world is *simple and >> difficult*. The boy's life world is *simple and easy*. >> >> Can we continue to discuss "Fate of a Man", while I open another movie for >> analysis? I think there are at least 10 subscribers to this list who have >> published in learned journals on the topic of perezhivanie in childhood. >> Perhaps one of you would like to reflect on the boy's perezhivanija? >> >> Andy >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------ >> Andy Blunden >> http://home.mira.net/~andy >> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making >> On 18/01/2017 5:14 AM, Marc Clar? wrote: >> >>> Hi, all, >>> >>> and thank you, Andy, for sharing this amazing film, which I didn't know. I >>> think it will be very useful to share and discuss our respective views on >>> perezhivanie. >>> >>> In my view, the film could be analyzed in terms of perezhivanie in three >>> different planes. First, we could consider the person who watches the >>> film, >>> and we could study how the meaning she forms for the film restructures her >>> relationship with aspects of her real life -such as, for example, her own >>> death or the death of a beloved one, etc. (perhaps this is a little bit >>> like what Beth and Monica, or Veresov and Fleer, do with their study of >>> playworlds?). In this plane, which would be perhaps the most naturalistic >>> one, the film could be studied as an human-made cultural artifact which >>> restuctures psychological functions; here, the meaning formed for the film >>> by who watches it and uses it as mediator in her relation to her real life >>> would be an m-perezhivanie. >>> >>> In a second plane, we could proceed as if the film was real life, and we >>> could consider Sokolov telling his story to the man he meets by the river >>> (a little bit like Carla telling her story to me). In this plane, >>> Sokolov's >>> narrative (i.e., what is showed to us as narrated flashback) could be >>> considered as a cultural artifact that Sokolov uses to relate to all what >>> happened to him. At this plane, the meaning of this narrative would be the >>> m-perezhivanie that, in that moment, mediates the relationship between >>> Sokolov and the war events he experienced years ago (but these events are >>> still very present to him, so although relating to past events, there is >>> here a Sokolov's activity [towards the past war events] which is in >>> present >>> -this echoes Christopher when, within our conversations, said: ?Part of >>> this might also be a question of what it means to describe and represent >>> one's own perezhivanie figuratively/narratively (whether to others, or to >>> oneself), as opposed to living that perezhivanie. Especially if the >>> attempt >>> to capture/represent one's own perezhivanie is, perhaps, also central to >>> the living of it?? >>> >>> In a third plane, we could proceed as if Sokolov's narration was not a >>> retrospective narration, but the on-time sequence of events with on-time >>> Sokolov's explanation of these events (in the moments in which the >>> narrator >>> voice is assumed within the flashback). In this plane, there are several >>> interesting perezhivanie phenomena. Clearly, there is a Sokolov's activity >>> of experiencing-as-struggle, which initiates when he realizes that all his >>> family, except one son, had been killed 2 years ago. At this moment, his >>> life becomes meaningless; the meaning (m-perezhivanie) he uses to relate >>> to >>> all his life (including the past) at this moment is expressed in his >>> conversation with his oncle: ?it's got to be that this life of mine is >>> nothing but a nightmare!?. In this moment, Sokolov's past in the prision >>> camp becomes also meaningless: then, his link to life (the m-perezhivanie >>> that made being alive meaningful to him) was meeting his family; but at >>> that time his family was already dead, so when he discovers it, he >>> realizes >>> that this m-perezhivanie (the idea of meeting his family) was linking him >>> to death, not to life, so all his efforts to surviving become meaningless: >>> ?Every night, when I was a prisioner, I talked with them. Now it turns out >>> that for two years I was talking with the dead??. In this conversation, >>> however, his oncle offers him an alternative m-perezhivanie to relate to >>> his life: he still has a son, so the m-perehivanie of meeting his family >>> can still turns Sokolov's life meaningful: ?you've got to go on living. >>> You >>> have to find Anatoly. When the war is over, your son will get married, you >>> will live with them. You will take up your carpentry again, play with your >>> grandkids?. It takes some time to Sokolov to enter into this >>> m-perezhivanie, but he does it and his life becomes meaningful again: ?and >>> then, unexpectedly, I've got a gleam of sunlight?. But, then, Anatoly also >>> dies. How to keep living? Here, Sokolov holds the m-perezhivanie that >>> linked him to life until that moment, and therefore, he needs a son; >>> pretending being the father of Vanya turns his life meaningful again. >>> >>> Another interesting thing, still at that level, is how Sokolov's relation >>> with his own immediate death changes along the different occasions in >>> which >>> he faces it. I thing here there are examples of >>> experiencing-as-contemplation -in my view, this is not >>> experiencing-as-struggle because the situation of impossibility (the >>> immediate death) is removed existentially (Sokolov's life is given back to >>> him), so that there is not a permanent situation of impossibility which is >>> initially meaningless and is turned into meaningful. In each occasion in >>> which Sokolov is faced with his immediate death, the m-perezhivanie that >>> mediates this relationship is different. When he is captured, his >>> m-perezhivanie is expressed as: ?here's my death coming after me?. When he >>> is conducted to meet the nazi official, the m-perezhivanie is expressed >>> as: >>> ?the end of your misery?, ?to my death and my release of this torment, I >>> will drink?. In the first, the death is running after Sokolov; in the >>> second, it is Sokolov happily going to meet death. Later, at the end of >>> the >>> film, he faces his immediate death again, and the m-perezhivanie is >>> expressed as: ?I'm really worried that I might die in my sleep, and that >>> would frighten my little son?. >>> >>> Well, just some thoughts after watching this wonderful film. >>> >>> Best regards, >>> >>> Marc. >>> >>> 2017-01-15 0:06 GMT+01:00 Christopher Schuck : >>> >>> Yes, definitely that article! And specifically, when I used "pivoting" I >>>> couldn't help but think of Beth's earlier example about how a child will >>>> use a stick as a pivot for a horse. Perhaps a somewhat different >>>> application but related, no? >>>> >>>> On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 4:06 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Chris, all, >>>>> your post is totally relevant to Beth's and Monica's article in the >>>>> special issue. They write about film and perezhivanie (quoting Sobchack) >>>>> the following: >>>>> >>>>> The reason that film allows us to glimpse the future is that there is a >>>>> connection between filmic time and ?real? time: ?The images of a film >>>>> >>>> exist >>>> >>>>> in the world as a temporal flow, within finitude and situation. Indeed, >>>>> >>>> the >>>> >>>>> fascination of the film is that it does not transcend our >>>>> >>>> lived-experience >>>> >>>>> of temporality, but rather that it seems to partake of it, to share it? >>>>> (1992, p. 60). >>>>> >>>>> And later >>>>> >>>>> "Specifically, the way that the flow of time becomes multidirectional is >>>>> that ?rehearsals make it necessary to think of the future in such a way >>>>> >>>> as >>>> >>>>> to create a past? (1985, p. 39). As Schechner ex-plains: ?In a very real >>>>> way the future ? the project coming into existence through the process >>>>> of >>>>> rehearsal ? determines the past: what will be kept from earlier >>>>> >>>> rehearsals >>>> >>>>> or from the ?source ma-terials? (1985, p. 39)." >>>>> >>>>> Alfredo >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ________________________________________ >>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>> on behalf of Christopher Schuck >>>>> Sent: 14 January 2017 21:43 >>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Fate of a Man >>>>> >>>>> But that's both the limitation and strength of art or fictional >>>>> narrative >>>>> as opposed to real life, isn't it? That art focuses our attention and >>>>> highlights certain features in a way that is idealized and artificially >>>>> "designed" to convey something more clearly and purely (but less >>>>> organically and authentically) than it would be conveyed in the course >>>>> of >>>>> living it, or observing someone else living it? One way to get around >>>>> >>>> this >>>> >>>>> would be, as David says, to analyze the film in terms of clues as to the >>>>> stages of emergence. But maybe another way to use the film would be to >>>>> >>>> view >>>> >>>>> it not so much as a complete, self-sufficient "example" of perezhivanie, >>>>> >>>> as >>>> >>>>> a *tool *for pivoting back and forth between the concept of perezhivanie >>>>> >>>> as >>>> >>>>> imaginatively constructed (through fiction), and the concept of >>>>> perezhivanie as imaginatively constructed (through our real living >>>>> experience and observation of it). So, it would be the *pivoting* >>>>> between >>>>> these two manifestations of the concept (designed vs. evolved, as David >>>>> >>>> put >>>> >>>>> it) that reveals new insights about perezhivanie, rather than >>>>> >>>> understanding >>>> >>>>> the concept from the film per se. >>>>> >>>>> On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 3:08 PM, David Kellogg >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> I think there's a good reason why Andy started a new thread on this: >>>>> he's a >>>>> >>>>>> very tidy thinker (quite unlike yours truly) and he knows that one >>>>>> >>>>> reason >>>>> why xmca threads are seldom cumulative is that they digress to related >>>>>> problems without solving the immmediate ones. >>>>>> >>>>>> Yes, of course, a film allows us to consider an example of >>>>>> >>>>> "perezhivanie", >>>>> >>>>>> but it is a designed perezhivanie rather than an evolved one; it >>>>>> >>>>> doesn't >>>>> explicitly display the various stages of emergence required for a >>>>> genetic >>>>> analysis, unless we analyze it not as a complete and finished work of >>>>> art >>>>> but instead for clues as to the stages of its creation (the way that, >>>>> for >>>>> example, "Quietly Flows the Don" was analyzed to determine its >>>>>> authenticity). >>>>>> >>>>>> I remember that In the original short story, the schnapps drinking >>>>>> scene seemed like pure sleight of hand: an artistically gratuitous >>>>>> >>>>> example >>>>> >>>>>> of what eventually gave Soviet social realism such a bad name. >>>>>> >>>>>> David Kellogg >>>>>> Macquarie University >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 10:04 PM, Carol Macdonald < >>>>>> >>>>> carolmacdon@gmail.com >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> Fellow XMCa-ers >>>>>>> I have watched it through now, thank you Andy, but right now only >>>>>>> >>>>>> empirical >>>>>> >>>>>>> psychological categories come to mind. I will watch it again and in >>>>>>> >>>>>> the >>>>>> meanwhile let my fellows with more recent experience of >>>>>> /perezhivanie/ >>>>> take >>>>>>> the discussion further. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It is a kind of timeless story, and modern film techniques would >>>>>>> >>>>>> perhaps >>>>>> be >>>>>> >>>>>>> more explicit. At the least I would say it has for me a Russian >>>>>>> understanding of suffering, perhaps because of their unique >>>>>>> >>>>>> experience >>>>> of >>>>> >>>>>> it. But having said that, WWII must have generated other similar >>>>>>> experiences, apart from the first part about Andrei's family dying in >>>>>>> >>>>>> the >>>>>> famine. >>>>>>> Carol >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 14 January 2017 at 02:15, Andy Blunden wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I watched it in two parts with subtitles: >>>>>>>> http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x16w7fg_destiny-of-a-man- >>>>>>>> 1959-pt-1_creation >>>>>>>> http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x16wat4_destiny-of-a-man- >>>>>>>> 1959-pt-2_creation >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Andy >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>>>> Andy Blunden >>>>>>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy >>>>>>>> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective- >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> decision-making >>>>>> On 14/01/2017 2:35 AM, Beth Ferholt wrote: >>>>>>>> Thank you for taking us to a shared example. I think that >>>>>>>>>> having a >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Carol A Macdonald Ph.D (Edin) >>>>>>> Cultural Historical Activity Theory >>>>>>> Honorary Research Fellow: Department of Linguistics, Unisa >>>>>>> alternative email address: tmacdoca@unisa.ac.za >>>>>>> >>>>>>> > From ablunden@mira.net Fri Jan 20 01:29:59 2017 From: ablunden@mira.net (Andy Blunden) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2017 20:29:59 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Fate of a Man In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5da09ee1-6c5d-dc96-d8dd-db0387f37931@mira.net> Are you going to contribute, Beth? I see your friend Christoper Schuck has made a very good contribution! I know this aspect of perezhivanie is outside your focus, but imagine how our understanding of concepts would be if Vygotsky had died before 1930 and we only had his comments on Leonid Sakharov's block experiments and didn't have chapters 6 and 7 of Thinking and Speech? And we'd be in a bit of a pickle if it were the other way around, actually. Andy ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making On 14/01/2017 2:35 AM, Beth Ferholt wrote: > Thanks! Beth > > On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 10:29 AM, Ulvi ??il wrote: > >> At the bottom of the link on that page below after donate ad etc there is a >> remark about the film with subtitles. >> >> Ulvi >> >> 13 Oca 2017 18:24 tarihinde "Beth Ferholt" yazd?: >> >>> Thank you for taking us to a shared example. I think that having a >> shared >>> example, and maybe one in art not in life, is key for discussions on this >>> topic to work -- which is so interesting! I will see it as soon as >>> possible: http://sovietmoviesonline.com/en/drama/36-sudba-cheloveka.html >>> is >>> where I see it in English, but did you see one with subtitles? Thanks, >> Beth >>> On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 4:34 AM, Andy Blunden wrote: >>> >>>> "Fate of a Man" is a 1959 Soviet film adaptation of the novel by >> Mikhail >>>> Sholokhov. It is 97 minutes and you can watch the full movie on line, >> as >>> I >>>> just did ... my eyes have just cleared enough to be able to send this >>>> message. >>>> >>>> What about it if people who have contributed to this discussion on >>>> /perezhivanie /could watch the movie and tell us if the movie >> illustrates >>>> some of the ideas they have about the meaning of /perezhi//vanie/? It >>>> certainly tells of some experiences that Russians have undergone. >>>> >>>> andy >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>> Andy Blunden >>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy >>>> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Beth Ferholt >>> Assistant Professor >>> Department of Early Childhood and Art Education >>> Brooklyn College, City University of New York >>> 2900 Bedford Avenue >>> Brooklyn, NY 11210-2889 >>> >>> Email: bferholt@brooklyn.cuny.edu >>> Phone: (718) 951-5205 >>> Fax: (718) 951-4816 >>> > > From ablunden@mira.net Fri Jan 20 01:33:24 2017 From: ablunden@mira.net (Andy Blunden) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2017 20:33:24 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Fate of a Man In-Reply-To: <5da09ee1-6c5d-dc96-d8dd-db0387f37931@mira.net> References: <5da09ee1-6c5d-dc96-d8dd-db0387f37931@mira.net> Message-ID: Apologies. I meant that message for Beth. :( Sorry. ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making On 20/01/2017 8:29 PM, Andy Blunden wrote: > Are you going to contribute, Beth? I see your friend > Christoper Schuck has made a very good contribution! > > I know this aspect of perezhivanie is outside your focus, > but imagine how our understanding of concepts would be if > Vygotsky had died before 1930 and we only had his comments > on Leonid Sakharov's block experiments and didn't have > chapters 6 and 7 of Thinking and Speech? And we'd be in a > bit of a pickle if it were the other way around, actually. > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Andy Blunden > http://home.mira.net/~andy > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > On 14/01/2017 2:35 AM, Beth Ferholt wrote: >> Thanks! Beth >> >> On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 10:29 AM, Ulvi ??il >> wrote: >> >>> At the bottom of the link on that page below after >>> donate ad etc there is a >>> remark about the film with subtitles. >>> >>> Ulvi >>> >>> 13 Oca 2017 18:24 tarihinde "Beth Ferholt" >>> yazd?: >>> >>>> Thank you for taking us to a shared example. I think >>>> that having a >>> shared >>>> example, and maybe one in art not in life, is key for >>>> discussions on this >>>> topic to work -- which is so interesting! I will see >>>> it as soon as >>>> possible: >>>> http://sovietmoviesonline.com/en/drama/36-sudba-cheloveka.html >>>> >>>> is >>>> where I see it in English, but did you see one with >>>> subtitles? Thanks, >>> Beth >>>> On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 4:34 AM, Andy Blunden >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> "Fate of a Man" is a 1959 Soviet film adaptation of >>>>> the novel by >>> Mikhail >>>>> Sholokhov. It is 97 minutes and you can watch the full >>>>> movie on line, >>> as >>>> I >>>>> just did ... my eyes have just cleared enough to be >>>>> able to send this >>>>> message. >>>>> >>>>> What about it if people who have contributed to this >>>>> discussion on >>>>> /perezhivanie /could watch the movie and tell us if >>>>> the movie >>> illustrates >>>>> some of the ideas they have about the meaning of >>>>> /perezhi//vanie/? It >>>>> certainly tells of some experiences that Russians have >>>>> undergone. >>>>> >>>>> andy >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>> >>>>> Andy Blunden >>>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy >>>>> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Beth Ferholt >>>> Assistant Professor >>>> Department of Early Childhood and Art Education >>>> Brooklyn College, City University of New York >>>> 2900 Bedford Avenue >>>> Brooklyn, NY 11210-2889 >>>> >>>> Email: bferholt@brooklyn.cuny.edu >>>> Phone: (718) 951-5205 >>>> Fax: (718) 951-4816 >>>> >> >> > > > From lpscholar2@gmail.com Fri Jan 20 09:33:20 2017 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2017 09:33:20 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Fate of a Man In-Reply-To: References: <048522a2-cca0-3e56-cae2-f2142b9fbd5a@mira.net> <1484427999407.2877@iped.uio.no> <2270f5e7-7d82-5150-89a3-808a4e20b89b@mira.net> Message-ID: <58824a0b.d54e620a.ecb0c.48b3@mx.google.com> Chris, Andy, Beth This notion of (life stand still) reminds me of notions of ?the* inter/val or ?the? pause or ?the? gap. The Japanese notion of (ma) also comes into play. THIS place where (life stand still) seems to be a moment that is central to the doubling-back and re-hearsal in first living-through and then working-through what was previously lived-through. I have one question of how we understand the 17 years period. What that ?an? inter/val only? This goes to the heart of chris? question of time frames and time inter/vals and perezhivanie as at root a travelling phenomena with dramatic qualities and principles/attitudes. Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Andy Blunden Sent: January 19, 2017 4:40 PM To: xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Fate of a Man Thank you for those reflections, Chris! The conditions under which I watched Fate of Man meant that I listened without audio, so I missed all these important allusions that you experienced and analysed. The way the music is used both to represent Andrei's reflection and by allusion, to induce reflection in the audience is very important from the point of view of representing/producing perezhivaniya, and the connections you make with Beth's paper are very appropriate on that point. The other point which I would like to emphasise in your analysis is the "time standing still." Russian psychologists report that this phenomenon, of time appearing to stand still for a moment, is characteristic of perezhivanie in its fullest development. It is also connected I think by the fact that our narrative memory of a course of events is built around these moments. Which brings us to the connection of perezhivaniya to the whole question of the formation of autobiographical narratives and consequently of identity. It also connects with Constantin Stanislavskii's idea of perezhivanie. I will post a text for analysis presently which also alludes to "time standing still." Apart from small screens and iPhones, Chris, of course, watching this movie in 2017 far away from the 1958 USSR in time and space, we *cannot* have the same /perezhivanie/ as the 1958 Soviet audience it was made for. Presumably it is like-experiences in our own lives which are summoned up by the watching of "Fate of a Man," adding a new shade to our own identity and our conception of the experiences of other people and ability to empathise. Andy ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making On 20/01/2017 11:00 AM, Christopher Schuck wrote: > For some reason I couldn't see the subtitles showing up in Fate of a Man > the first time, so I started to watch it dubbed in English instead. But the > mannered Hollywood accents definitely were not exactly helping to convey > the "real Russian soul" Robbins talks about! It felt like I was being asked > to imagine Cary Grant inhabiting Andrei's perezhivanie-ing body. So, I > started over with the subtitled version. > > Here are some quick initial reflections: wonderful movie, and in Andrei one > of the more memorable characters I have seen. But I also found myself > thinking how big a difference there is between watching a film on my > 12-inch laptop with headphones (my only option at the moment), and sitting > back and immersing yourself in a darkened theater or at least on a > widescreen TV without any other distractions, allowing ourselves to "fall > into this space" by virtue of our very awareness of the illusion generated > by the frame, as Beth and Monica put it. This difference becomes even > bigger if the screen you're viewing it on also enables you to quickly check > email from time to time during the movie, as many people do these days. If > we are to consider the film experience as a model (analogy?) for > perezhivanie or even a certain kind of simulation of it, this effect that > occurs when we lose ourselves in a film would be undermined by an > especially small frame or poor viewing conditions. At what point does "the > knowledge that the movement we experience is just an illusion" (p. 2 in > their article) undermine the perezhivanie-like quality of film as opposed > to forming an integral part of it? And, might the way distraction functions > to undermine perezhivanie in the context of film in any way mirror how we > "distract" ourselves in the course of living lives from conscious > engagement with the perezhivanie we are otherwise undergoing? Is viewing a > film on a 12-inch screen while checking email and calling it an > "experience" in any way analogous to the self-deceptions and escapes we > engage in during the course of either experience-as-struggle or > experience-as-contemplation? I did not check email while watching Fate of a > Man, by the way. Just in case you're wondering. > > As for the film itself: I was struck by the incidental way in which the > earlier loss of his childhood family is introduced and acknowledged at the > very outset, and how this contrasts with the dramatic ongoing perezhivanie > that ensues going forward: it is as if this early loss is "taken for > granted" as also part of the Russian experience. We are not privy to any > perezhivanie he might have presumably undergone before that point; it is > simply not "within the frame." At several points, I was reminded of > Satyajit's World of Apu (last movie in his trilogy), where there was also a > set of early losses and a relationship formed with a "son." Have any of you > seen it? I think it would also be a good example of perezhivanie. > > I would not want to overemphasize the use of literary motifs, since > Bondarchuk was presumably not making any references to the concept of > perezhivanie as such. But there were several devices that evoked Beth and > Monica's passage from To The Lighthouse ("Time stand still here"), and > their metaphor of a life (or more specifically, a perezhivanie within a > life) spiraling back over itself to bring two disparate moments into > juxtaposition in a way such that "your life becomes three-dimensional > again" (p. 2). One occurs in the various scenes when Andrei gazes up at the > sky in reverie and all we see are clouds, or the scene where he lies in the > grass after his first escape and the camera pans back as it becomes very > quiet, leaving nothing but him swallowed up in the vastness of nature. > There is a certain timeless quality to these scenes, a sense that he is > momentarily transcending the linear temporal flow of his life as he either > stands outside it and "stands still" in it. It could be a thousand years > passing by in those clouds, or just the 17 years of his second phase; it > suddenly doesn't matter. Another thing I noticed was the use of the two > musical themes: the love song the accordionist plays for him and Irina, and > the festive music incongruously piped in at the concentration camp during > that amazing scene around Part 1, minute 45 where the prisoners are being > marched in and the crematorium is going full blast down the road. At some > point (I couldn't relocate it) Andrei has a flashback where he revisits the > love song and his memories of Irina; then at minute 20 in Part 2, while > processing his family's death after coming home from the war, he finds > himself hearing the concentration camp song on the record player and is > suddenly transported back to that traumatic experience. Yet he does not > smash the record right away; he stares at it for a minute, almost as if he > is resituating these two moments in relation to each other. > > Perhaps I am overanalyzing, but I found both these motifs to speak to Beth > and Monica's examples in the way they bring two moments back into contact > with each other. > > Finally, Mike and Andy's discussion in the Misha thread about the watching > of a film functioning as perezhivanie for those viewers for whom it > reflects and repeats their own experience, raises a question about the > difference between extended perezhivanie and the personal re-enactment of > one's perezhivanie within a much smaller time scale (the two or three hours > spent watching the movie). I hope at some point we could delve more into > this issue of time frame and time scale in various forms of perezhivanie. > > Chris > > > On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 8:39 PM, Andy Blunden wrote: > >> Thank you Marc! It was the third "plane" which was my intention in >> providing "Fate of a Man" for discussion. You picked out what were for me >> also the main (but by no means the only) instances of perezhivanija in this >> movie. >> >> It seems to me that Sokolov (the author) offers one perezhivanie in >> particular as the main theme of the movie. At the beginning of the movie, >> the man and boy walk up the path to the camera and at the end of the movie >> they walk off together again. So this is the central theme. As you say, >> when Sokolov's family has all been killed, even his talented war-hero son >> who was going to be a famous mathematician, his life has become >> meaningless. I really liked your reflections of Sokolov's reflections too. >> He sees the young orphan boy who, he discovers, has no family and doesn't >> even know what town he comes from, but is aimlessly living on pieces of >> rubbish. He sees that the two of them are in the same situation. So after >> some time mulling this over a they sit together in the truck, he lies to >> the boy and tells him that he is the boy's father, and they embrace. But >> the boy questions this and he reasserts his claim and the boy accepts this. >> The man is able to define a new meaning for his life; he has done this >> autonomously without the help of a therapist, but he still needs another, >> the boy, to embody that meaning. But he knows it is his own invention. The >> boy on the other hand has to be made to believe it is true; he is not >> sufficiently mature to manufacture this meaning himself, but as a child he >> can be guided by an adult. As you say, Marc, it is very significant when >> Sokolov tells us how he is now, again, worried about his own death. What if >> I died in my sleep? that would be a shock for my son! >> >> For me, this reflection causes me to look back on the man's whole struggle >> during the war: in the first phase he does not differentiate between his >> life as a father and husband and his life as a Soviet citizen - war is his >> duty and he is confident, as is everyone else, of victory. His bravery in >> driving his truck to the front line under fire reflects the fact that he >> has never imagined his own death. Then he finds himself prostrate before 2 >> Nazi soldiers who we assume are going among the wounded shooting anyone who >> has survived. But surprisingly, he is allowed to live, but is to be used as >> a slave. Sokolov has been confronted by his own mortality for the first >> time and he chooses life, but accepts slavery (Sartre and Hegel both >> thematize this moment in their philosophy). In this second phase of >> Sokolov's life he is a survivor. Everything hinges on surviving and >> returning to his wife and family. As you point out, Marc, his later >> reflections on this are particularly poignant, when he discovers the >> futility of this hope. Eventually, the life of forced labour becomes >> unbearable. He cries out: "Why are we forced to dig 3 cubic metres when 1 >> cubic meter is enough for a grave!" Sokolov has accepted and embraced death >> after all. (Transition to the third phase.) To his German masters this is >> an unendurable act of defiance. As David points out, there are flaws in the >> scene which follows, but ... he confronts his own death defiantly, stares >> it in the eye, spits on it, and his life again gains meaning as a "brave >> Soviet soldier" unafraid of death even in such an impossible moment. Not >> only does he survive, but takes the Nazi Colonel prisoner and hands the war >> plans over to the Red Army. Now, when he is offered the chance to return to >> his wife as a war hero he declines and asks to be sent back to the front. >> His life has adopted this new meaning which casts his life as a father into >> the shade. He no longer fears death. But he is persuaded to take time off >> and learns of the death of his family. As Marc relates, the continued >> survival of his son, who is now also a war hero, provides continued meaning >> and integrates the two themes in his life. This takes work, as Marc points >> out, and he has the assistance of an older man, in achieving this >> redefinition of his life. But tragically, with the death of his son (and NB >> the end of the war, albeit in victory) his life is again without meaning. >> Fourth phase. He has survived, but has no purpose. By becoming a father >> again (Fifth phase), he regains the fear of death and meaning in his life. >> It is real work, and we witness this psychological turmoil as he copes with >> the idea that this scruffy orphan boy could be a son to him, and eventually >> he manages it. >> >> The transition between each phase is a critical period during which >> Sokolov's personality is transformed. Note also, that there is a >> premonition of this perezhivanie in Sokolov's earlier life: his family is >> wiped out in the Civil War and the famine of 1922, then he meets his >> wife-to-be, also raised in an orphanage, and they together create a life >> and have 17 happy years before the Nazi invasion intrudes. So from the >> beginning of the movie we are introduced to the main theme. >> >> These are the main moments in the movie, which caused me to select it for >> discussion rather than any other movie. Also, there is no doubt that in >> producing this movie in 1958 the Soviet government was engaged with its >> people, in a process of collective perezhivanie and by reflecting on the >> collective perezhivanie during the period of the war, before and after, >> they aim to assist the people in collectively assigning meaning to this >> terrible suffering and like the man and his "son" walking again into the >> future. As a propaganda movie, of course, it is open to much criticism, but >> that is hardly the point. I appreciate Marc's analysis in terms of the >> other concepts he has introduced. I wouldn't mind a recap on these. In >> terms of Vasilyuk's concepts, Sokolov's life-world is *simple and >> difficult*. The boy's life world is *simple and easy*. >> >> Can we continue to discuss "Fate of a Man", while I open another movie for >> analysis? I think there are at least 10 subscribers to this list who have >> published in learned journals on the topic of perezhivanie in childhood. >> Perhaps one of you would like to reflect on the boy's perezhivanija? >> >> Andy >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------ >> Andy Blunden >> http://home.mira.net/~andy >> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making >> On 18/01/2017 5:14 AM, Marc Clar? wrote: >> >>> Hi, all, >>> >>> and thank you, Andy, for sharing this amazing film, which I didn't know. I >>> think it will be very useful to share and discuss our respective views on >>> perezhivanie. >>> >>> In my view, the film could be analyzed in terms of perezhivanie in three >>> different planes. First, we could consider the person who watches the >>> film, >>> and we could study how the meaning she forms for the film restructures her >>> relationship with aspects of her real life -such as, for example, her own >>> death or the death of a beloved one, etc. (perhaps this is a little bit >>> like what Beth and Monica, or Veresov and Fleer, do with their study of >>> playworlds?). In this plane, which would be perhaps the most naturalistic >>> one, the film could be studied as an human-made cultural artifact which >>> restuctures psychological functions; here, the meaning formed for the film >>> by who watches it and uses it as mediator in her relation to her real life >>> would be an m-perezhivanie. >>> >>> In a second plane, we could proceed as if the film was real life, and we >>> could consider Sokolov telling his story to the man he meets by the river >>> (a little bit like Carla telling her story to me). In this plane, >>> Sokolov's >>> narrative (i.e., what is showed to us as narrated flashback) could be >>> considered as a cultural artifact that Sokolov uses to relate to all what >>> happened to him. At this plane, the meaning of this narrative would be the >>> m-perezhivanie that, in that moment, mediates the relationship between >>> Sokolov and the war events he experienced years ago (but these events are >>> still very present to him, so although relating to past events, there is >>> here a Sokolov's activity [towards the past war events] which is in >>> present >>> -this echoes Christopher when, within our conversations, said: ?Part of >>> this might also be a question of what it means to describe and represent >>> one's own perezhivanie figuratively/narratively (whether to others, or to >>> oneself), as opposed to living that perezhivanie. Especially if the >>> attempt >>> to capture/represent one's own perezhivanie is, perhaps, also central to >>> the living of it?? >>> >>> In a third plane, we could proceed as if Sokolov's narration was not a >>> retrospective narration, but the on-time sequence of events with on-time >>> Sokolov's explanation of these events (in the moments in which the >>> narrator >>> voice is assumed within the flashback). In this plane, there are several >>> interesting perezhivanie phenomena. Clearly, there is a Sokolov's activity >>> of experiencing-as-struggle, which initiates when he realizes that all his >>> family, except one son, had been killed 2 years ago. At this moment, his >>> life becomes meaningless; the meaning (m-perezhivanie) he uses to relate >>> to >>> all his life (including the past) at this moment is expressed in his >>> conversation with his oncle: ?it's got to be that this life of mine is >>> nothing but a nightmare!?. In this moment, Sokolov's past in the prision >>> camp becomes also meaningless: then, his link to life (the m-perezhivanie >>> that made being alive meaningful to him) was meeting his family; but at >>> that time his family was already dead, so when he discovers it, he >>> realizes >>> that this m-perezhivanie (the idea of meeting his family) was linking him >>> to death, not to life, so all his efforts to surviving become meaningless: >>> ?Every night, when I was a prisioner, I talked with them. Now it turns out >>> that for two years I was talking with the dead??. In this conversation, >>> however, his oncle offers him an alternative m-perezhivanie to relate to >>> his life: he still has a son, so the m-perehivanie of meeting his family >>> can still turns Sokolov's life meaningful: ?you've got to go on living. >>> You >>> have to find Anatoly. When the war is over, your son will get married, you >>> will live with them. You will take up your carpentry again, play with your >>> grandkids?. It takes some time to Sokolov to enter into this >>> m-perezhivanie, but he does it and his life becomes meaningful again: ?and >>> then, unexpectedly, I've got a gleam of sunlight?. But, then, Anatoly also >>> dies. How to keep living? Here, Sokolov holds the m-perezhivanie that >>> linked him to life until that moment, and therefore, he needs a son; >>> pretending being the father of Vanya turns his life meaningful again. >>> >>> Another interesting thing, still at that level, is how Sokolov's relation >>> with his own immediate death changes along the different occasions in >>> which >>> he faces it. I thing here there are examples of >>> experiencing-as-contemplation -in my view, this is not >>> experiencing-as-struggle because the situation of impossibility (the >>> immediate death) is removed existentially (Sokolov's life is given back to >>> him), so that there is not a permanent situation of impossibility which is >>> initially meaningless and is turned into meaningful. In each occasion in >>> which Sokolov is faced with his immediate death, the m-perezhivanie that >>> mediates this relationship is different. When he is captured, his >>> m-perezhivanie is expressed as: ?here's my death coming after me?. When he >>> is conducted to meet the nazi official, the m-perezhivanie is expressed >>> as: >>> ?the end of your misery?, ?to my death and my release of this torment, I >>> will drink?. In the first, the death is running after Sokolov; in the >>> second, it is Sokolov happily going to meet death. Later, at the end of >>> the >>> film, he faces his immediate death again, and the m-perezhivanie is >>> expressed as: ?I'm really worried that I might die in my sleep, and that >>> would frighten my little son?. >>> >>> Well, just some thoughts after watching this wonderful film. >>> >>> Best regards, >>> >>> Marc. >>> >>> 2017-01-15 0:06 GMT+01:00 Christopher Schuck : >>> >>> Yes, definitely that article! And specifically, when I used "pivoting" I >>>> couldn't help but think of Beth's earlier example about how a child will >>>> use a stick as a pivot for a horse. Perhaps a somewhat different >>>> application but related, no? >>>> >>>> On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 4:06 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Chris, all, >>>>> your post is totally relevant to Beth's and Monica's article in the >>>>> special issue. They write about film and perezhivanie (quoting Sobchack) >>>>> the following: >>>>> >>>>> The reason that film allows us to glimpse the future is that there is a >>>>> connection between filmic time and ?real? time: ?The images of a film >>>>> >>>> exist >>>> >>>>> in the world as a temporal flow, within finitude and situation. Indeed, >>>>> >>>> the >>>> >>>>> fascination of the film is that it does not transcend our >>>>> >>>> lived-experience >>>> >>>>> of temporality, but rather that it seems to partake of it, to share it? >>>>> (1992, p. 60). >>>>> >>>>> And later >>>>> >>>>> "Specifically, the way that the flow of time becomes multidirectional is >>>>> that ?rehearsals make it necessary to think of the future in such a way >>>>> >>>> as >>>> >>>>> to create a past? (1985, p. 39). As Schechner ex-plains: ?In a very real >>>>> way the future ? the project coming into existence through the process >>>>> of >>>>> rehearsal ? determines the past: what will be kept from earlier >>>>> >>>> rehearsals >>>> >>>>> or from the ?source ma-terials? (1985, p. 39)." >>>>> >>>>> Alfredo >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ________________________________________ >>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>> on behalf of Christopher Schuck >>>>> Sent: 14 January 2017 21:43 >>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Fate of a Man >>>>> >>>>> But that's both the limitation and strength of art or fictional >>>>> narrative >>>>> as opposed to real life, isn't it? That art focuses our attention and >>>>> highlights certain features in a way that is idealized and artificially >>>>> "designed" to convey something more clearly and purely (but less >>>>> organically and authentically) than it would be conveyed in the course >>>>> of >>>>> living it, or observing someone else living it? One way to get around >>>>> >>>> this >>>> >>>>> would be, as David says, to analyze the film in terms of clues as to the >>>>> stages of emergence. But maybe another way to use the film would be to >>>>> >>>> view >>>> >>>>> it not so much as a complete, self-sufficient "example" of perezhivanie, >>>>> >>>> as >>>> >>>>> a *tool *for pivoting back and forth between the concept of perezhivanie >>>>> >>>> as >>>> >>>>> imaginatively constructed (through fiction), and the concept of >>>>> perezhivanie as imaginatively constructed (through our real living >>>>> experience and observation of it). So, it would be the *pivoting* >>>>> between >>>>> these two manifestations of the concept (designed vs. evolved, as David >>>>> >>>> put >>>> >>>>> it) that reveals new insights about perezhivanie, rather than >>>>> >>>> understanding >>>> >>>>> the concept from the film per se. >>>>> >>>>> On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 3:08 PM, David Kellogg >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> I think there's a good reason why Andy started a new thread on this: >>>>> he's a >>>>> >>>>>> very tidy thinker (quite unlike yours truly) and he knows that one >>>>>> >>>>> reason >>>>> why xmca threads are seldom cumulative is that they digress to related >>>>>> problems without solving the immmediate ones. >>>>>> >>>>>> Yes, of course, a film allows us to consider an example of >>>>>> >>>>> "perezhivanie", >>>>> >>>>>> but it is a designed perezhivanie rather than an evolved one; it >>>>>> >>>>> doesn't >>>>> explicitly display the various stages of emergence required for a >>>>> genetic >>>>> analysis, unless we analyze it not as a complete and finished work of >>>>> art >>>>> but instead for clues as to the stages of its creation (the way that, >>>>> for >>>>> example, "Quietly Flows the Don" was analyzed to determine its >>>>>> authenticity). >>>>>> >>>>>> I remember that In the original short story, the schnapps drinking >>>>>> scene seemed like pure sleight of hand: an artistically gratuitous >>>>>> >>>>> example >>>>> >>>>>> of what eventually gave Soviet social realism such a bad name. >>>>>> >>>>>> David Kellogg >>>>>> Macquarie University >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 10:04 PM, Carol Macdonald < >>>>>> >>>>> carolmacdon@gmail.com >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> Fellow XMCa-ers >>>>>>> I have watched it through now, thank you Andy, but right now only >>>>>>> >>>>>> empirical >>>>>> >>>>>>> psychological categories come to mind. I will watch it again and in >>>>>>> >>>>>> the >>>>>> meanwhile let my fellows with more recent experience of >>>>>> /perezhivanie/ >>>>> take >>>>>>> the discussion further. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It is a kind of timeless story, and modern film techniques would >>>>>>> >>>>>> perhaps >>>>>> be >>>>>> >>>>>>> more explicit. At the least I would say it has for me a Russian >>>>>>> understanding of suffering, perhaps because of their unique >>>>>>> >>>>>> experience >>>>> of >>>>> >>>>>> it. But having said that, WWII must have generated other similar >>>>>>> experiences, apart from the first part about Andrei's family dying in >>>>>>> >>>>>> the >>>>>> famine. >>>>>>> Carol >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 14 January 2017 at 02:15, Andy Blunden wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I watched it in two parts with subtitles: >>>>>>>> http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x16w7fg_destiny-of-a-man- >>>>>>>> 1959-pt-1_creation >>>>>>>> http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x16wat4_destiny-of-a-man- >>>>>>>> 1959-pt-2_creation >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Andy >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>>>> Andy Blunden >>>>>>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy >>>>>>>> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective- >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> decision-making >>>>>> On 14/01/2017 2:35 AM, Beth Ferholt wrote: >>>>>>>> Thank you for taking us to a shared example. I think that >>>>>>>>>> having a >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Carol A Macdonald Ph.D (Edin) >>>>>>> Cultural Historical Activity Theory >>>>>>> Honorary Research Fellow: Department of Linguistics, Unisa >>>>>>> alternative email address: tmacdoca@unisa.ac.za >>>>>>> >>>>>>> > From helenaworthen@gmail.com Fri Jan 20 17:03:20 2017 From: helenaworthen@gmail.com (Helena Worthen) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2017 17:03:20 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Fate of a Man In-Reply-To: References: <048522a2-cca0-3e56-cae2-f2142b9fbd5a@mira.net> <1484427999407.2877@iped.uio.no> <2270f5e7-7d82-5150-89a3-808a4e20b89b@mira.net> Message-ID: <9B8D2964-0926-4976-91F2-CDD51E50A6F5@gmail.com> I am late to this discussion, but I have been paying attention. I was reluctant to expose myself to the emotional challenges of the film. I knew that between the majestic music, the stunning black and white images, the beautiful human faces and bodies (and some very ugly ones), and the twists of the story, I was going to be deeply moved. However, I have been reading two books by Svetlana Alexievich -- Voices from Chernobyl and Secondhand Time - which tell equally heartbreaking, horrifying stories of suffering. Reading her work inclines me to place the film in the context of the period of deStalinization after Kruschev's 1956 speech to the 20th Congress of the CPSU, which gave the signal that it was permissible to begin to talk freely about Soviet history. It was a period of trying to build a story that could explain and honor, if not justify, the extreme suffering of the Soviet people. This film seems to me to set out to accomplish that. So does Alexievich's book, which is a compilation of interviews done between 1991 and 2012, with people who had something to say (good and bad) about the Soviet regime and the experience of its dissolution. She got the 2015 Nobel Prize for this book. And I sense that Andy, or someone, is anticipating that the US is going to have to produce some works of scholarship or art, or both, that attempt to explain what is happening now here in the US -- for example, this afternoon, under President Trump. Helena Worthen helenaworthen@gmail.com Vietnam blog: helenaworthen.wordpress.com On Jan 19, 2017, at 4:00 PM, Christopher Schuck wrote: > For some reason I couldn't see the subtitles showing up in Fate of a Man > the first time, so I started to watch it dubbed in English instead. But the > mannered Hollywood accents definitely were not exactly helping to convey > the "real Russian soul" Robbins talks about! It felt like I was being asked > to imagine Cary Grant inhabiting Andrei's perezhivanie-ing body. So, I > started over with the subtitled version. > > Here are some quick initial reflections: wonderful movie, and in Andrei one > of the more memorable characters I have seen. But I also found myself > thinking how big a difference there is between watching a film on my > 12-inch laptop with headphones (my only option at the moment), and sitting > back and immersing yourself in a darkened theater or at least on a > widescreen TV without any other distractions, allowing ourselves to "fall > into this space" by virtue of our very awareness of the illusion generated > by the frame, as Beth and Monica put it. This difference becomes even > bigger if the screen you're viewing it on also enables you to quickly check > email from time to time during the movie, as many people do these days. If > we are to consider the film experience as a model (analogy?) for > perezhivanie or even a certain kind of simulation of it, this effect that > occurs when we lose ourselves in a film would be undermined by an > especially small frame or poor viewing conditions. At what point does "the > knowledge that the movement we experience is just an illusion" (p. 2 in > their article) undermine the perezhivanie-like quality of film as opposed > to forming an integral part of it? And, might the way distraction functions > to undermine perezhivanie in the context of film in any way mirror how we > "distract" ourselves in the course of living lives from conscious > engagement with the perezhivanie we are otherwise undergoing? Is viewing a > film on a 12-inch screen while checking email and calling it an > "experience" in any way analogous to the self-deceptions and escapes we > engage in during the course of either experience-as-struggle or > experience-as-contemplation? I did not check email while watching Fate of a > Man, by the way. Just in case you're wondering. > > As for the film itself: I was struck by the incidental way in which the > earlier loss of his childhood family is introduced and acknowledged at the > very outset, and how this contrasts with the dramatic ongoing perezhivanie > that ensues going forward: it is as if this early loss is "taken for > granted" as also part of the Russian experience. We are not privy to any > perezhivanie he might have presumably undergone before that point; it is > simply not "within the frame." At several points, I was reminded of > Satyajit's World of Apu (last movie in his trilogy), where there was also a > set of early losses and a relationship formed with a "son." Have any of you > seen it? I think it would also be a good example of perezhivanie. > > I would not want to overemphasize the use of literary motifs, since > Bondarchuk was presumably not making any references to the concept of > perezhivanie as such. But there were several devices that evoked Beth and > Monica's passage from To The Lighthouse ("Time stand still here"), and > their metaphor of a life (or more specifically, a perezhivanie within a > life) spiraling back over itself to bring two disparate moments into > juxtaposition in a way such that "your life becomes three-dimensional > again" (p. 2). One occurs in the various scenes when Andrei gazes up at the > sky in reverie and all we see are clouds, or the scene where he lies in the > grass after his first escape and the camera pans back as it becomes very > quiet, leaving nothing but him swallowed up in the vastness of nature. > There is a certain timeless quality to these scenes, a sense that he is > momentarily transcending the linear temporal flow of his life as he either > stands outside it and "stands still" in it. It could be a thousand years > passing by in those clouds, or just the 17 years of his second phase; it > suddenly doesn't matter. Another thing I noticed was the use of the two > musical themes: the love song the accordionist plays for him and Irina, and > the festive music incongruously piped in at the concentration camp during > that amazing scene around Part 1, minute 45 where the prisoners are being > marched in and the crematorium is going full blast down the road. At some > point (I couldn't relocate it) Andrei has a flashback where he revisits the > love song and his memories of Irina; then at minute 20 in Part 2, while > processing his family's death after coming home from the war, he finds > himself hearing the concentration camp song on the record player and is > suddenly transported back to that traumatic experience. Yet he does not > smash the record right away; he stares at it for a minute, almost as if he > is resituating these two moments in relation to each other. > > Perhaps I am overanalyzing, but I found both these motifs to speak to Beth > and Monica's examples in the way they bring two moments back into contact > with each other. > > Finally, Mike and Andy's discussion in the Misha thread about the watching > of a film functioning as perezhivanie for those viewers for whom it > reflects and repeats their own experience, raises a question about the > difference between extended perezhivanie and the personal re-enactment of > one's perezhivanie within a much smaller time scale (the two or three hours > spent watching the movie). I hope at some point we could delve more into > this issue of time frame and time scale in various forms of perezhivanie. > > Chris > > > On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 8:39 PM, Andy Blunden wrote: > >> Thank you Marc! It was the third "plane" which was my intention in >> providing "Fate of a Man" for discussion. You picked out what were for me >> also the main (but by no means the only) instances of perezhivanija in this >> movie. >> >> It seems to me that Sokolov (the author) offers one perezhivanie in >> particular as the main theme of the movie. At the beginning of the movie, >> the man and boy walk up the path to the camera and at the end of the movie >> they walk off together again. So this is the central theme. As you say, >> when Sokolov's family has all been killed, even his talented war-hero son >> who was going to be a famous mathematician, his life has become >> meaningless. I really liked your reflections of Sokolov's reflections too. >> He sees the young orphan boy who, he discovers, has no family and doesn't >> even know what town he comes from, but is aimlessly living on pieces of >> rubbish. He sees that the two of them are in the same situation. So after >> some time mulling this over a they sit together in the truck, he lies to >> the boy and tells him that he is the boy's father, and they embrace. But >> the boy questions this and he reasserts his claim and the boy accepts this. >> The man is able to define a new meaning for his life; he has done this >> autonomously without the help of a therapist, but he still needs another, >> the boy, to embody that meaning. But he knows it is his own invention. The >> boy on the other hand has to be made to believe it is true; he is not >> sufficiently mature to manufacture this meaning himself, but as a child he >> can be guided by an adult. As you say, Marc, it is very significant when >> Sokolov tells us how he is now, again, worried about his own death. What if >> I died in my sleep? that would be a shock for my son! >> >> For me, this reflection causes me to look back on the man's whole struggle >> during the war: in the first phase he does not differentiate between his >> life as a father and husband and his life as a Soviet citizen - war is his >> duty and he is confident, as is everyone else, of victory. His bravery in >> driving his truck to the front line under fire reflects the fact that he >> has never imagined his own death. Then he finds himself prostrate before 2 >> Nazi soldiers who we assume are going among the wounded shooting anyone who >> has survived. But surprisingly, he is allowed to live, but is to be used as >> a slave. Sokolov has been confronted by his own mortality for the first >> time and he chooses life, but accepts slavery (Sartre and Hegel both >> thematize this moment in their philosophy). In this second phase of >> Sokolov's life he is a survivor. Everything hinges on surviving and >> returning to his wife and family. As you point out, Marc, his later >> reflections on this are particularly poignant, when he discovers the >> futility of this hope. Eventually, the life of forced labour becomes >> unbearable. He cries out: "Why are we forced to dig 3 cubic metres when 1 >> cubic meter is enough for a grave!" Sokolov has accepted and embraced death >> after all. (Transition to the third phase.) To his German masters this is >> an unendurable act of defiance. As David points out, there are flaws in the >> scene which follows, but ... he confronts his own death defiantly, stares >> it in the eye, spits on it, and his life again gains meaning as a "brave >> Soviet soldier" unafraid of death even in such an impossible moment. Not >> only does he survive, but takes the Nazi Colonel prisoner and hands the war >> plans over to the Red Army. Now, when he is offered the chance to return to >> his wife as a war hero he declines and asks to be sent back to the front. >> His life has adopted this new meaning which casts his life as a father into >> the shade. He no longer fears death. But he is persuaded to take time off >> and learns of the death of his family. As Marc relates, the continued >> survival of his son, who is now also a war hero, provides continued meaning >> and integrates the two themes in his life. This takes work, as Marc points >> out, and he has the assistance of an older man, in achieving this >> redefinition of his life. But tragically, with the death of his son (and NB >> the end of the war, albeit in victory) his life is again without meaning. >> Fourth phase. He has survived, but has no purpose. By becoming a father >> again (Fifth phase), he regains the fear of death and meaning in his life. >> It is real work, and we witness this psychological turmoil as he copes with >> the idea that this scruffy orphan boy could be a son to him, and eventually >> he manages it. >> >> The transition between each phase is a critical period during which >> Sokolov's personality is transformed. Note also, that there is a >> premonition of this perezhivanie in Sokolov's earlier life: his family is >> wiped out in the Civil War and the famine of 1922, then he meets his >> wife-to-be, also raised in an orphanage, and they together create a life >> and have 17 happy years before the Nazi invasion intrudes. So from the >> beginning of the movie we are introduced to the main theme. >> >> These are the main moments in the movie, which caused me to select it for >> discussion rather than any other movie. Also, there is no doubt that in >> producing this movie in 1958 the Soviet government was engaged with its >> people, in a process of collective perezhivanie and by reflecting on the >> collective perezhivanie during the period of the war, before and after, >> they aim to assist the people in collectively assigning meaning to this >> terrible suffering and like the man and his "son" walking again into the >> future. As a propaganda movie, of course, it is open to much criticism, but >> that is hardly the point. I appreciate Marc's analysis in terms of the >> other concepts he has introduced. I wouldn't mind a recap on these. In >> terms of Vasilyuk's concepts, Sokolov's life-world is *simple and >> difficult*. The boy's life world is *simple and easy*. >> >> Can we continue to discuss "Fate of a Man", while I open another movie for >> analysis? I think there are at least 10 subscribers to this list who have >> published in learned journals on the topic of perezhivanie in childhood. >> Perhaps one of you would like to reflect on the boy's perezhivanija? >> >> Andy >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------ >> Andy Blunden >> http://home.mira.net/~andy >> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making >> On 18/01/2017 5:14 AM, Marc Clar? wrote: >> >>> Hi, all, >>> >>> and thank you, Andy, for sharing this amazing film, which I didn't know. I >>> think it will be very useful to share and discuss our respective views on >>> perezhivanie. >>> >>> In my view, the film could be analyzed in terms of perezhivanie in three >>> different planes. First, we could consider the person who watches the >>> film, >>> and we could study how the meaning she forms for the film restructures her >>> relationship with aspects of her real life -such as, for example, her own >>> death or the death of a beloved one, etc. (perhaps this is a little bit >>> like what Beth and Monica, or Veresov and Fleer, do with their study of >>> playworlds?). In this plane, which would be perhaps the most naturalistic >>> one, the film could be studied as an human-made cultural artifact which >>> restuctures psychological functions; here, the meaning formed for the film >>> by who watches it and uses it as mediator in her relation to her real life >>> would be an m-perezhivanie. >>> >>> In a second plane, we could proceed as if the film was real life, and we >>> could consider Sokolov telling his story to the man he meets by the river >>> (a little bit like Carla telling her story to me). In this plane, >>> Sokolov's >>> narrative (i.e., what is showed to us as narrated flashback) could be >>> considered as a cultural artifact that Sokolov uses to relate to all what >>> happened to him. At this plane, the meaning of this narrative would be the >>> m-perezhivanie that, in that moment, mediates the relationship between >>> Sokolov and the war events he experienced years ago (but these events are >>> still very present to him, so although relating to past events, there is >>> here a Sokolov's activity [towards the past war events] which is in >>> present >>> -this echoes Christopher when, within our conversations, said: ?Part of >>> this might also be a question of what it means to describe and represent >>> one's own perezhivanie figuratively/narratively (whether to others, or to >>> oneself), as opposed to living that perezhivanie. Especially if the >>> attempt >>> to capture/represent one's own perezhivanie is, perhaps, also central to >>> the living of it?? >>> >>> In a third plane, we could proceed as if Sokolov's narration was not a >>> retrospective narration, but the on-time sequence of events with on-time >>> Sokolov's explanation of these events (in the moments in which the >>> narrator >>> voice is assumed within the flashback). In this plane, there are several >>> interesting perezhivanie phenomena. Clearly, there is a Sokolov's activity >>> of experiencing-as-struggle, which initiates when he realizes that all his >>> family, except one son, had been killed 2 years ago. At this moment, his >>> life becomes meaningless; the meaning (m-perezhivanie) he uses to relate >>> to >>> all his life (including the past) at this moment is expressed in his >>> conversation with his oncle: ?it's got to be that this life of mine is >>> nothing but a nightmare!?. In this moment, Sokolov's past in the prision >>> camp becomes also meaningless: then, his link to life (the m-perezhivanie >>> that made being alive meaningful to him) was meeting his family; but at >>> that time his family was already dead, so when he discovers it, he >>> realizes >>> that this m-perezhivanie (the idea of meeting his family) was linking him >>> to death, not to life, so all his efforts to surviving become meaningless: >>> ?Every night, when I was a prisioner, I talked with them. Now it turns out >>> that for two years I was talking with the dead??. In this conversation, >>> however, his oncle offers him an alternative m-perezhivanie to relate to >>> his life: he still has a son, so the m-perehivanie of meeting his family >>> can still turns Sokolov's life meaningful: ?you've got to go on living. >>> You >>> have to find Anatoly. When the war is over, your son will get married, you >>> will live with them. You will take up your carpentry again, play with your >>> grandkids?. It takes some time to Sokolov to enter into this >>> m-perezhivanie, but he does it and his life becomes meaningful again: ?and >>> then, unexpectedly, I've got a gleam of sunlight?. But, then, Anatoly also >>> dies. How to keep living? Here, Sokolov holds the m-perezhivanie that >>> linked him to life until that moment, and therefore, he needs a son; >>> pretending being the father of Vanya turns his life meaningful again. >>> >>> Another interesting thing, still at that level, is how Sokolov's relation >>> with his own immediate death changes along the different occasions in >>> which >>> he faces it. I thing here there are examples of >>> experiencing-as-contemplation -in my view, this is not >>> experiencing-as-struggle because the situation of impossibility (the >>> immediate death) is removed existentially (Sokolov's life is given back to >>> him), so that there is not a permanent situation of impossibility which is >>> initially meaningless and is turned into meaningful. In each occasion in >>> which Sokolov is faced with his immediate death, the m-perezhivanie that >>> mediates this relationship is different. When he is captured, his >>> m-perezhivanie is expressed as: ?here's my death coming after me?. When he >>> is conducted to meet the nazi official, the m-perezhivanie is expressed >>> as: >>> ?the end of your misery?, ?to my death and my release of this torment, I >>> will drink?. In the first, the death is running after Sokolov; in the >>> second, it is Sokolov happily going to meet death. Later, at the end of >>> the >>> film, he faces his immediate death again, and the m-perezhivanie is >>> expressed as: ?I'm really worried that I might die in my sleep, and that >>> would frighten my little son?. >>> >>> Well, just some thoughts after watching this wonderful film. >>> >>> Best regards, >>> >>> Marc. >>> >>> 2017-01-15 0:06 GMT+01:00 Christopher Schuck : >>> >>> Yes, definitely that article! And specifically, when I used "pivoting" I >>>> couldn't help but think of Beth's earlier example about how a child will >>>> use a stick as a pivot for a horse. Perhaps a somewhat different >>>> application but related, no? >>>> >>>> On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 4:06 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >>>> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Chris, all, >>>>> >>>>> your post is totally relevant to Beth's and Monica's article in the >>>>> special issue. They write about film and perezhivanie (quoting Sobchack) >>>>> the following: >>>>> >>>>> The reason that film allows us to glimpse the future is that there is a >>>>> connection between filmic time and ?real? time: ?The images of a film >>>>> >>>> exist >>>> >>>>> in the world as a temporal flow, within finitude and situation. Indeed, >>>>> >>>> the >>>> >>>>> fascination of the film is that it does not transcend our >>>>> >>>> lived-experience >>>> >>>>> of temporality, but rather that it seems to partake of it, to share it? >>>>> (1992, p. 60). >>>>> >>>>> And later >>>>> >>>>> "Specifically, the way that the flow of time becomes multidirectional is >>>>> that ?rehearsals make it necessary to think of the future in such a way >>>>> >>>> as >>>> >>>>> to create a past? (1985, p. 39). As Schechner ex-plains: ?In a very real >>>>> way the future ? the project coming into existence through the process >>>>> of >>>>> rehearsal ? determines the past: what will be kept from earlier >>>>> >>>> rehearsals >>>> >>>>> or from the ?source ma-terials? (1985, p. 39)." >>>>> >>>>> Alfredo >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ________________________________________ >>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>> on behalf of Christopher Schuck >>>>> Sent: 14 January 2017 21:43 >>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Fate of a Man >>>>> >>>>> But that's both the limitation and strength of art or fictional >>>>> narrative >>>>> as opposed to real life, isn't it? That art focuses our attention and >>>>> highlights certain features in a way that is idealized and artificially >>>>> "designed" to convey something more clearly and purely (but less >>>>> organically and authentically) than it would be conveyed in the course >>>>> of >>>>> living it, or observing someone else living it? One way to get around >>>>> >>>> this >>>> >>>>> would be, as David says, to analyze the film in terms of clues as to the >>>>> stages of emergence. But maybe another way to use the film would be to >>>>> >>>> view >>>> >>>>> it not so much as a complete, self-sufficient "example" of perezhivanie, >>>>> >>>> as >>>> >>>>> a *tool *for pivoting back and forth between the concept of perezhivanie >>>>> >>>> as >>>> >>>>> imaginatively constructed (through fiction), and the concept of >>>>> perezhivanie as imaginatively constructed (through our real living >>>>> experience and observation of it). So, it would be the *pivoting* >>>>> between >>>>> these two manifestations of the concept (designed vs. evolved, as David >>>>> >>>> put >>>> >>>>> it) that reveals new insights about perezhivanie, rather than >>>>> >>>> understanding >>>> >>>>> the concept from the film per se. >>>>> >>>>> On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 3:08 PM, David Kellogg >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> I think there's a good reason why Andy started a new thread on this: >>>>>> >>>>> he's a >>>>> >>>>>> very tidy thinker (quite unlike yours truly) and he knows that one >>>>>> >>>>> reason >>>> >>>>> why xmca threads are seldom cumulative is that they digress to related >>>>>> problems without solving the immmediate ones. >>>>>> >>>>>> Yes, of course, a film allows us to consider an example of >>>>>> >>>>> "perezhivanie", >>>>> >>>>>> but it is a designed perezhivanie rather than an evolved one; it >>>>>> >>>>> doesn't >>>> >>>>> explicitly display the various stages of emergence required for a >>>>>> >>>>> genetic >>>> >>>>> analysis, unless we analyze it not as a complete and finished work of >>>>>> >>>>> art >>>> >>>>> but instead for clues as to the stages of its creation (the way that, >>>>>> >>>>> for >>>> >>>>> example, "Quietly Flows the Don" was analyzed to determine its >>>>>> authenticity). >>>>>> >>>>>> I remember that In the original short story, the schnapps drinking >>>>>> scene seemed like pure sleight of hand: an artistically gratuitous >>>>>> >>>>> example >>>>> >>>>>> of what eventually gave Soviet social realism such a bad name. >>>>>> >>>>>> David Kellogg >>>>>> Macquarie University >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 10:04 PM, Carol Macdonald < >>>>>> >>>>> carolmacdon@gmail.com >>>> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Fellow XMCa-ers >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I have watched it through now, thank you Andy, but right now only >>>>>>> >>>>>> empirical >>>>>> >>>>>>> psychological categories come to mind. I will watch it again and in >>>>>>> >>>>>> the >>>>> >>>>>> meanwhile let my fellows with more recent experience of >>>>>>> >>>>>> /perezhivanie/ >>>> >>>>> take >>>>>> >>>>>>> the discussion further. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It is a kind of timeless story, and modern film techniques would >>>>>>> >>>>>> perhaps >>>>> >>>>>> be >>>>>> >>>>>>> more explicit. At the least I would say it has for me a Russian >>>>>>> understanding of suffering, perhaps because of their unique >>>>>>> >>>>>> experience >>>> >>>>> of >>>>> >>>>>> it. But having said that, WWII must have generated other similar >>>>>>> experiences, apart from the first part about Andrei's family dying in >>>>>>> >>>>>> the >>>>> >>>>>> famine. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Carol >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 14 January 2017 at 02:15, Andy Blunden wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I watched it in two parts with subtitles: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x16w7fg_destiny-of-a-man- >>>>>>>> 1959-pt-1_creation >>>>>>>> http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x16wat4_destiny-of-a-man- >>>>>>>> 1959-pt-2_creation >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Andy >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>>>> Andy Blunden >>>>>>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy >>>>>>>> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective- >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> decision-making >>>>> >>>>>> On 14/01/2017 2:35 AM, Beth Ferholt wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thank you for taking us to a shared example. I think that >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> having a >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Carol A Macdonald Ph.D (Edin) >>>>>>> Cultural Historical Activity Theory >>>>>>> Honorary Research Fellow: Department of Linguistics, Unisa >>>>>>> alternative email address: tmacdoca@unisa.ac.za >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> From ablunden@mira.net Fri Jan 20 20:51:34 2017 From: ablunden@mira.net (Andy Blunden) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2017 15:51:34 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Fate of a Man In-Reply-To: <9B8D2964-0926-4976-91F2-CDD51E50A6F5@gmail.com> References: <048522a2-cca0-3e56-cae2-f2142b9fbd5a@mira.net> <1484427999407.2877@iped.uio.no> <2270f5e7-7d82-5150-89a3-808a4e20b89b@mira.net> <9B8D2964-0926-4976-91F2-CDD51E50A6F5@gmail.com> Message-ID: How about a documentary movie about the first Trump voter who dies as a result of repeal of Obama Care? That would be a perezhivanie within a perezhivanie! Andy ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making On 21/01/2017 12:03 PM, Helena Worthen wrote: > I am late to this discussion, but I have been paying attention. I was reluctant to expose myself to the emotional challenges of the film. I knew that between the majestic music, the stunning black and white images, the beautiful human faces and bodies (and some very ugly ones), and the twists of the story, I was going to be deeply moved. However, I have been reading two books by Svetlana Alexievich -- Voices from Chernobyl and Secondhand Time - which tell equally heartbreaking, horrifying stories of suffering. Reading her work inclines me to place the film in the context of the period of deStalinization after Kruschev's 1956 speech to the 20th Congress of the CPSU, which gave the signal that it was permissible to begin to talk freely about Soviet history. It was a period of trying to build a story that could explain and honor, if not justify, the extreme suffering of the Soviet people. This film seems to me to set out to accomplish that. So does Alexievich's book, which is a compilation of interviews done between 1991 and 2012, with people who had something to say (good and bad) about the Soviet regime and the experience of its dissolution. She got the 2015 Nobel Prize for this book. And I sense that Andy, or someone, is anticipating that the US is going to have to produce some works of scholarship or art, or both, that attempt to explain what is happening now here in the US -- for example, this afternoon, under President Trump. > > Helena Worthen > helenaworthen@gmail.com > Vietnam blog: helenaworthen.wordpress.com > > On Jan 19, 2017, at 4:00 PM, Christopher Schuck wrote: > >> For some reason I couldn't see the subtitles showing up in Fate of a Man >> the first time, so I started to watch it dubbed in English instead. But the >> mannered Hollywood accents definitely were not exactly helping to convey >> the "real Russian soul" Robbins talks about! It felt like I was being asked >> to imagine Cary Grant inhabiting Andrei's perezhivanie-ing body. So, I >> started over with the subtitled version. >> >> Here are some quick initial reflections: wonderful movie, and in Andrei one >> of the more memorable characters I have seen. But I also found myself >> thinking how big a difference there is between watching a film on my >> 12-inch laptop with headphones (my only option at the moment), and sitting >> back and immersing yourself in a darkened theater or at least on a >> widescreen TV without any other distractions, allowing ourselves to "fall >> into this space" by virtue of our very awareness of the illusion generated >> by the frame, as Beth and Monica put it. This difference becomes even >> bigger if the screen you're viewing it on also enables you to quickly check >> email from time to time during the movie, as many people do these days. If >> we are to consider the film experience as a model (analogy?) for >> perezhivanie or even a certain kind of simulation of it, this effect that >> occurs when we lose ourselves in a film would be undermined by an >> especially small frame or poor viewing conditions. At what point does "the >> knowledge that the movement we experience is just an illusion" (p. 2 in >> their article) undermine the perezhivanie-like quality of film as opposed >> to forming an integral part of it? And, might the way distraction functions >> to undermine perezhivanie in the context of film in any way mirror how we >> "distract" ourselves in the course of living lives from conscious >> engagement with the perezhivanie we are otherwise undergoing? Is viewing a >> film on a 12-inch screen while checking email and calling it an >> "experience" in any way analogous to the self-deceptions and escapes we >> engage in during the course of either experience-as-struggle or >> experience-as-contemplation? I did not check email while watching Fate of a >> Man, by the way. Just in case you're wondering. >> >> As for the film itself: I was struck by the incidental way in which the >> earlier loss of his childhood family is introduced and acknowledged at the >> very outset, and how this contrasts with the dramatic ongoing perezhivanie >> that ensues going forward: it is as if this early loss is "taken for >> granted" as also part of the Russian experience. We are not privy to any >> perezhivanie he might have presumably undergone before that point; it is >> simply not "within the frame." At several points, I was reminded of >> Satyajit's World of Apu (last movie in his trilogy), where there was also a >> set of early losses and a relationship formed with a "son." Have any of you >> seen it? I think it would also be a good example of perezhivanie. >> >> I would not want to overemphasize the use of literary motifs, since >> Bondarchuk was presumably not making any references to the concept of >> perezhivanie as such. But there were several devices that evoked Beth and >> Monica's passage from To The Lighthouse ("Time stand still here"), and >> their metaphor of a life (or more specifically, a perezhivanie within a >> life) spiraling back over itself to bring two disparate moments into >> juxtaposition in a way such that "your life becomes three-dimensional >> again" (p. 2). One occurs in the various scenes when Andrei gazes up at the >> sky in reverie and all we see are clouds, or the scene where he lies in the >> grass after his first escape and the camera pans back as it becomes very >> quiet, leaving nothing but him swallowed up in the vastness of nature. >> There is a certain timeless quality to these scenes, a sense that he is >> momentarily transcending the linear temporal flow of his life as he either >> stands outside it and "stands still" in it. It could be a thousand years >> passing by in those clouds, or just the 17 years of his second phase; it >> suddenly doesn't matter. Another thing I noticed was the use of the two >> musical themes: the love song the accordionist plays for him and Irina, and >> the festive music incongruously piped in at the concentration camp during >> that amazing scene around Part 1, minute 45 where the prisoners are being >> marched in and the crematorium is going full blast down the road. At some >> point (I couldn't relocate it) Andrei has a flashback where he revisits the >> love song and his memories of Irina; then at minute 20 in Part 2, while >> processing his family's death after coming home from the war, he finds >> himself hearing the concentration camp song on the record player and is >> suddenly transported back to that traumatic experience. Yet he does not >> smash the record right away; he stares at it for a minute, almost as if he >> is resituating these two moments in relation to each other. >> >> Perhaps I am overanalyzing, but I found both these motifs to speak to Beth >> and Monica's examples in the way they bring two moments back into contact >> with each other. >> >> Finally, Mike and Andy's discussion in the Misha thread about the watching >> of a film functioning as perezhivanie for those viewers for whom it >> reflects and repeats their own experience, raises a question about the >> difference between extended perezhivanie and the personal re-enactment of >> one's perezhivanie within a much smaller time scale (the two or three hours >> spent watching the movie). I hope at some point we could delve more into >> this issue of time frame and time scale in various forms of perezhivanie. >> >> Chris >> >> >> On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 8:39 PM, Andy Blunden wrote: >> >>> Thank you Marc! It was the third "plane" which was my intention in >>> providing "Fate of a Man" for discussion. You picked out what were for me >>> also the main (but by no means the only) instances of perezhivanija in this >>> movie. >>> >>> It seems to me that Sokolov (the author) offers one perezhivanie in >>> particular as the main theme of the movie. At the beginning of the movie, >>> the man and boy walk up the path to the camera and at the end of the movie >>> they walk off together again. So this is the central theme. As you say, >>> when Sokolov's family has all been killed, even his talented war-hero son >>> who was going to be a famous mathematician, his life has become >>> meaningless. I really liked your reflections of Sokolov's reflections too. >>> He sees the young orphan boy who, he discovers, has no family and doesn't >>> even know what town he comes from, but is aimlessly living on pieces of >>> rubbish. He sees that the two of them are in the same situation. So after >>> some time mulling this over a they sit together in the truck, he lies to >>> the boy and tells him that he is the boy's father, and they embrace. But >>> the boy questions this and he reasserts his claim and the boy accepts this. >>> The man is able to define a new meaning for his life; he has done this >>> autonomously without the help of a therapist, but he still needs another, >>> the boy, to embody that meaning. But he knows it is his own invention. The >>> boy on the other hand has to be made to believe it is true; he is not >>> sufficiently mature to manufacture this meaning himself, but as a child he >>> can be guided by an adult. As you say, Marc, it is very significant when >>> Sokolov tells us how he is now, again, worried about his own death. What if >>> I died in my sleep? that would be a shock for my son! >>> >>> For me, this reflection causes me to look back on the man's whole struggle >>> during the war: in the first phase he does not differentiate between his >>> life as a father and husband and his life as a Soviet citizen - war is his >>> duty and he is confident, as is everyone else, of victory. His bravery in >>> driving his truck to the front line under fire reflects the fact that he >>> has never imagined his own death. Then he finds himself prostrate before 2 >>> Nazi soldiers who we assume are going among the wounded shooting anyone who >>> has survived. But surprisingly, he is allowed to live, but is to be used as >>> a slave. Sokolov has been confronted by his own mortality for the first >>> time and he chooses life, but accepts slavery (Sartre and Hegel both >>> thematize this moment in their philosophy). In this second phase of >>> Sokolov's life he is a survivor. Everything hinges on surviving and >>> returning to his wife and family. As you point out, Marc, his later >>> reflections on this are particularly poignant, when he discovers the >>> futility of this hope. Eventually, the life of forced labour becomes >>> unbearable. He cries out: "Why are we forced to dig 3 cubic metres when 1 >>> cubic meter is enough for a grave!" Sokolov has accepted and embraced death >>> after all. (Transition to the third phase.) To his German masters this is >>> an unendurable act of defiance. As David points out, there are flaws in the >>> scene which follows, but ... he confronts his own death defiantly, stares >>> it in the eye, spits on it, and his life again gains meaning as a "brave >>> Soviet soldier" unafraid of death even in such an impossible moment. Not >>> only does he survive, but takes the Nazi Colonel prisoner and hands the war >>> plans over to the Red Army. Now, when he is offered the chance to return to >>> his wife as a war hero he declines and asks to be sent back to the front. >>> His life has adopted this new meaning which casts his life as a father into >>> the shade. He no longer fears death. But he is persuaded to take time off >>> and learns of the death of his family. As Marc relates, the continued >>> survival of his son, who is now also a war hero, provides continued meaning >>> and integrates the two themes in his life. This takes work, as Marc points >>> out, and he has the assistance of an older man, in achieving this >>> redefinition of his life. But tragically, with the death of his son (and NB >>> the end of the war, albeit in victory) his life is again without meaning. >>> Fourth phase. He has survived, but has no purpose. By becoming a father >>> again (Fifth phase), he regains the fear of death and meaning in his life. >>> It is real work, and we witness this psychological turmoil as he copes with >>> the idea that this scruffy orphan boy could be a son to him, and eventually >>> he manages it. >>> >>> The transition between each phase is a critical period during which >>> Sokolov's personality is transformed. Note also, that there is a >>> premonition of this perezhivanie in Sokolov's earlier life: his family is >>> wiped out in the Civil War and the famine of 1922, then he meets his >>> wife-to-be, also raised in an orphanage, and they together create a life >>> and have 17 happy years before the Nazi invasion intrudes. So from the >>> beginning of the movie we are introduced to the main theme. >>> >>> These are the main moments in the movie, which caused me to select it for >>> discussion rather than any other movie. Also, there is no doubt that in >>> producing this movie in 1958 the Soviet government was engaged with its >>> people, in a process of collective perezhivanie and by reflecting on the >>> collective perezhivanie during the period of the war, before and after, >>> they aim to assist the people in collectively assigning meaning to this >>> terrible suffering and like the man and his "son" walking again into the >>> future. As a propaganda movie, of course, it is open to much criticism, but >>> that is hardly the point. I appreciate Marc's analysis in terms of the >>> other concepts he has introduced. I wouldn't mind a recap on these. In >>> terms of Vasilyuk's concepts, Sokolov's life-world is *simple and >>> difficult*. The boy's life world is *simple and easy*. >>> >>> Can we continue to discuss "Fate of a Man", while I open another movie for >>> analysis? I think there are at least 10 subscribers to this list who have >>> published in learned journals on the topic of perezhivanie in childhood. >>> Perhaps one of you would like to reflect on the boy's perezhivanija? >>> >>> Andy >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>> Andy Blunden >>> http://home.mira.net/~andy >>> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making >>> On 18/01/2017 5:14 AM, Marc Clar? wrote: >>> >>>> Hi, all, >>>> >>>> and thank you, Andy, for sharing this amazing film, which I didn't know. I >>>> think it will be very useful to share and discuss our respective views on >>>> perezhivanie. >>>> >>>> In my view, the film could be analyzed in terms of perezhivanie in three >>>> different planes. First, we could consider the person who watches the >>>> film, >>>> and we could study how the meaning she forms for the film restructures her >>>> relationship with aspects of her real life -such as, for example, her own >>>> death or the death of a beloved one, etc. (perhaps this is a little bit >>>> like what Beth and Monica, or Veresov and Fleer, do with their study of >>>> playworlds?). In this plane, which would be perhaps the most naturalistic >>>> one, the film could be studied as an human-made cultural artifact which >>>> restuctures psychological functions; here, the meaning formed for the film >>>> by who watches it and uses it as mediator in her relation to her real life >>>> would be an m-perezhivanie. >>>> >>>> In a second plane, we could proceed as if the film was real life, and we >>>> could consider Sokolov telling his story to the man he meets by the river >>>> (a little bit like Carla telling her story to me). In this plane, >>>> Sokolov's >>>> narrative (i.e., what is showed to us as narrated flashback) could be >>>> considered as a cultural artifact that Sokolov uses to relate to all what >>>> happened to him. At this plane, the meaning of this narrative would be the >>>> m-perezhivanie that, in that moment, mediates the relationship between >>>> Sokolov and the war events he experienced years ago (but these events are >>>> still very present to him, so although relating to past events, there is >>>> here a Sokolov's activity [towards the past war events] which is in >>>> present >>>> -this echoes Christopher when, within our conversations, said: ?Part of >>>> this might also be a question of what it means to describe and represent >>>> one's own perezhivanie figuratively/narratively (whether to others, or to >>>> oneself), as opposed to living that perezhivanie. Especially if the >>>> attempt >>>> to capture/represent one's own perezhivanie is, perhaps, also central to >>>> the living of it?? >>>> >>>> In a third plane, we could proceed as if Sokolov's narration was not a >>>> retrospective narration, but the on-time sequence of events with on-time >>>> Sokolov's explanation of these events (in the moments in which the >>>> narrator >>>> voice is assumed within the flashback). In this plane, there are several >>>> interesting perezhivanie phenomena. Clearly, there is a Sokolov's activity >>>> of experiencing-as-struggle, which initiates when he realizes that all his >>>> family, except one son, had been killed 2 years ago. At this moment, his >>>> life becomes meaningless; the meaning (m-perezhivanie) he uses to relate >>>> to >>>> all his life (including the past) at this moment is expressed in his >>>> conversation with his oncle: ?it's got to be that this life of mine is >>>> nothing but a nightmare!?. In this moment, Sokolov's past in the prision >>>> camp becomes also meaningless: then, his link to life (the m-perezhivanie >>>> that made being alive meaningful to him) was meeting his family; but at >>>> that time his family was already dead, so when he discovers it, he >>>> realizes >>>> that this m-perezhivanie (the idea of meeting his family) was linking him >>>> to death, not to life, so all his efforts to surviving become meaningless: >>>> ?Every night, when I was a prisioner, I talked with them. Now it turns out >>>> that for two years I was talking with the dead??. In this conversation, >>>> however, his oncle offers him an alternative m-perezhivanie to relate to >>>> his life: he still has a son, so the m-perehivanie of meeting his family >>>> can still turns Sokolov's life meaningful: ?you've got to go on living. >>>> You >>>> have to find Anatoly. When the war is over, your son will get married, you >>>> will live with them. You will take up your carpentry again, play with your >>>> grandkids?. It takes some time to Sokolov to enter into this >>>> m-perezhivanie, but he does it and his life becomes meaningful again: ?and >>>> then, unexpectedly, I've got a gleam of sunlight?. But, then, Anatoly also >>>> dies. How to keep living? Here, Sokolov holds the m-perezhivanie that >>>> linked him to life until that moment, and therefore, he needs a son; >>>> pretending being the father of Vanya turns his life meaningful again. >>>> >>>> Another interesting thing, still at that level, is how Sokolov's relation >>>> with his own immediate death changes along the different occasions in >>>> which >>>> he faces it. I thing here there are examples of >>>> experiencing-as-contemplation -in my view, this is not >>>> experiencing-as-struggle because the situation of impossibility (the >>>> immediate death) is removed existentially (Sokolov's life is given back to >>>> him), so that there is not a permanent situation of impossibility which is >>>> initially meaningless and is turned into meaningful. In each occasion in >>>> which Sokolov is faced with his immediate death, the m-perezhivanie that >>>> mediates this relationship is different. When he is captured, his >>>> m-perezhivanie is expressed as: ?here's my death coming after me?. When he >>>> is conducted to meet the nazi official, the m-perezhivanie is expressed >>>> as: >>>> ?the end of your misery?, ?to my death and my release of this torment, I >>>> will drink?. In the first, the death is running after Sokolov; in the >>>> second, it is Sokolov happily going to meet death. Later, at the end of >>>> the >>>> film, he faces his immediate death again, and the m-perezhivanie is >>>> expressed as: ?I'm really worried that I might die in my sleep, and that >>>> would frighten my little son?. >>>> >>>> Well, just some thoughts after watching this wonderful film. >>>> >>>> Best regards, >>>> >>>> Marc. >>>> >>>> 2017-01-15 0:06 GMT+01:00 Christopher Schuck : >>>> >>>> Yes, definitely that article! And specifically, when I used "pivoting" I >>>>> couldn't help but think of Beth's earlier example about how a child will >>>>> use a stick as a pivot for a horse. Perhaps a somewhat different >>>>> application but related, no? >>>>> >>>>> On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 4:06 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Chris, all, >>>>>> your post is totally relevant to Beth's and Monica's article in the >>>>>> special issue. They write about film and perezhivanie (quoting Sobchack) >>>>>> the following: >>>>>> >>>>>> The reason that film allows us to glimpse the future is that there is a >>>>>> connection between filmic time and ?real? time: ?The images of a film >>>>>> >>>>> exist >>>>> >>>>>> in the world as a temporal flow, within finitude and situation. Indeed, >>>>>> >>>>> the >>>>> >>>>>> fascination of the film is that it does not transcend our >>>>>> >>>>> lived-experience >>>>> >>>>>> of temporality, but rather that it seems to partake of it, to share it? >>>>>> (1992, p. 60). >>>>>> >>>>>> And later >>>>>> >>>>>> "Specifically, the way that the flow of time becomes multidirectional is >>>>>> that ?rehearsals make it necessary to think of the future in such a way >>>>>> >>>>> as >>>>> >>>>>> to create a past? (1985, p. 39). As Schechner ex-plains: ?In a very real >>>>>> way the future ? the project coming into existence through the process >>>>>> of >>>>>> rehearsal ? determines the past: what will be kept from earlier >>>>>> >>>>> rehearsals >>>>> >>>>>> or from the ?source ma-terials? (1985, p. 39)." >>>>>> >>>>>> Alfredo >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> ________________________________________ >>>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>>> on behalf of Christopher Schuck >>>>>> Sent: 14 January 2017 21:43 >>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Fate of a Man >>>>>> >>>>>> But that's both the limitation and strength of art or fictional >>>>>> narrative >>>>>> as opposed to real life, isn't it? That art focuses our attention and >>>>>> highlights certain features in a way that is idealized and artificially >>>>>> "designed" to convey something more clearly and purely (but less >>>>>> organically and authentically) than it would be conveyed in the course >>>>>> of >>>>>> living it, or observing someone else living it? One way to get around >>>>>> >>>>> this >>>>> >>>>>> would be, as David says, to analyze the film in terms of clues as to the >>>>>> stages of emergence. But maybe another way to use the film would be to >>>>>> >>>>> view >>>>> >>>>>> it not so much as a complete, self-sufficient "example" of perezhivanie, >>>>>> >>>>> as >>>>> >>>>>> a *tool *for pivoting back and forth between the concept of perezhivanie >>>>>> >>>>> as >>>>> >>>>>> imaginatively constructed (through fiction), and the concept of >>>>>> perezhivanie as imaginatively constructed (through our real living >>>>>> experience and observation of it). So, it would be the *pivoting* >>>>>> between >>>>>> these two manifestations of the concept (designed vs. evolved, as David >>>>>> >>>>> put >>>>> >>>>>> it) that reveals new insights about perezhivanie, rather than >>>>>> >>>>> understanding >>>>> >>>>>> the concept from the film per se. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 3:08 PM, David Kellogg >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> I think there's a good reason why Andy started a new thread on this: >>>>>> he's a >>>>>> >>>>>>> very tidy thinker (quite unlike yours truly) and he knows that one >>>>>>> >>>>>> reason >>>>>> why xmca threads are seldom cumulative is that they digress to related >>>>>>> problems without solving the immmediate ones. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Yes, of course, a film allows us to consider an example of >>>>>>> >>>>>> "perezhivanie", >>>>>> >>>>>>> but it is a designed perezhivanie rather than an evolved one; it >>>>>>> >>>>>> doesn't >>>>>> explicitly display the various stages of emergence required for a >>>>>> genetic >>>>>> analysis, unless we analyze it not as a complete and finished work of >>>>>> art >>>>>> but instead for clues as to the stages of its creation (the way that, >>>>>> for >>>>>> example, "Quietly Flows the Don" was analyzed to determine its >>>>>>> authenticity). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I remember that In the original short story, the schnapps drinking >>>>>>> scene seemed like pure sleight of hand: an artistically gratuitous >>>>>>> >>>>>> example >>>>>> >>>>>>> of what eventually gave Soviet social realism such a bad name. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> David Kellogg >>>>>>> Macquarie University >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 10:04 PM, Carol Macdonald < >>>>>>> >>>>>> carolmacdon@gmail.com >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> Fellow XMCa-ers >>>>>>>> I have watched it through now, thank you Andy, but right now only >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> empirical >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> psychological categories come to mind. I will watch it again and in >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> meanwhile let my fellows with more recent experience of >>>>>>> /perezhivanie/ >>>>>> take >>>>>>>> the discussion further. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> It is a kind of timeless story, and modern film techniques would >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> perhaps >>>>>>> be >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> more explicit. At the least I would say it has for me a Russian >>>>>>>> understanding of suffering, perhaps because of their unique >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> experience >>>>>> of >>>>>> >>>>>>> it. But having said that, WWII must have generated other similar >>>>>>>> experiences, apart from the first part about Andrei's family dying in >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> famine. >>>>>>>> Carol >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 14 January 2017 at 02:15, Andy Blunden wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I watched it in two parts with subtitles: >>>>>>>>> http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x16w7fg_destiny-of-a-man- >>>>>>>>> 1959-pt-1_creation >>>>>>>>> http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x16wat4_destiny-of-a-man- >>>>>>>>> 1959-pt-2_creation >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Andy >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>>>>> Andy Blunden >>>>>>>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy >>>>>>>>> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective- >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> decision-making >>>>>>> On 14/01/2017 2:35 AM, Beth Ferholt wrote: >>>>>>>>> Thank you for taking us to a shared example. I think that >>>>>>>>>>> having a >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> Carol A Macdonald Ph.D (Edin) >>>>>>>> Cultural Historical Activity Theory >>>>>>>> Honorary Research Fellow: Department of Linguistics, Unisa >>>>>>>> alternative email address: tmacdoca@unisa.ac.za >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> > > From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Sat Jan 21 12:44:43 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2017 20:44:43 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Trump's speech and Perezhivanie Message-ID: <1485031482970.89461@iped.uio.no> Dear Helena, Andy, all, Unfortunately, I have not been able to find the time to watch the movie Fate of a Man, but I have followed the very interesting analyses and conversations about it. I am opening this thread as connexions between those analyses, perezhivanie, and current tragic social and political situation in the US and elsewhere. This also connects with the article that Mike shared on the position of the Learning Sciences with regard to this situation (how happy I was to see this initiative!). In particular, I wanted to pick up on Helena's very true comment that "the US is going to have to produce some works of scholarship or art, or both, that attempt to explain what is happening now here in the US -- for example, this afternoon, under President Trump." Yesterday, we saw at home Trump's speech. Although we had followed Trump's campaign and its denigrating tenor, it was yesterday, for the first time, that my wife and me got this gut feeling of true tragedy, of a real *drama* as we heard those empty, but to recover the prior article for discussion, hollowed and hollowing words coming out of that mouth. It came upon us that there may be lots of people for whom those words are not hollowed, but actually encouraging, rich, beautiful. How can you hear that as beauty? So, I was wondering, and in following up with our 2016 MCA Issue 4 discussion, whether we could not actually conduct an analysis of the sort Marc offers in his article of the perezhivanie. Just as Vygotsky explains how 3 different children experience the situation of an alcoholic mother differently, could not we perform an analysis ?of that perezhivanie in which a person experiences yesterday's situation as one of encouragement, of freedom and hope. Would that not be a way to try to understand what is going on? This would not be a piece of art, but could be something we could do to try to understand and change this situation. We could then contrast that perezhivanie with the one many of as have, in which the situation is experience as a real TRAGEDY. I think in the first case, there is no hope for change, there is contempt; in the second, hearing those words as hollowed and hollowing require that you live the situation as a doubled situation in which you experienced it from a very different developmental stage. One in which the speech sounds as a case of involution. Should we find the transcribed speech and perform such analysis? Going now to support the Woman's march here in Victoria BC. Alfredo From s.davis@cqu.edu.au Sat Jan 21 16:54:27 2017 From: s.davis@cqu.edu.au (Susan Davis) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2017 00:54:27 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie Message-ID: Greetings all, I agree it would be a timely and powerful collaboration to explore the significance of the times and the meaning for different people at this particular moment in history. While looking at Trump?s speech provides a common anchor point for discussion, I think it would also be worth looking at the different ways individuals, groups (including huge groups of people) are experiencing, living through and making meaning of the what is going on. This is being expressed in many creative ways and ?art forms?, including the marshalling of millions of people in protest marches across the globe and the various forms of human expression (including actual ?signs? http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2017/01/21/best-prot est-signs-womens-march-washington/96877890/). It seems there are some powerful collaborative versions of perezhivanie going on as well as deeply individual and perhaps it is worth documenting, analysing and exploring these as well. Kind regards and all power to those who are standing together to speak out for equity and justice across the world this weekend! Sue Dr Susan Davis Senior Lecturer | School of Education & the Arts | Higher Education Division CQUniversity Australia, Noosa Campus | PO Box 1128, Qld 4566 P +61 (0)7 5440 7007 | X 47007 | M +61 418 763 428 E: s.davis@cqu.edu.au L https://www.linkedin.com/in/suedavisnoosa RG | https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Susan_Davis7 On 22/01/2017 6:44 am, "xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil" wrote: >Dear Helena, Andy, all, > > >Unfortunately, I have not been able to find the time to watch the movie >Fate of a Man, but I have followed the very interesting analyses and >conversations about it. I am opening this thread as connexions between >those analyses, perezhivanie, and current tragic social and political >situation in the US and elsewhere. This also connects with the article >that Mike shared on the position of the Learning Sciences with regard to >this situation (how happy I was to see this initiative!). > > >In particular, I wanted to pick up on Helena's very true comment that >"the US is going to have to produce some works of scholarship or art, or >both, that attempt to explain what is happening now here in the US -- for >example, this afternoon, under President Trump." > > >Yesterday, we saw at home Trump's speech. Although we had followed >Trump's campaign and its denigrating tenor, it was yesterday, for the >first time, that my wife and me got this gut feeling of true tragedy, of >a real *drama* as we heard those empty, but to recover the prior article >for discussion, hollowed and hollowing words coming out of that mouth. It >came upon us that there may be lots of people for whom those words are >not hollowed, but actually encouraging, rich, beautiful. How can you hear >that as beauty? > > >So, I was wondering, and in following up with our 2016 MCA Issue 4 >discussion, whether we could not actually conduct an analysis of the >sort Marc offers in his article of the perezhivanie. Just as Vygotsky >explains how 3 different children experience the situation of an >alcoholic mother differently, could not we perform an analysis ?of that >perezhivanie in which a person experiences yesterday's situation as one >of encouragement, of freedom and hope. Would that not be a way to try to >understand what is going on? This would not be a piece of art, but could >be something we could do to try to understand and change this situation. > >We could then contrast that perezhivanie with the one many of as have, in >which the situation is experience as a real TRAGEDY. I think in the first >case, there is no hope for change, there is contempt; in the second, >hearing those words as hollowed and hollowing require that you live the >situation as a doubled situation in which you experienced it from a very >different developmental stage. One in which the speech sounds as a case >of involution. > >Should we find the transcribed speech and perform such analysis? > > >Going now to support the Woman's march here in Victoria BC. > >Alfredo > > From lpscholar2@gmail.com Sat Jan 21 17:29:09 2017 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2017 17:29:09 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: <1485031482970.89461@iped.uio.no> References: <1485031482970.89461@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <58840b10.4319620a.49c0c.033a@mx.google.com> Alfredo, I will share an impression I had as I listened to a particular group being interviewed who were inspired by the Trump speech. The group were ?the biker?s for Trump?. I asked what symbolic form they were inhabiting or living out? The answer i came up with was the modern symbolic of being ?On the Road Again? and distancing from the perceived limitations of social con/striction. Then Thelma and Louise came to mind. Now how does this modern American cultural imaginary of being on the road again inter/sect with Trump?s speech. Trump said now there is only the future. No doubling back. The form changes, but there is a deeper (layered) imaginary being expressed that is shared between the biker?s for Trump and Trump?s speech. This symbolic (taking multiple forms) is profoundly anti-historical in rhetoric. It creates ?dramatic places? in which people ?fall into? and become animated and encouraged and re-enchanted and re-vitalized. There is a re/lease from perceived constraints. Alfredo, My impression watching the inauguration and the motivating dramatic place Trump opens for some while sending a shudder down the spine for others. The myth of escape from the shackles of history runs deep as a symbolic imaginary that takes multiple ?forms? in the American dream. This is only one quick pass through as an impression. Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Alfredo Jornet Gil Sent: January 21, 2017 12:46 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Trump's speech and Perezhivanie Dear Helena, Andy, all, Unfortunately, I have not been able to find the time to watch the movie Fate of a Man, but I have followed the very interesting analyses and conversations about it. I am opening this thread as connexions between those analyses, perezhivanie, and current tragic social and political situation in the US and elsewhere. This also connects with the article that Mike shared on the position of the Learning Sciences with regard to this situation (how happy I was to see this initiative!). In particular, I wanted to pick up on Helena's very true comment that "the US is going to have to produce some works of scholarship or art, or both, that attempt to explain what is happening now here in the US -- for example, this afternoon, under President Trump." Yesterday, we saw at home Trump's speech. Although we had followed Trump's campaign and its denigrating tenor, it was yesterday, for the first time, that my wife and me got this gut feeling of true tragedy, of a real *drama* as we heard those empty, but to recover the prior article for discussion, hollowed and hollowing words coming out of that mouth. It came upon us that there may be lots of people for whom those words are not hollowed, but actually encouraging, rich, beautiful. How can you hear that as beauty? So, I was wondering, and in following up with our 2016 MCA Issue 4 discussion, whether we could not actually conduct an analysis of the sort Marc offers in his article of the perezhivanie. Just as Vygotsky explains how 3 different children experience the situation of an alcoholic mother differently, could not we perform an analysis ?of that perezhivanie in which a person experiences yesterday's situation as one of encouragement, of freedom and hope. Would that not be a way to try to understand what is going on? This would not be a piece of art, but could be something we could do to try to understand and change this situation. We could then contrast that perezhivanie with the one many of as have, in which the situation is experience as a real TRAGEDY. I think in the first case, there is no hope for change, there is contempt; in the second, hearing those words as hollowed and hollowing require that you live the situation as a doubled situation in which you experienced it from a very different developmental stage. One in which the speech sounds as a case of involution. Should we find the transcribed speech and perform such analysis? Going now to support the Woman's march here in Victoria BC. Alfredo From greg.a.thompson@gmail.com Sat Jan 21 17:47:49 2017 From: greg.a.thompson@gmail.com (Greg Thompson) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2017 18:47:49 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: <58840b10.4319620a.49c0c.033a@mx.google.com> References: <1485031482970.89461@iped.uio.no> <58840b10.4319620a.49c0c.033a@mx.google.com> Message-ID: Alfredo, I find this to be a fantastic suggestion. One interesting analysis that helps us understand the circumstances/context in which many people experience Trump's speech as beautiful, even hopeful, is this book: http://thenewpress.com/books/strangers-their-own-land Democracy Now did a nice interview with her as well: https://www.democracynow.org/2016/9/28/what_drives_trump_supporters_sociologist_arlie In the book (and the interview) Hochschild engages with, among others, the question of why someone who has had been directly deleteriously affected by the impact of fracking and oil production would support politicians who are against government regulation of those industries. She appears to deal with the situation very thoughtfully and compassionately, helping those of us who can't understand Trump supporters see how they might have a different experience of what Trump has to say. Hopefully this doesn't take too far off track, but seems relevant to really consider the circumstances of Trump supporters in order to understand their experiences. Just a thought. -greg On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 6:29 PM, wrote: > Alfredo, > I will share an impression I had as I listened to a particular group being > interviewed who were inspired by the Trump speech. > The group were ?the biker?s for Trump?. I asked what symbolic form they > were inhabiting or living out? The answer i came up with was the modern > symbolic of being ?On the Road Again? and distancing from the perceived > limitations of social con/striction. Then Thelma and Louise came to mind. > Now how does this modern American cultural imaginary of being on the road > again inter/sect with Trump?s speech. > Trump said now there is only the future. No doubling back. The form > changes, but there is a deeper (layered) imaginary being expressed that is > shared between the biker?s for Trump and Trump?s speech. This symbolic > (taking multiple forms) is profoundly anti-historical in rhetoric. It > creates ?dramatic places? in which people ?fall into? and become animated > and encouraged and re-enchanted and re-vitalized. There is a re/lease from > perceived constraints. > > Alfredo, My impression watching the inauguration and the motivating > dramatic place Trump opens for some while sending a shudder down the spine > for others. The myth of escape from the shackles of history runs deep as a > symbolic imaginary that takes multiple ?forms? in the American dream. > > This is only one quick pass through as an impression. > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > From: Alfredo Jornet Gil > Sent: January 21, 2017 12:46 PM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Trump's speech and Perezhivanie > > Dear Helena, Andy, all, > > > Unfortunately, I have not been able to find the time to watch the movie > Fate of a Man, but I have followed the very interesting analyses and > conversations about it. I am opening this thread as connexions between > those analyses, perezhivanie, and current tragic social and political > situation in the US and elsewhere. This also connects with the article that > Mike shared on the position of the Learning Sciences with regard to this > situation (how happy I was to see this initiative!). > > > In particular, I wanted to pick up on Helena's very true comment that "the > US is going to have to produce some works of scholarship or art, or both, > that attempt to explain what is happening now here in the US -- for > example, this afternoon, under President Trump." > > > Yesterday, we saw at home Trump's speech. Although we had followed Trump's > campaign and its denigrating tenor, it was yesterday, for the first time, > that my wife and me got this gut feeling of true tragedy, of a real *drama* > as we heard those empty, but to recover the prior article for discussion, > hollowed and hollowing words coming out of that mouth. It came upon us that > there may be lots of people for whom those words are not hollowed, but > actually encouraging, rich, beautiful. How can you hear that as beauty? > > > So, I was wondering, and in following up with our 2016 MCA Issue 4 > discussion, whether we could not actually conduct an analysis of the sort > Marc offers in his article of the perezhivanie. Just as Vygotsky explains > how 3 different children experience the situation of an alcoholic mother > differently, could not we perform an analysis ?of that perezhivanie in > which a person experiences yesterday's situation as one of encouragement, > of freedom and hope. Would that not be a way to try to understand what is > going on? This would not be a piece of art, but could be something we could > do to try to understand and change this situation. > > We could then contrast that perezhivanie with the one many of as have, in > which the situation is experience as a real TRAGEDY. I think in the first > case, there is no hope for change, there is contempt; in the second, > hearing those words as hollowed and hollowing require that you live the > situation as a doubled situation in which you experienced it from a very > different developmental stage. One in which the speech sounds as a case of > involution. > > Should we find the transcribed speech and perform such analysis? > > > Going now to support the Woman's march here in Victoria BC. > > Alfredo > > > > -- Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Department of Anthropology 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower Brigham Young University Provo, UT 84602 http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson From mcole@ucsd.edu Sat Jan 21 17:55:26 2017 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2017 17:55:26 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: <58840b10.4319620a.49c0c.033a@mx.google.com> References: <1485031482970.89461@iped.uio.no> <58840b10.4319620a.49c0c.033a@mx.google.com> Message-ID: Hi Larry -- You did not pick up on Alfredo's suggestion that xmca-o-philes conduct a collective investigation of the relationship of people's responses to the new administration as related to their age. Seemed like an interesting idea to me. mike On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 5:29 PM, wrote: > Alfredo, > I will share an impression I had as I listened to a particular group being > interviewed who were inspired by the Trump speech. > The group were ?the biker?s for Trump?. I asked what symbolic form they > were inhabiting or living out? The answer i came up with was the modern > symbolic of being ?On the Road Again? and distancing from the perceived > limitations of social con/striction. Then Thelma and Louise came to mind. > Now how does this modern American cultural imaginary of being on the road > again inter/sect with Trump?s speech. > Trump said now there is only the future. No doubling back. The form > changes, but there is a deeper (layered) imaginary being expressed that is > shared between the biker?s for Trump and Trump?s speech. This symbolic > (taking multiple forms) is profoundly anti-historical in rhetoric. It > creates ?dramatic places? in which people ?fall into? and become animated > and encouraged and re-enchanted and re-vitalized. There is a re/lease from > perceived constraints. > > Alfredo, My impression watching the inauguration and the motivating > dramatic place Trump opens for some while sending a shudder down the spine > for others. The myth of escape from the shackles of history runs deep as a > symbolic imaginary that takes multiple ?forms? in the American dream. > > This is only one quick pass through as an impression. > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > From: Alfredo Jornet Gil > Sent: January 21, 2017 12:46 PM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Trump's speech and Perezhivanie > > Dear Helena, Andy, all, > > > Unfortunately, I have not been able to find the time to watch the movie > Fate of a Man, but I have followed the very interesting analyses and > conversations about it. I am opening this thread as connexions between > those analyses, perezhivanie, and current tragic social and political > situation in the US and elsewhere. This also connects with the article that > Mike shared on the position of the Learning Sciences with regard to this > situation (how happy I was to see this initiative!). > > > In particular, I wanted to pick up on Helena's very true comment that "the > US is going to have to produce some works of scholarship or art, or both, > that attempt to explain what is happening now here in the US -- for > example, this afternoon, under President Trump." > > > Yesterday, we saw at home Trump's speech. Although we had followed Trump's > campaign and its denigrating tenor, it was yesterday, for the first time, > that my wife and me got this gut feeling of true tragedy, of a real *drama* > as we heard those empty, but to recover the prior article for discussion, > hollowed and hollowing words coming out of that mouth. It came upon us that > there may be lots of people for whom those words are not hollowed, but > actually encouraging, rich, beautiful. How can you hear that as beauty? > > > So, I was wondering, and in following up with our 2016 MCA Issue 4 > discussion, whether we could not actually conduct an analysis of the sort > Marc offers in his article of the perezhivanie. Just as Vygotsky explains > how 3 different children experience the situation of an alcoholic mother > differently, could not we perform an analysis ?of that perezhivanie in > which a person experiences yesterday's situation as one of encouragement, > of freedom and hope. Would that not be a way to try to understand what is > going on? This would not be a piece of art, but could be something we could > do to try to understand and change this situation. > > We could then contrast that perezhivanie with the one many of as have, in > which the situation is experience as a real TRAGEDY. I think in the first > case, there is no hope for change, there is contempt; in the second, > hearing those words as hollowed and hollowing require that you live the > situation as a doubled situation in which you experienced it from a very > different developmental stage. One in which the speech sounds as a case of > involution. > > Should we find the transcribed speech and perform such analysis? > > > Going now to support the Woman's march here in Victoria BC. > > Alfredo > > > > From Peg.Griffin@att.net Sat Jan 21 18:10:01 2017 From: Peg.Griffin@att.net (Peg Griffin) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2017 21:10:01 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <001201d27454$a47631d0$ed629570$@att.net> A great home-made sign from today's DC WMW, held by a woman in her mid-twenties: "If I register my uterus as a corporation, will you pass a law to protect it from regulation?" And the woman was accompanied by a friend who had a one word sign, actually quoting from many a twit trump tweet: "Sad." The double-take of readers was as lovely to behold as was the sign itself! Peg Griffin -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Susan Davis Sent: Saturday, January 21, 2017 7:54 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie Greetings all, I agree it would be a timely and powerful collaboration to explore the significance of the times and the meaning for different people at this particular moment in history. While looking at Trump?s speech provides a common anchor point for discussion, I think it would also be worth looking at the different ways individuals, groups (including huge groups of people) are experiencing, living through and making meaning of the what is going on. This is being expressed in many creative ways and ?art forms?, including the marshalling of millions of people in protest marches across the globe and the various forms of human expression (including actual ?signs? http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2017/01/21/best-prot est-signs-womens-march-washington/96877890/). It seems there are some powerful collaborative versions of perezhivanie going on as well as deeply individual and perhaps it is worth documenting, analysing and exploring these as well. Kind regards and all power to those who are standing together to speak out for equity and justice across the world this weekend! Sue Dr Susan Davis Senior Lecturer | School of Education & the Arts | Higher Education Division CQUniversity Australia, Noosa Campus | PO Box 1128, Qld 4566 P +61 (0)7 5440 7007 | X 47007 | M +61 418 763 428 E: s.davis@cqu.edu.au L https://www.linkedin.com/in/suedavisnoosa RG | https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Susan_Davis7 On 22/01/2017 6:44 am, "xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil" wrote: >Dear Helena, Andy, all, > > >Unfortunately, I have not been able to find the time to watch the movie >Fate of a Man, but I have followed the very interesting analyses and >conversations about it. I am opening this thread as connexions between >those analyses, perezhivanie, and current tragic social and political >situation in the US and elsewhere. This also connects with the article >that Mike shared on the position of the Learning Sciences with regard >to this situation (how happy I was to see this initiative!). > > >In particular, I wanted to pick up on Helena's very true comment that >"the US is going to have to produce some works of scholarship or art, >or both, that attempt to explain what is happening now here in the US >-- for example, this afternoon, under President Trump." > > >Yesterday, we saw at home Trump's speech. Although we had followed >Trump's campaign and its denigrating tenor, it was yesterday, for the >first time, that my wife and me got this gut feeling of true tragedy, >of a real *drama* as we heard those empty, but to recover the prior >article for discussion, hollowed and hollowing words coming out of that >mouth. It came upon us that there may be lots of people for whom those >words are not hollowed, but actually encouraging, rich, beautiful. How >can you hear that as beauty? > > >So, I was wondering, and in following up with our 2016 MCA Issue 4 >discussion, whether we could not actually conduct an analysis of the >sort Marc offers in his article of the perezhivanie. Just as Vygotsky >explains how 3 different children experience the situation of an >alcoholic mother differently, could not we perform an analysis ?of that >perezhivanie in which a person experiences yesterday's situation as one >of encouragement, of freedom and hope. Would that not be a way to try >to understand what is going on? This would not be a piece of art, but >could be something we could do to try to understand and change this situation. > >We could then contrast that perezhivanie with the one many of as have, >in which the situation is experience as a real TRAGEDY. I think in the >first case, there is no hope for change, there is contempt; in the >second, hearing those words as hollowed and hollowing require that you >live the situation as a doubled situation in which you experienced it >from a very different developmental stage. One in which the speech >sounds as a case of involution. > >Should we find the transcribed speech and perform such analysis? > > >Going now to support the Woman's march here in Victoria BC. > >Alfredo > > From ablunden@mira.net Sat Jan 21 20:33:37 2017 From: ablunden@mira.net (Andy Blunden) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2017 15:33:37 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: References: <1485031482970.89461@iped.uio.no> <58840b10.4319620a.49c0c.033a@mx.google.com> Message-ID: Well, I'm 71 and I subjected myself again to 17 mins of Trump, in the service of xmca. I am filled again with feelings of anger, disgust and frustration. I see a *conman*, he has appropriated lines from every discourse known to humanity, some progressive, some reactionary and pumped it out, drained of meaning in the hope of hooking a fish with such an obvious bait. Not even a very good conman. He promotes *magical thinking*, all the social problems of American stop "now". Magical thinking. Within hours he is ripping health cover of several million of the poorest Americans and giving corporations the green light to ignore environmental regulations. My feelings of anger and disgust are generated not so much by his wilful assault on people (before Obama these people never had health care anyway), but by the hypocrisy and duplicity with which it is done. As a non-American all the "victim-America" talk is of course also particularly provocative. In a word disgust at what I see as a gesture of utter contempt for his listeners. If I had to perform my reaction on stage, and if I were to take Stanislavskii's advice, I would adopt the feeling of disgust as the meaning which made my perception of the speech into an aesthetic whole. Andy ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making On 22/01/2017 12:55 PM, mike cole wrote: > Hi Larry -- > > You did not pick up on Alfredo's suggestion that xmca-o-philes conduct a > collective investigation of the relationship of people's responses to the > new administration as related to their age. Seemed like an interesting idea > to me. > > mike > > On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 5:29 PM, wrote: > >> Alfredo, >> I will share an impression I had as I listened to a particular group being >> interviewed who were inspired by the Trump speech. >> The group were ?the biker?s for Trump?. I asked what symbolic form they >> were inhabiting or living out? The answer i came up with was the modern >> symbolic of being ?On the Road Again? and distancing from the perceived >> limitations of social con/striction. Then Thelma and Louise came to mind. >> Now how does this modern American cultural imaginary of being on the road >> again inter/sect with Trump?s speech. >> Trump said now there is only the future. No doubling back. The form >> changes, but there is a deeper (layered) imaginary being expressed that is >> shared between the biker?s for Trump and Trump?s speech. This symbolic >> (taking multiple forms) is profoundly anti-historical in rhetoric. It >> creates ?dramatic places? in which people ?fall into? and become animated >> and encouraged and re-enchanted and re-vitalized. There is a re/lease from >> perceived constraints. >> >> Alfredo, My impression watching the inauguration and the motivating >> dramatic place Trump opens for some while sending a shudder down the spine >> for others. The myth of escape from the shackles of history runs deep as a >> symbolic imaginary that takes multiple ?forms? in the American dream. >> >> This is only one quick pass through as an impression. >> >> Sent from my Windows 10 phone >> >> From: Alfredo Jornet Gil >> Sent: January 21, 2017 12:46 PM >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Trump's speech and Perezhivanie >> >> Dear Helena, Andy, all, >> >> >> Unfortunately, I have not been able to find the time to watch the movie >> Fate of a Man, but I have followed the very interesting analyses and >> conversations about it. I am opening this thread as connexions between >> those analyses, perezhivanie, and current tragic social and political >> situation in the US and elsewhere. This also connects with the article that >> Mike shared on the position of the Learning Sciences with regard to this >> situation (how happy I was to see this initiative!). >> >> >> In particular, I wanted to pick up on Helena's very true comment that "the >> US is going to have to produce some works of scholarship or art, or both, >> that attempt to explain what is happening now here in the US -- for >> example, this afternoon, under President Trump." >> >> >> Yesterday, we saw at home Trump's speech. Although we had followed Trump's >> campaign and its denigrating tenor, it was yesterday, for the first time, >> that my wife and me got this gut feeling of true tragedy, of a real *drama* >> as we heard those empty, but to recover the prior article for discussion, >> hollowed and hollowing words coming out of that mouth. It came upon us that >> there may be lots of people for whom those words are not hollowed, but >> actually encouraging, rich, beautiful. How can you hear that as beauty? >> >> >> So, I was wondering, and in following up with our 2016 MCA Issue 4 >> discussion, whether we could not actually conduct an analysis of the sort >> Marc offers in his article of the perezhivanie. Just as Vygotsky explains >> how 3 different children experience the situation of an alcoholic mother >> differently, could not we perform an analysis ?of that perezhivanie in >> which a person experiences yesterday's situation as one of encouragement, >> of freedom and hope. Would that not be a way to try to understand what is >> going on? This would not be a piece of art, but could be something we could >> do to try to understand and change this situation. >> >> We could then contrast that perezhivanie with the one many of as have, in >> which the situation is experience as a real TRAGEDY. I think in the first >> case, there is no hope for change, there is contempt; in the second, >> hearing those words as hollowed and hollowing require that you live the >> situation as a doubled situation in which you experienced it from a very >> different developmental stage. One in which the speech sounds as a case of >> involution. >> >> Should we find the transcribed speech and perform such analysis? >> >> >> Going now to support the Woman's march here in Victoria BC. >> >> Alfredo >> >> >> >> > From helenaworthen@gmail.com Sat Jan 21 20:48:56 2017 From: helenaworthen@gmail.com (Helena Worthen) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2017 20:48:56 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: References: <1485031482970.89461@iped.uio.no> <58840b10.4319620a.49c0c.033a@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <0A8D9897-86CD-4674-A823-FB75571AE830@gmail.com> Hello - I hope we pause and consider Alfredo?s suggestion. Thank you, Alfredo for the phrase ?gut feeling of true tragedy.? Can we work with that? How, given the xmca medium of long-chain texts from voices all over the world, would we carry out such a project? Let me see if I can say Alfredo?s proposal in my own words: to read Trump?s speech at his inauguration and ask, ?Who could find this speech hopeful, inspiring, uplifting, comforting? Who would listen to it and think, ?I am glad I voted for this man and I am glad he is my President.?? But also ask, ?Who could find this speech horrifying and frightening? This man Trump is lying to us all and I am sick to think that he is my President.? The social situation ? like the alcoholic mother in the case with the three children each with a different perezvhanie - is the same for both people who are listening to the speech, but the people (like the children) respond differently. This sounds to me like a project for going out and finding strangers to talk with. Thank you, Greg, for bringing attention to Arlie Hochschild's book, Strangers in their Own Land. I have only read the first chapter of it, but I think this is what she is trying to do: give us insight into the person who might find the inauguration speech something other than a case of a celebrity clown practicing The Big Lie. Joe and I spent today at the Women?s March in Oakland, California. The police estimated 60,000 people there. Although there was supposed to be first a march and then a rally, there were too many people to fit into the streets between the starting point of the march and the destination, so many marchers never got to the end. However, that didn?t seem to be a problem. there were all kinds of small (200 person) gatherings going on all over the place. The mood was cheerful, mainstream, determined, friendly ? tremendous variety of signs including the one that Peg saw in DC about regulating women?s bodies but not corporations. I actually feel better right now than I did yesterday at this time. There sure were a lot of us out there. So my perezvhanie has been expanded by a day on the street. Helena Helena Worthen helenaworthen@gmail.com Berkeley, CA 94707 Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com > On Jan 21, 2017, at 5:47 PM, Greg Thompson wrote: > > Alfredo, > I find this to be a fantastic suggestion. > > One interesting analysis that helps us understand the circumstances/context > in which many people experience Trump's speech as beautiful, even hopeful, > is this book: > http://thenewpress.com/books/strangers-their-own-land > > Democracy Now did a nice interview with her as well: > https://www.democracynow.org/2016/9/28/what_drives_trump_supporters_sociologist_arlie > > In the book (and the interview) Hochschild engages with, among others, the > question of why someone who has had been directly deleteriously affected by > the impact of fracking and oil production would support politicians who are > against government regulation of those industries. She appears to deal with > the situation very thoughtfully and compassionately, helping those of us > who can't understand Trump supporters see how they might have a different > experience of what Trump has to say. > > Hopefully this doesn't take too far off track, but seems relevant to really > consider the circumstances of Trump supporters in order to understand their > experiences. > > Just a thought. > > -greg > > > > On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 6:29 PM, wrote: > >> Alfredo, >> I will share an impression I had as I listened to a particular group being >> interviewed who were inspired by the Trump speech. >> The group were ?the biker?s for Trump?. I asked what symbolic form they >> were inhabiting or living out? The answer i came up with was the modern >> symbolic of being ?On the Road Again? and distancing from the perceived >> limitations of social con/striction. Then Thelma and Louise came to mind. >> Now how does this modern American cultural imaginary of being on the road >> again inter/sect with Trump?s speech. >> Trump said now there is only the future. No doubling back. The form >> changes, but there is a deeper (layered) imaginary being expressed that is >> shared between the biker?s for Trump and Trump?s speech. This symbolic >> (taking multiple forms) is profoundly anti-historical in rhetoric. It >> creates ?dramatic places? in which people ?fall into? and become animated >> and encouraged and re-enchanted and re-vitalized. There is a re/lease from >> perceived constraints. >> >> Alfredo, My impression watching the inauguration and the motivating >> dramatic place Trump opens for some while sending a shudder down the spine >> for others. The myth of escape from the shackles of history runs deep as a >> symbolic imaginary that takes multiple ?forms? in the American dream. >> >> This is only one quick pass through as an impression. >> >> Sent from my Windows 10 phone >> >> From: Alfredo Jornet Gil >> Sent: January 21, 2017 12:46 PM >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Trump's speech and Perezhivanie >> >> Dear Helena, Andy, all, >> >> >> Unfortunately, I have not been able to find the time to watch the movie >> Fate of a Man, but I have followed the very interesting analyses and >> conversations about it. I am opening this thread as connexions between >> those analyses, perezhivanie, and current tragic social and political >> situation in the US and elsewhere. This also connects with the article that >> Mike shared on the position of the Learning Sciences with regard to this >> situation (how happy I was to see this initiative!). >> >> >> In particular, I wanted to pick up on Helena's very true comment that "the >> US is going to have to produce some works of scholarship or art, or both, >> that attempt to explain what is happening now here in the US -- for >> example, this afternoon, under President Trump." >> >> >> Yesterday, we saw at home Trump's speech. Although we had followed Trump's >> campaign and its denigrating tenor, it was yesterday, for the first time, >> that my wife and me got this gut feeling of true tragedy, of a real *drama* >> as we heard those empty, but to recover the prior article for discussion, >> hollowed and hollowing words coming out of that mouth. It came upon us that >> there may be lots of people for whom those words are not hollowed, but >> actually encouraging, rich, beautiful. How can you hear that as beauty? >> >> >> So, I was wondering, and in following up with our 2016 MCA Issue 4 >> discussion, whether we could not actually conduct an analysis of the sort >> Marc offers in his article of the perezhivanie. Just as Vygotsky explains >> how 3 different children experience the situation of an alcoholic mother >> differently, could not we perform an analysis ?of that perezhivanie in >> which a person experiences yesterday's situation as one of encouragement, >> of freedom and hope. Would that not be a way to try to understand what is >> going on? This would not be a piece of art, but could be something we could >> do to try to understand and change this situation. >> >> We could then contrast that perezhivanie with the one many of as have, in >> which the situation is experience as a real TRAGEDY. I think in the first >> case, there is no hope for change, there is contempt; in the second, >> hearing those words as hollowed and hollowing require that you live the >> situation as a doubled situation in which you experienced it from a very >> different developmental stage. One in which the speech sounds as a case of >> involution. >> >> Should we find the transcribed speech and perform such analysis? >> >> >> Going now to support the Woman's march here in Victoria BC. >> >> Alfredo >> >> >> >> > > > -- > Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. > Assistant Professor > Department of Anthropology > 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower > Brigham Young University > Provo, UT 84602 > http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson From ablunden@mira.net Sat Jan 21 21:29:39 2017 From: ablunden@mira.net (Andy Blunden) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2017 16:29:39 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: <0A8D9897-86CD-4674-A823-FB75571AE830@gmail.com> References: <1485031482970.89461@iped.uio.no> <58840b10.4319620a.49c0c.033a@mx.google.com> <0A8D9897-86CD-4674-A823-FB75571AE830@gmail.com> Message-ID: No, Helena, the *environment* is the same, but each are in a different *social situation of development*, thus the different perezhivanie. Andy ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making On 22/01/2017 3:48 PM, Helena Worthen wrote: > ... The social situation ? like the alcoholic mother in the case with the three children each with a different perezvhanie - is the same for both people who are listening to the speech, but the people (like the children) respond differently. > > From helenaworthen@gmail.com Sat Jan 21 21:54:50 2017 From: helenaworthen@gmail.com (Helena Worthen) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2017 21:54:50 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: References: <1485031482970.89461@iped.uio.no> <58840b10.4319620a.49c0c.033a@mx.google.com> <0A8D9897-86CD-4674-A823-FB75571AE830@gmail.com> Message-ID: <6F36B192-D012-4CE8-A68F-9DABFBC15BFA@gmail.com> OK, got it. H Helena Worthen helenaworthen@gmail.com Berkeley, CA 94707 Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com > On Jan 21, 2017, at 9:29 PM, Andy Blunden wrote: > > No, Helena, the *environment* is the same, but each are in a different *social situation of development*, thus the different perezhivanie. > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Andy Blunden > http://home.mira.net/~andy > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > On 22/01/2017 3:48 PM, Helena Worthen wrote: >> ... The social situation ? like the alcoholic mother in the case with the three children each with a different perezvhanie - is the same for both people who are listening to the speech, but the people (like the children) respond differently. >> >> > From greg.a.thompson@gmail.com Sat Jan 21 23:21:50 2017 From: greg.a.thompson@gmail.com (Greg Thompson) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2017 00:21:50 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: <0A8D9897-86CD-4674-A823-FB75571AE830@gmail.com> References: <1485031482970.89461@iped.uio.no> <58840b10.4319620a.49c0c.033a@mx.google.com> <0A8D9897-86CD-4674-A823-FB75571AE830@gmail.com> Message-ID: Loving everything I'm seeing on facebook about the marches today around the country and around the world. Really inspiring stuff, particularly after what happened yesterday. And yes, there is a feeling, a mood here that gives me great hope. (and thanks Peg for the sign slogan, I posted it to my fb page). But back to the nasty business that Alfredo proposed we deal with, here is a description of some of Mr. Trump's words: "Mr. Trump on Friday described the nation as a landscape of ?rusted-out factories scattered like tombstones? and inner cities infested with crime, gangs and drugs." I wonder, for whom might this resonate? Similarly, who would accept the premise of this statement: "The American carnage stops right here and stops right now," I fear that this is striking a nerve with many people's perezhivanie abuilding over the past 10 years or so (I'm still a little unsure of how best to use perezhivanie, help please). Anyway, I'm still wondering about the circumstances and experiences of Trump sympathizers. Some of you out there must have some first-hand contact with such folks. But perhaps this is getting too far afield from CHAT since it seems like it starts to get into an area of communication theory called Media Ecology - the media environments of people in various places (The problem of the (media) environment?). Alfredo, Peg, Helena, Andy, maybe you guys can give us some advice about how to go about treating Trump's speech in a CHAT kind of way? How to proceed with this endeavor? -greg On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 9:48 PM, Helena Worthen wrote: > Hello - > > I hope we pause and consider Alfredo?s suggestion. Thank you, Alfredo for > the phrase ?gut feeling of true tragedy.? Can we work with that? > > How, given the xmca medium of long-chain texts from voices all over the > world, would we carry out such a project? Let me see if I can say Alfredo?s > proposal in my own words: to read Trump?s speech at his inauguration and > ask, ?Who could find this speech hopeful, inspiring, uplifting, comforting? > Who would listen to it and think, ?I am glad I voted for this man and I am > glad he is my President.?? But also ask, ?Who could find this speech > horrifying and frightening? This man Trump is lying to us all and I am sick > to think that he is my President.? The social situation ? like the > alcoholic mother in the case with the three children each with a different > perezvhanie - is the same for both people who are listening to the speech, > but the people (like the children) respond differently. > > This sounds to me like a project for going out and finding strangers to > talk with. Thank you, Greg, for bringing attention to Arlie Hochschild's > book, Strangers in their Own Land. I have only read the first chapter of > it, but I think this is what she is trying to do: give us insight into the > person who might find the inauguration speech something other than a case > of a celebrity clown practicing The Big Lie. > > Joe and I spent today at the Women?s March in Oakland, California. The > police estimated 60,000 people there. Although there was supposed to be > first a march and then a rally, there were too many people to fit into the > streets between the starting point of the march and the destination, so > many marchers never got to the end. However, that didn?t seem to be a > problem. there were all kinds of small (200 person) gatherings going on all > over the place. The mood was cheerful, mainstream, determined, friendly ? > tremendous variety of signs including the one that Peg saw in DC about > regulating women?s bodies but not corporations. I actually feel better > right now than I did yesterday at this time. There sure were a lot of us > out there. So my perezvhanie has been expanded by a day on the street. > > Helena > > > Helena Worthen > helenaworthen@gmail.com > Berkeley, CA 94707 > Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com > > > > > On Jan 21, 2017, at 5:47 PM, Greg Thompson > wrote: > > > > Alfredo, > > I find this to be a fantastic suggestion. > > > > One interesting analysis that helps us understand the > circumstances/context > > in which many people experience Trump's speech as beautiful, even > hopeful, > > is this book: > > http://thenewpress.com/books/strangers-their-own-land > > > > Democracy Now did a nice interview with her as well: > > https://www.democracynow.org/2016/9/28/what_drives_trump_ > supporters_sociologist_arlie > > > > In the book (and the interview) Hochschild engages with, among others, > the > > question of why someone who has had been directly deleteriously affected > by > > the impact of fracking and oil production would support politicians who > are > > against government regulation of those industries. She appears to deal > with > > the situation very thoughtfully and compassionately, helping those of us > > who can't understand Trump supporters see how they might have a different > > experience of what Trump has to say. > > > > Hopefully this doesn't take too far off track, but seems relevant to > really > > consider the circumstances of Trump supporters in order to understand > their > > experiences. > > > > Just a thought. > > > > -greg > > > > > > > > On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 6:29 PM, wrote: > > > >> Alfredo, > >> I will share an impression I had as I listened to a particular group > being > >> interviewed who were inspired by the Trump speech. > >> The group were ?the biker?s for Trump?. I asked what symbolic form they > >> were inhabiting or living out? The answer i came up with was the modern > >> symbolic of being ?On the Road Again? and distancing from the perceived > >> limitations of social con/striction. Then Thelma and Louise came to > mind. > >> Now how does this modern American cultural imaginary of being on the > road > >> again inter/sect with Trump?s speech. > >> Trump said now there is only the future. No doubling back. The form > >> changes, but there is a deeper (layered) imaginary being expressed that > is > >> shared between the biker?s for Trump and Trump?s speech. This symbolic > >> (taking multiple forms) is profoundly anti-historical in rhetoric. It > >> creates ?dramatic places? in which people ?fall into? and become > animated > >> and encouraged and re-enchanted and re-vitalized. There is a re/lease > from > >> perceived constraints. > >> > >> Alfredo, My impression watching the inauguration and the motivating > >> dramatic place Trump opens for some while sending a shudder down the > spine > >> for others. The myth of escape from the shackles of history runs deep > as a > >> symbolic imaginary that takes multiple ?forms? in the American dream. > >> > >> This is only one quick pass through as an impression. > >> > >> Sent from my Windows 10 phone > >> > >> From: Alfredo Jornet Gil > >> Sent: January 21, 2017 12:46 PM > >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Trump's speech and Perezhivanie > >> > >> Dear Helena, Andy, all, > >> > >> > >> Unfortunately, I have not been able to find the time to watch the movie > >> Fate of a Man, but I have followed the very interesting analyses and > >> conversations about it. I am opening this thread as connexions between > >> those analyses, perezhivanie, and current tragic social and political > >> situation in the US and elsewhere. This also connects with the article > that > >> Mike shared on the position of the Learning Sciences with regard to this > >> situation (how happy I was to see this initiative!). > >> > >> > >> In particular, I wanted to pick up on Helena's very true comment that > "the > >> US is going to have to produce some works of scholarship or art, or > both, > >> that attempt to explain what is happening now here in the US -- for > >> example, this afternoon, under President Trump." > >> > >> > >> Yesterday, we saw at home Trump's speech. Although we had followed > Trump's > >> campaign and its denigrating tenor, it was yesterday, for the first > time, > >> that my wife and me got this gut feeling of true tragedy, of a real > *drama* > >> as we heard those empty, but to recover the prior article for > discussion, > >> hollowed and hollowing words coming out of that mouth. It came upon us > that > >> there may be lots of people for whom those words are not hollowed, but > >> actually encouraging, rich, beautiful. How can you hear that as beauty? > >> > >> > >> So, I was wondering, and in following up with our 2016 MCA Issue 4 > >> discussion, whether we could not actually conduct an analysis of the > sort > >> Marc offers in his article of the perezhivanie. Just as Vygotsky > explains > >> how 3 different children experience the situation of an alcoholic mother > >> differently, could not we perform an analysis ?of that perezhivanie in > >> which a person experiences yesterday's situation as one of > encouragement, > >> of freedom and hope. Would that not be a way to try to understand what > is > >> going on? This would not be a piece of art, but could be something we > could > >> do to try to understand and change this situation. > >> > >> We could then contrast that perezhivanie with the one many of as have, > in > >> which the situation is experience as a real TRAGEDY. I think in the > first > >> case, there is no hope for change, there is contempt; in the second, > >> hearing those words as hollowed and hollowing require that you live the > >> situation as a doubled situation in which you experienced it from a very > >> different developmental stage. One in which the speech sounds as a case > of > >> involution. > >> > >> Should we find the transcribed speech and perform such analysis? > >> > >> > >> Going now to support the Woman's march here in Victoria BC. > >> > >> Alfredo > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > -- > > Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. > > Assistant Professor > > Department of Anthropology > > 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower > > Brigham Young University > > Provo, UT 84602 > > http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson > > -- Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Department of Anthropology 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower Brigham Young University Provo, UT 84602 http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Sat Jan 21 23:40:54 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2017 07:40:54 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: <6F36B192-D012-4CE8-A68F-9DABFBC15BFA@gmail.com> References: <1485031482970.89461@iped.uio.no> <58840b10.4319620a.49c0c.033a@mx.google.com> <0A8D9897-86CD-4674-A823-FB75571AE830@gmail.com> , <6F36B192-D012-4CE8-A68F-9DABFBC15BFA@gmail.com> Message-ID: <1485070853888.71427@iped.uio.no> Thank you all for following up on the Trump's speech suggestion. Helena, the way you have re-phrased my proposal is exactly they way I had hoped it to be heard. I think Andy, Helena, Sue, Greg and Larry have offered empirical materials for and analyses of the type we would be producing if we were to follow the proposal. Thanks Greg for the reference, which seems right to the point, and Sue for the glimpse to people's best protest signs (they are good empirical materials for sure). Thanks Andy, too, offering your body and soul to scientific progress and undergoing the inaugural speech again. The way you describe it is very close to how I thought and felt yesterday. My family and friends today joined the march here in Victoria, and, like Helena mentions, we all commented on how well it felt. There was a very cheerful, friendly atmosphere, and lots of affection. I too felt better today. In case we wanted to go forward with this project, I have created a google doc in which I am collecting the resources, empirical cases, and analyses that we have begun producing. I have also added additional links (like one to the "Bikers for Trump" site, and the full transcript of the inaugural speech plus a link from the Washington Post. The document should be accessible to everyone who follow this link: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Nmn77hKa8XhDJ043ZfVuTUtT7NxDAibuzdv0KJDGqCo/edit?usp=sharing I guess the easiest way is that I curate it, populating it with content shared in xmca, but everyone is able and welcome to edit. Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Helena Worthen Sent: 22 January 2017 06:54 To: ablunden@mira.net; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie OK, got it. H Helena Worthen helenaworthen@gmail.com Berkeley, CA 94707 Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com > On Jan 21, 2017, at 9:29 PM, Andy Blunden wrote: > > No, Helena, the *environment* is the same, but each are in a different *social situation of development*, thus the different perezhivanie. > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Andy Blunden > http://home.mira.net/~andy > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > On 22/01/2017 3:48 PM, Helena Worthen wrote: >> ... The social situation ? like the alcoholic mother in the case with the three children each with a different perezvhanie - is the same for both people who are listening to the speech, but the people (like the children) respond differently. >> >> > From ablunden@mira.net Sun Jan 22 00:24:22 2017 From: ablunden@mira.net (Andy Blunden) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2017 19:24:22 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: References: <1485031482970.89461@iped.uio.no> <58840b10.4319620a.49c0c.033a@mx.google.com> <0A8D9897-86CD-4674-A823-FB75571AE830@gmail.com> Message-ID: Greg, As Marc has made clear, we can talk about perezhivanie with reference to Trump's capture of the Presidency at several different levels. I chose to interpret the directions very literally and discussed listening to the Inauguration Speech as an experience, that is, as one of innumerable perezhivaniya in my life through which my view on things has been formed. As Helena points out, listening to this speech would be a different experience for men and women who live with industrial decline, and have been humiliated countless times by professionals like Hillary picking on their way of speaking. But this speech is only one moment in an experience for them which will be decades long. It is doubtful if this Speech will be a very significant moment in the perezhivanie of a Trump voter. The crucial moment will be some incident when suddenly the whole episode takes on a new meaning, perhaps betrayal, perhaps life-changing redemption, who can tell? The perezhivanie of listening to Trump's speech is not going to be a fully developed perezhivanie because if you knew he was a conman what you heard only confirmed that; if you thought he was the saviour of the nation, the Speech confirms that too. It is the experience which does not confirm but overthrows one's view which belong to perezhivanie. Such a moment (e.g. the announcement from the medical professional that you do not have access to the procedure needed to save your life) is not in itself the perezhivanie, which includes the process of digesting this news and re-organising your life accordingly. There is, as Mike referred to, also the issue of a collective perezhivanie, of the entire nation discovering what Trump's election is all about and overcoming it. Give America a decade or so. The Vietnam War is something comparable, I think. Andy ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making On 22/01/2017 6:21 PM, Greg Thompson wrote: > Loving everything I'm seeing on facebook about the marches today around the > country and around the world. Really inspiring stuff, particularly after > what happened yesterday. And yes, there is a feeling, a mood here that > gives me great hope. (and thanks Peg for the sign slogan, I posted it to my > fb page). > > But back to the nasty business that Alfredo proposed we deal with, here is > a description of some of Mr. Trump's words: > "Mr. Trump on Friday described the nation as a landscape of ?rusted-out > factories scattered like tombstones? and inner cities infested with crime, > gangs and drugs." > I wonder, for whom might this resonate? > > Similarly, who would accept the premise of this statement: > "The American carnage stops right here and stops right now," > I fear that this is striking a nerve with many people's perezhivanie > abuilding over the past 10 years or so (I'm still a little unsure of how > best to use perezhivanie, help please). Anyway, I'm still wondering about > the circumstances and experiences of Trump sympathizers. Some of you out > there must have some first-hand contact with such folks. > > But perhaps this is getting too far afield from CHAT since it seems like it > starts to get into an area of communication theory called Media Ecology - > the media environments of people in various places (The problem of the > (media) environment?). > > Alfredo, Peg, Helena, Andy, maybe you guys can give us some advice about > how to go about treating Trump's speech in a CHAT kind of way? How to > proceed with this endeavor? > > -greg > > > > > On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 9:48 PM, Helena Worthen > wrote: > >> Hello - >> >> I hope we pause and consider Alfredo?s suggestion. Thank you, Alfredo for >> the phrase ?gut feeling of true tragedy.? Can we work with that? >> >> How, given the xmca medium of long-chain texts from voices all over the >> world, would we carry out such a project? Let me see if I can say Alfredo?s >> proposal in my own words: to read Trump?s speech at his inauguration and >> ask, ?Who could find this speech hopeful, inspiring, uplifting, comforting? >> Who would listen to it and think, ?I am glad I voted for this man and I am >> glad he is my President.?? But also ask, ?Who could find this speech >> horrifying and frightening? This man Trump is lying to us all and I am sick >> to think that he is my President.? The social situation ? like the >> alcoholic mother in the case with the three children each with a different >> perezvhanie - is the same for both people who are listening to the speech, >> but the people (like the children) respond differently. >> >> This sounds to me like a project for going out and finding strangers to >> talk with. Thank you, Greg, for bringing attention to Arlie Hochschild's >> book, Strangers in their Own Land. I have only read the first chapter of >> it, but I think this is what she is trying to do: give us insight into the >> person who might find the inauguration speech something other than a case >> of a celebrity clown practicing The Big Lie. >> >> Joe and I spent today at the Women?s March in Oakland, California. The >> police estimated 60,000 people there. Although there was supposed to be >> first a march and then a rally, there were too many people to fit into the >> streets between the starting point of the march and the destination, so >> many marchers never got to the end. However, that didn?t seem to be a >> problem. there were all kinds of small (200 person) gatherings going on all >> over the place. The mood was cheerful, mainstream, determined, friendly ? >> tremendous variety of signs including the one that Peg saw in DC about >> regulating women?s bodies but not corporations. I actually feel better >> right now than I did yesterday at this time. There sure were a lot of us >> out there. So my perezvhanie has been expanded by a day on the street. >> >> Helena >> >> >> Helena Worthen >> helenaworthen@gmail.com >> Berkeley, CA 94707 >> Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com >> >> >> >>> On Jan 21, 2017, at 5:47 PM, Greg Thompson >> wrote: >>> Alfredo, >>> I find this to be a fantastic suggestion. >>> >>> One interesting analysis that helps us understand the >> circumstances/context >>> in which many people experience Trump's speech as beautiful, even >> hopeful, >>> is this book: >>> http://thenewpress.com/books/strangers-their-own-land >>> >>> Democracy Now did a nice interview with her as well: >>> https://www.democracynow.org/2016/9/28/what_drives_trump_ >> supporters_sociologist_arlie >>> In the book (and the interview) Hochschild engages with, among others, >> the >>> question of why someone who has had been directly deleteriously affected >> by >>> the impact of fracking and oil production would support politicians who >> are >>> against government regulation of those industries. She appears to deal >> with >>> the situation very thoughtfully and compassionately, helping those of us >>> who can't understand Trump supporters see how they might have a different >>> experience of what Trump has to say. >>> >>> Hopefully this doesn't take too far off track, but seems relevant to >> really >>> consider the circumstances of Trump supporters in order to understand >> their >>> experiences. >>> >>> Just a thought. >>> >>> -greg >>> >>> >>> >>> On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 6:29 PM, wrote: >>> >>>> Alfredo, >>>> I will share an impression I had as I listened to a particular group >> being >>>> interviewed who were inspired by the Trump speech. >>>> The group were ?the biker?s for Trump?. I asked what symbolic form they >>>> were inhabiting or living out? The answer i came up with was the modern >>>> symbolic of being ?On the Road Again? and distancing from the perceived >>>> limitations of social con/striction. Then Thelma and Louise came to >> mind. >>>> Now how does this modern American cultural imaginary of being on the >> road >>>> again inter/sect with Trump?s speech. >>>> Trump said now there is only the future. No doubling back. The form >>>> changes, but there is a deeper (layered) imaginary being expressed that >> is >>>> shared between the biker?s for Trump and Trump?s speech. This symbolic >>>> (taking multiple forms) is profoundly anti-historical in rhetoric. It >>>> creates ?dramatic places? in which people ?fall into? and become >> animated >>>> and encouraged and re-enchanted and re-vitalized. There is a re/lease >> from >>>> perceived constraints. >>>> >>>> Alfredo, My impression watching the inauguration and the motivating >>>> dramatic place Trump opens for some while sending a shudder down the >> spine >>>> for others. The myth of escape from the shackles of history runs deep >> as a >>>> symbolic imaginary that takes multiple ?forms? in the American dream. >>>> >>>> This is only one quick pass through as an impression. >>>> >>>> Sent from my Windows 10 phone >>>> >>>> From: Alfredo Jornet Gil >>>> Sent: January 21, 2017 12:46 PM >>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Trump's speech and Perezhivanie >>>> >>>> Dear Helena, Andy, all, >>>> >>>> >>>> Unfortunately, I have not been able to find the time to watch the movie >>>> Fate of a Man, but I have followed the very interesting analyses and >>>> conversations about it. I am opening this thread as connexions between >>>> those analyses, perezhivanie, and current tragic social and political >>>> situation in the US and elsewhere. This also connects with the article >> that >>>> Mike shared on the position of the Learning Sciences with regard to this >>>> situation (how happy I was to see this initiative!). >>>> >>>> >>>> In particular, I wanted to pick up on Helena's very true comment that >> "the >>>> US is going to have to produce some works of scholarship or art, or >> both, >>>> that attempt to explain what is happening now here in the US -- for >>>> example, this afternoon, under President Trump." >>>> >>>> >>>> Yesterday, we saw at home Trump's speech. Although we had followed >> Trump's >>>> campaign and its denigrating tenor, it was yesterday, for the first >> time, >>>> that my wife and me got this gut feeling of true tragedy, of a real >> *drama* >>>> as we heard those empty, but to recover the prior article for >> discussion, >>>> hollowed and hollowing words coming out of that mouth. It came upon us >> that >>>> there may be lots of people for whom those words are not hollowed, but >>>> actually encouraging, rich, beautiful. How can you hear that as beauty? >>>> >>>> >>>> So, I was wondering, and in following up with our 2016 MCA Issue 4 >>>> discussion, whether we could not actually conduct an analysis of the >> sort >>>> Marc offers in his article of the perezhivanie. Just as Vygotsky >> explains >>>> how 3 different children experience the situation of an alcoholic mother >>>> differently, could not we perform an analysis ?of that perezhivanie in >>>> which a person experiences yesterday's situation as one of >> encouragement, >>>> of freedom and hope. Would that not be a way to try to understand what >> is >>>> going on? This would not be a piece of art, but could be something we >> could >>>> do to try to understand and change this situation. >>>> >>>> We could then contrast that perezhivanie with the one many of as have, >> in >>>> which the situation is experience as a real TRAGEDY. I think in the >> first >>>> case, there is no hope for change, there is contempt; in the second, >>>> hearing those words as hollowed and hollowing require that you live the >>>> situation as a doubled situation in which you experienced it from a very >>>> different developmental stage. One in which the speech sounds as a case >> of >>>> involution. >>>> >>>> Should we find the transcribed speech and perform such analysis? >>>> >>>> >>>> Going now to support the Woman's march here in Victoria BC. >>>> >>>> Alfredo >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. >>> Assistant Professor >>> Department of Anthropology >>> 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower >>> Brigham Young University >>> Provo, UT 84602 >>> http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson >> > From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Sun Jan 22 00:25:28 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2017 08:25:28 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism In-Reply-To: References: <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C71964@CIO-KRC-D1MBX04.osuad.osu.edu>, Message-ID: <1485073527094.7145@iped.uio.no> Mike, thanks a lot for sharing this article. You and Michael, who have and know more history, have spoken in terms of reminiscences. I have lived and know less, and the article feels like fresh air. During my PhD, I begun to increasingly feel that I had to due something to act and respond to the increasing ecological and humanitarian globe crises. But how could I do anything if I had children and a PhD to finalise?? What could I do that would also be doing my job as researcher in a department of education? It was very difficult to find anything, partly because almost every academic quest would focus on learning, but so little on social development. How many scientific articles are dedicated to socio-political questions in the most cited educational journals? I felt very powerless. To be able to address these questions within my expertise, is a challenge partly because contrary to Dewey's hope, educational research has only marginally focused on these questions, and yet they may be exactly the question that matter to education. What are we educating for? Indeed, what is education for? I think we face a serious problem when someone (like myself), being an educational researchers/scholar, still has to scratch her head wondering <> Vygotsky would be shocked! Alfredo From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of mike cole Sent: 19 January 2017 04:51 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism Yes Michael, It feels like the world of the later 1930's about the time I was born as that period came down to me through the prism of a family of "premature anti fascists." For a great re-creation of those times see the highly ambivalent film by Frank Capra, "meet John Doe." It has American big capital interconnected with fascism combined with populist collectivism in a manner that points at the media (as then experienced) as the bad guys in disguise. Happy Ending, Beethoven Ode to Joy and all. It's come round again, nastier this time. Mike On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 6:20 PM Glassman, Michael wrote: > Mike > > > > It was so interesting to read this note after reading the Cognition and > Instruction essay. All the way through it I kept thinking we have been > here before. It reminded me of the scholars, especially those who had > escaped from Germany, trying to make sense of what had happened to their > society during World War II. The foremost in my mind was Lewin. Except I > wonder if he would say the process of transformative action starts not with > emergence of quasi-needs, but our willingness and abilities to step back > from our quasi-needs and the ways that they drive us, often to > dysfunctional behaviors that it ultimately destructive to both our society > and to us as individuals. How hard this is to do, we have to keep going > back again and again. The quasi-needs, tribalism, acceptance, standing are > always there. It is how they shape us that is critical. > > > > Michael > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto: > xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole > > Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 8:31 PM > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism > > > > In following the perezhivanie thread I encountered the note I re-membered. > > And interestingly mis-remembered. A translation into my focus on > mediational means. He places the starting point of the process of > transformative action at the emergence of quasi-needs (from Kurt Lewin). > > That seems correct to me. The new mediational means emerge under > environmental presses. Ever functionalist ego need a goal(!). (The problem > with functionalism) In David's words, > > > > Perhaps the place we should look for "exaptations" that can save both our > personalities and our environment is not in our evolved needs, but in yet > to be designed quasi-needs. Artificial organs, after all, always suggest > new and ever more artificial functions, like chess and language. > > > > This point seems worth keeping in mind as we look at where this group of > critical scholars who work within the Learning Sciences disciplinary > framework would like to lead us. > > > > mike > > > > From ablunden@mira.net Sun Jan 22 01:40:29 2017 From: ablunden@mira.net (Andy Blunden) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2017 20:40:29 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] James Lawson and perezhivanie Message-ID: <628ebbd3-8b51-8e15-47d0-9164e8352c36@mira.net> James Lawson is the Methodist preacher who trained the young members of the SNCC in non-violent action and wrote their constitution. I paste below and attach an excerpt from my book "The Origins of Collective Decision Making" which narrates Lawson's life up until April 1960. Perezhivanie was not the topic under discussion so it is not mentioned in the text, but xmca-ers should be able to see it, an example of perezhivanie: ------------------------------------------------------------ James Lawson was born in 1928, in Uniontown, Pennsylvania. His father, James Snr., was the grandson of an escaped slave, and a Minister for the African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church in New England. Via the Free African Society(FAS) the Methodists had recruited freed slaves in Philadelphiain 1787, but as a result of a racist incident, some left to found the African Methodist Episcopal Church(AMEC). Nonetheless, many African Americans stayed with the United Methodist Church. The AMEC split started in Philadelphia and the AMEC Zion Church was a split that came out of New York. It was to AMEC Zion, James Lawson was born. However, Lawson returned to The United Methodist Church, created by a 1939 merger of several branches of the Methodist Church, which set up five regional ?jurisdictions? of Methodists in the US, organized to maintain regionally identity and a sixth, called the ?Central Jurisdiction? which combined the Black annual conferences, thus building segregation into the constitution of the Church.The Methodists went through a long and painful process, carried out in accordance with the Methodist Code of Discipline, which mandates the principle of Majority, to re-integrate the white and Black, but it was not till after 1964 that Black conferences started to merge into white conferences. At the local level, congregations continued much as before. So it was within the Black section of the segregated United Methodist Church, that James Lawson became a Methodist. James Snr. was a militant preacher; he packed a 38 pistol and set up branches of the NAACP wherever he was assigned to preach. After serving at St. James AMEZ Church in Massillon, Ohio, he transferred to the Lexington Annual Conference of the Central Jurisdiction of the United Methodist Church. James Snr. was no pacifist and according to Lawson he ?refused to take any guff from anyone, particularly on the point of race? and ?insisted that he was going to be treated as a man.? Lawson?s mother, Philane May Cover, on the other hand, was decidedly nonviolent. Lawson?s challenge, which was to form his character, was to reconcile his father?s militancy with his mother?s nonviolence. Lawson grew up in Massillon. One day, at the age of 10, Lawson was asked by his mother to run an errand: A little white child in an automobile yelled ?nigger? out the opened window. I walked over ... and, since I was in a hurry running my mother?s errand, I smacked the child and went on my way. When the Lawson kids got called ?nigger? on the streets or at school, we usually fought. I don?t know where we got that from, except that we figured that it was something to fight over. (Lawson, cited in King, 1999) On the return trip home, aware of possible repercussions, Lawson tried to find the parents of the offending child, to talk to them, but the car was gone. Once home, he told his mother of the incident. Lawson?s mother replied, ?Jimmy, what good did that do?? She talked about who I was, the fact of God?s love, that we were a family of love and that such an incident could not hurt me, because of who I was. I don?t remember anyone else being around, but a stillness took over my being at that moment. It was, as I realized much later on, a mystical experience. In a very real way, my life stood still. I realized in that stillness that I had changed forever. One of the phrases my mother used in her conversation with me was that ?there must be a better way?. I determined, from then on, that I would find the better way. (Lawson, cited in King, 1999, pp. 187-188) He first became acquainted with Gandhi?s experiments in nonviolence as a child, thanks to the African-American press which the family discussed around the dinner table, and had read Gandhi?s autobiography as a teenager. At Baldwin Wallace College, a liberal arts Methodistcollege in Berea, Ohio, he studied Thoreau, Gandhi and Tolstoy, and the pacifist theologians Dietrich Bonhoeffer and Reinhold Niebuhr. At age 19, he became a draft resister, refusing service in the Korean War. Executive director of Fellowship Of Reconciliation (FOR), A. J. Muste,frequently visited to lecture at the College: All of us in history classes were required to hear Muste. I was thrilled. He made me realize that I was not alone in my experimentation, that there was a world movement, and a national movement. ... He acquainted me with the Fellowship Of Reconciliation, which I joined on the spot in 1947. That meant that I got exposed to their book list. After hearing a lecture by A. J. Muste, he joined FOR and CORE. Muste was instrumental thereafter in strengthening Lawson?s nonviolent orientation, directing him towards Gandhi and later facilitating his entry into the sit-in and boycott movement beginning in the South. In the late 1940s and early 1950s Lawson had organized sit-ins and protests directed at establishments that discriminated against blacks in Massillon, long before the Montgomery bus-boycott. He was also active with the National Conference of Methodist Youth. Although a member of a segregated Methodist Church, he found plenty of support for his stands against racial discrimination and war from his white colleagues and church fellows. While he was in prison serving thirteen months of a two and a half year term for draft resistance in 1952, he was re-elected as Vice-President of the NCMY. Wesleyan Methodism was central to Lawson?s outlook. Just as John Wesley had sought to cleanse individuals of iniquity, so could society be purged of the social sins of slavery, segregation, poverty, and war.Generations of African American Methodists from Harriet Tubman (AMEZ) and Henry M. Turner (AME) in the nineteenth century, to Rosa Parks (AME) and James Farmer (MEC), were led to social justice activism by this Methodist heritage. Lawson used his prison time to read and think. Writing from prison in 1952 aged 23 years old and yet to enter the seminary, Lawson said he aspired to emulate ?the life of Jesus, St. Francis, George Fox, Gandhi, Buddha... and other great religious persons.? These figures attached little importance to ?theology but (to their) experience with God.?Further, he noted ?religious failures today are in (the arena of) experience and practice, not theology.? When Lawson entered prison, he was a Christian pacifist.He told Mary King however, that his ?first commitment was to work on race,? and conscientious objection came second.By the time of his release, he had advanced to Gandhian nonviolence. He wondered ?why can?t a mass non-violent revolution be staged throughout the South where the segregation pattern is much like the ?untouchables? of India? Such a movement would have to start with one person who had the Christian vision to make such a revolution a reality in his own life.? Gandhian nonviolence became the synthesizing factor for Lawson?s religious thinking: the militancy of his father?s Methodism and the Christian pacifism that he drew from his mother. Muste arranged for Lawson to visit India after his release from prison with a letter of introduction to activists in the Gandhian movement, and he remained in India from May 1953 to 1956, working at Hislop College in Nagpur, reading Indian literature and working with Gandhi?s movement. Lawson?s practice would remain deeply religious; his nonviolence was saturated with the message of Christian love, and blended with principles synthesized from a broad range of religious and secular sources, both Eastern and Western. His aim was the ?mass education and training of people in the use of nonviolent direct action techniques.? Lawson insisted that ?you are fighting a system, not an individual, not a race, or not the people of another country, but a system.? He continued his study of pacifism and Gandhian nonviolence at Oberlin College, Ohio. While still in India, he had read about Martin Luther King and his successful leadership of the Montgomery bus boycott.King?s lecture at Oberlin on February 6, 1957, fortified his long-held intention to work in the South for transformative social change. After King?s lecture to a packed audience, he and Lawson talked together at dinner.Though Lawson was contemplating study for a Ph.D., King told him ?don?t wait, but come south now!? adding that there was no one else like Lawson.Muste arranged for FOR to hire Lawson as southern field secretary to be stationed at Nashville in January 1958. Upon his arrival, he found that Glenn Smiley, national field director of FOR, had arranged for Lawson to run a full schedule of workshops ? including one to take place early that year at the first annual meeting of the SCLC in Columbia, South Carolina. At the SCLC meeting, King made an exuberant introduction of Lawson as FOR?s new regional representative and discussed the organization?s role in Montgomery, telling delegates to be sure to attend Lawson?s workshop on nonviolence. King took his seat in the first pew, waiting for the three-hour session to start: Martin did that at every SCLC meeting as long as he lived. He would ask me to conduct an afternoon workshop, usually two or three hours, and he would arrange for it to be ?at-large? so that everyone could attend, with nothing else to compete. He put it on the schedule himself. A few minutes early, he would show up and sit alone, as an example, in the front row. Back in Nashville, Lawson continued with Monday evening workshops during the autumn of 1959 in which he trained the students who were to be the core of the Nashville sit-in movement. As a result of his involvement with the sit-ins Lawson was expelled from Vanderbilt, but he enrolled with Boston University to finish his degree in theology,while continuing to work with the students. Several professors in the School of Theology resigned over his expulsion. The techniques that the students deployed were drawn from Lawson?s workshops. In 1958 and 1959, Lawson mobilized all that he knew about Christian pacifism, Gandhian nonviolence, and Methodist social ministry and blended them into an unprecedented curriculum that influenced the civil rights movement in Nashville and beyond. Blending Christianity and interreligious sources, he did not present its philosophy and practice as a secular doctrine, but as the essence of religion itself. Core to nonviolence was mirroring God?s love for humankind and exhibiting it through concrete relationships of human solidarity and community. ?Nonviolence,? Lawson taught, is the aggressive, forgiving, patient, long-suffering Christ-like and Christ-commanded love or good-will for all humankind even in the face of tension, fear, hatred, or demonic evil.? Moreover, ?it is the readiness to absorb suffering with forgiveness and courage rather than to inflict suffering on others.? Lawson divided his instruction into four modules: how nonviolence reacts, training for nonviolence, the virtues of nonviolence, and the methods of nonviolence. Practitioners prepared themselves by jettisoning anger, hostility and fear thus ?minimizing the effect of an attack,? valuing love, courage, fearlessness, and forgiveness, and pursuing redemptive suffering which ?releases unknown elements for good.? Preparation included meditation and prayer, study of the scriptures, practicing nonviolence through challenges to segregation in bus transportation and in other public facilities.The practice steps included fact-finding, negotiation, education of the community, and various methods of nonviolent direct action including sit-ins, boycotts, strikes, and civil disobedience. Lawson provided an extensive bibliography including relevant verses from the Bible, the Bhagavad Gita, and from the Chinese philosopher, Mo Ti and the Hebrew prophet, Isaiah. The Nashville sit-ins and those led by students in other southern cities convinced Ella Baker of the SCLC to call a conference in April, 1960, at Shaw University in Raleigh, North Carolina. Out of this meeting emerged the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee.Lawson delivered an opening keynote address that helped to frame SNCC?s nonviolent trajectory.Later, Lawson summarized discussions and consensus that emerged out of the conference, and his synopsis received the approval of everyone there. Lawson?s overall comments said that ?nonviolence as it grows from Judaic-Christian tradition seeks a social order of justice permeated by love.? It was Lawson who delivered the keynote address and framed SNCC?s nonviolent orientation. The whole group, perhaps 120 participants, all in the room, asked me to draft a statement. Eventually, three different drafts emerged. The Nashville group was cohesive. The extant draft was the third, influenced by the Nashville group, after two earlier conversations. (Interview with King, June 2014) Lawson?s synopsis was approved by the Conference. In a private email message Mary King told me: He [James Lawson] was reading from the FOR booklist from a young age, but I don?t think that he was influenced on notions of Consensus by Quakers, because the connection was too abstract. Let me underscore that he says it was for him Methodist origins. (Private email, 15 April 2014) In his interview with Mary King, Lawson confirmed that the origin of Consensus in SNCC was the Nashville Central Committee, confirming what Mary King had told me in April. As to the roots Consensus in Lawson?s own experience, he emphasized that: It was the Methodist youth and student movements with which I had grown up, and this is how they made decisions. They knew the rules of parliamentary procedures, but they wanted to find a common mind. (Interview with King, June 2014) The Methodist Church to this very day still mandates Majority decisions, but this would never have entailed children voting ? in general youngsters in these organizations were simply told what to do. The Black congregations had operated separately for more than a century, so there was some room for Lawson to develop a consensual model of collaboration in working with young people. It is also possible the Black congregations, like other Black Churches in America, drew on other traditions of decision making. -- ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: James Lawson Biography.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 53117 bytes Desc: not available Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20170122/1418e566/attachment.bin From glassman.13@osu.edu Sun Jan 22 05:41:17 2017 From: glassman.13@osu.edu (Glassman, Michael) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2017 13:41:17 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism In-Reply-To: <1485073527094.7145@iped.uio.no> References: <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C71964@CIO-KRC-D1MBX04.osuad.osu.edu>, <1485073527094.7145@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C71EF9@CIO-KRC-D1MBX04.osuad.osu.edu> Hi Alfredo, Your short post is deeply resonant for me and I find your questions at the end especially poignant. For Dewey and those around him education was supposed to be the backstop against the rise of somebody like Trump. Lately I have been thinking that in some ways we treat Trump as if he had come from some type of other planet to dominate and destroy us - a Twilight Zone episode - To Serve Man with Small Hands Perhaps. But that keeps us from thinking about the causes proximal and distal that have caused this to happen - not only here but around the world. There seems to be limited self-reflection. How much has what we have let the education systems become has played into this - the insane competition, the standardization, the control through ritual. And as education researchers we often say to the larger society, we'll make your children do better, to be more competitive, we'll be number one, or at least number six on PISA - instead of saying we are losing the thread, we are losing too much of what is possible through education. Michael -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Alfredo Jornet Gil Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 3:25 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism Mike, thanks a lot for sharing this article. You and Michael, who have and know more history, have spoken in terms of reminiscences. I have lived and know less, and the article feels like fresh air. During my PhD, I begun to increasingly feel that I had to due something to act and respond to the increasing ecological and humanitarian globe crises. But how could I do anything if I had children and a PhD to finalise?? What could I do that would also be doing my job as researcher in a department of education? It was very difficult to find anything, partly because almost every academic quest would focus on learning, but so little on social development. How many scientific articles are dedicated to socio-political questions in the most cited educational journals? I felt very powerless. To be able to address these questions within my expertise, is a challenge partly because contrary to Dewey's hope, educational research has only marginally focused on these questions, and yet they may be exactly the question that matter to education. What are we educating for? Indeed, what is education for? I think we face a serious problem when someone (like myself), being an educational researchers/scholar, still has to scratch her head wondering <> Vygotsky would be shocked! Alfredo From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of mike cole Sent: 19 January 2017 04:51 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism Yes Michael, It feels like the world of the later 1930's about the time I was born as that period came down to me through the prism of a family of "premature anti fascists." For a great re-creation of those times see the highly ambivalent film by Frank Capra, "meet John Doe." It has American big capital interconnected with fascism combined with populist collectivism in a manner that points at the media (as then experienced) as the bad guys in disguise. Happy Ending, Beethoven Ode to Joy and all. It's come round again, nastier this time. Mike On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 6:20 PM Glassman, Michael wrote: > Mike > > > > It was so interesting to read this note after reading the Cognition > and Instruction essay. All the way through it I kept thinking we have > been here before. It reminded me of the scholars, especially those > who had escaped from Germany, trying to make sense of what had > happened to their society during World War II. The foremost in my > mind was Lewin. Except I wonder if he would say the process of > transformative action starts not with emergence of quasi-needs, but > our willingness and abilities to step back from our quasi-needs and > the ways that they drive us, often to dysfunctional behaviors that it > ultimately destructive to both our society and to us as individuals. > How hard this is to do, we have to keep going back again and again. > The quasi-needs, tribalism, acceptance, standing are always there. It is how they shape us that is critical. > > > > Michael > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto: > xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole > > Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 8:31 PM > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism > > > > In following the perezhivanie thread I encountered the note I re-membered. > > And interestingly mis-remembered. A translation into my focus on > mediational means. He places the starting point of the process of > transformative action at the emergence of quasi-needs (from Kurt Lewin). > > That seems correct to me. The new mediational means emerge under > environmental presses. Ever functionalist ego need a goal(!). (The > problem with functionalism) In David's words, > > > > Perhaps the place we should look for "exaptations" that can save both > our personalities and our environment is not in our evolved needs, but > in yet to be designed quasi-needs. Artificial organs, after all, > always suggest new and ever more artificial functions, like chess and language. > > > > This point seems worth keeping in mind as we look at where this group > of critical scholars who work within the Learning Sciences > disciplinary framework would like to lead us. > > > > mike > > > > From r.j.s.parsons@open.ac.uk Sun Jan 22 06:23:40 2017 From: r.j.s.parsons@open.ac.uk (R.J.S.Parsons) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2017 14:23:40 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism In-Reply-To: <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C71EF9@CIO-KRC-D1MBX04.osuad.osu.edu> References: <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C71964@CIO-KRC-D1MBX04.osuad.osu.edu> <1485073527094.7145@iped.uio.no> <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C71EF9@CIO-KRC-D1MBX04.osuad.osu.edu> Message-ID: <3d46f46b-e05e-c110-db32-0eeb4169a8fe@open.ac.uk> Trump inauguration Twilight Zone: it's been done: http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/news/donald-trump-inauguration-scottish-newspaper-preview-sunday-herald-the-twilight-zone-a7528991.html Rob On 22/01/2017 13:41, Glassman, Michael wrote: > Hi Alfredo, > > Your short post is deeply resonant for me and I find your questions at the end especially poignant. For Dewey and those around him education was supposed to be the backstop against the rise of somebody like Trump. Lately I have been thinking that in some ways we treat Trump as if he had come from some type of other planet to dominate and destroy us - a Twilight Zone episode - To Serve Man with Small Hands Perhaps. But that keeps us from thinking about the causes proximal and distal that have caused this to happen - not only here but around the world. There seems to be limited self-reflection. How much has what we have let the education systems become has played into this - the insane competition, the standardization, the control through ritual. And as education researchers we often say to the larger society, we'll make your children do better, to be more competitive, we'll be number one, or at least number six on PISA - instead of saying we are losing the thread, we are losing too much of what is possible through education. > > Michael > > -----Original Message----- > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Alfredo Jornet Gil > Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 3:25 AM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism > > Mike, > > thanks a lot for sharing this article. You and Michael, who have and know more history, have spoken in terms of reminiscences. I have lived and know less, and the article feels like fresh air. During my PhD, I begun to increasingly feel that I had to due something to act and respond to the increasing ecological and humanitarian globe crises. But how could I do anything if I had children and a PhD to finalise?? What could I do that would also be doing my job as researcher in a department of education? It was very difficult to find anything, partly because almost every academic quest would focus on learning, but so little on social development. How many scientific articles are dedicated to socio-political questions in the most cited educational journals? I felt very powerless. > > To be able to address these questions within my expertise, is a challenge partly because contrary to Dewey's hope, educational research has only marginally focused on these questions, and yet they may be exactly the question that matter to education. What are we educating for? Indeed, what is education for? I think we face a serious problem when someone (like myself), being an educational researchers/scholar, still has to scratch her head wondering <> Vygotsky would be shocked! > > Alfredo > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of mike cole > Sent: 19 January 2017 04:51 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism > > Yes Michael, > > It feels like the world of the later 1930's about the time I was born as that period came down to me through the prism of a family of "premature anti fascists." > > For a great re-creation of those times see the highly ambivalent film by Frank Capra, "meet John Doe." It has American big capital interconnected with fascism combined with populist collectivism in a manner that points at the media (as then experienced) as the bad guys in disguise. Happy Ending, Beethoven Ode to Joy and all. > > It's come round again, nastier this time. > > Mike > On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 6:20 PM Glassman, Michael > wrote: > >> Mike >> >> >> >> It was so interesting to read this note after reading the Cognition >> and Instruction essay. All the way through it I kept thinking we have >> been here before. It reminded me of the scholars, especially those >> who had escaped from Germany, trying to make sense of what had >> happened to their society during World War II. The foremost in my >> mind was Lewin. Except I wonder if he would say the process of >> transformative action starts not with emergence of quasi-needs, but >> our willingness and abilities to step back from our quasi-needs and >> the ways that they drive us, often to dysfunctional behaviors that it >> ultimately destructive to both our society and to us as individuals. >> How hard this is to do, we have to keep going back again and again. >> The quasi-needs, tribalism, acceptance, standing are always there. It is how they shape us that is critical. >> >> >> >> Michael >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto: >> xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole >> >> Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 8:31 PM >> >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> >> Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism >> >> >> >> In following the perezhivanie thread I encountered the note I re-membered. >> >> And interestingly mis-remembered. A translation into my focus on >> mediational means. He places the starting point of the process of >> transformative action at the emergence of quasi-needs (from Kurt Lewin). >> >> That seems correct to me. The new mediational means emerge under >> environmental presses. Ever functionalist ego need a goal(!). (The >> problem with functionalism) In David's words, >> >> >> >> Perhaps the place we should look for "exaptations" that can save both >> our personalities and our environment is not in our evolved needs, but >> in yet to be designed quasi-needs. Artificial organs, after all, >> always suggest new and ever more artificial functions, like chess and language. >> >> >> >> This point seems worth keeping in mind as we look at where this group >> of critical scholars who work within the Learning Sciences >> disciplinary framework would like to lead us. >> >> >> >> mike >> >> >> >> From boblake@georgiasouthern.edu Sun Jan 22 06:23:54 2017 From: boblake@georgiasouthern.edu (Robert Lake) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2017 09:23:54 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism In-Reply-To: <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C71EF9@CIO-KRC-D1MBX04.osuad.osu.edu> References: <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C71964@CIO-KRC-D1MBX04.osuad.osu.edu> <1485073527094.7145@iped.uio.no> <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C71EF9@CIO-KRC-D1MBX04.osuad.osu.edu> Message-ID: Thank you for this posting Michael. I've been thinking for the last few days about how the Internet, social media, 24-hour news, and now electronic versions of the major newspapers in the world, leave very little time for self reflection. This was a large part of Dewey's thinking and and Freire's notion of conscientiza??o ( translated critical consciousness, but like many words that LSV used, there is something lost in translation). The notion of Praxis as Freire used it (reflection and action) also gets at the heart of this immense missing piece in the formation of 21st century "mind" as we witness it jumping to see and hear something "new". Can there be real "progress" without transformative change of thought and action? *Robert Lake* On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 8:41 AM, Glassman, Michael wrote: > Hi Alfredo, > > Your short post is deeply resonant for me and I find your questions at the > end especially poignant. For Dewey and those around him education was > supposed to be the backstop against the rise of somebody like Trump. > Lately I have been thinking that in some ways we treat Trump as if he had > come from some type of other planet to dominate and destroy us - a Twilight > Zone episode - To Serve Man with Small Hands Perhaps. But that keeps us > from thinking about the causes proximal and distal that have caused this to > happen - not only here but around the world. There seems to be limited > self-reflection. How much has what we have let the education systems > become has played into this - the insane competition, the standardization, > the control through ritual. And as education researchers we often say to > the larger society, we'll make your children do better, to be more > competitive, we'll be number one, or at least number six on PISA - instead > of saying we are losing the thread, we are losing too much of what is > possible through education. > > Michael > > -----Original Message----- > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ > mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Alfredo Jornet Gil > Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 3:25 AM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism > > Mike, > > thanks a lot for sharing this article. You and Michael, who have and know > more history, have spoken in terms of reminiscences. I have lived and know > less, and the article feels like fresh air. During my PhD, I begun to > increasingly feel that I had to due something to act and respond to the > increasing ecological and humanitarian globe crises. But how could I do > anything if I had children and a PhD to finalise?? What could I do that > would also be doing my job as researcher in a department of education? It > was very difficult to find anything, partly because almost every academic > quest would focus on learning, but so little on social development. How > many scientific articles are dedicated to socio-political questions in the > most cited educational journals? I felt very powerless. > > To be able to address these questions within my expertise, is a challenge > partly because contrary to Dewey's hope, educational research has only > marginally focused on these questions, and yet they may be exactly the > question that matter to education. What are we educating for? Indeed, what > is education for? I think we face a serious problem when someone (like > myself), being an educational researchers/scholar, still has to scratch her > head wondering < development?>> Vygotsky would be shocked! > > Alfredo > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of mike cole > Sent: 19 January 2017 04:51 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism > > Yes Michael, > > It feels like the world of the later 1930's about the time I was born as > that period came down to me through the prism of a family of "premature > anti fascists." > > For a great re-creation of those times see the highly ambivalent film by > Frank Capra, "meet John Doe." It has American big capital interconnected > with fascism combined with populist collectivism in a manner that points at > the media (as then experienced) as the bad guys in disguise. Happy Ending, > Beethoven Ode to Joy and all. > > It's come round again, nastier this time. > > Mike > On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 6:20 PM Glassman, Michael > wrote: > > > Mike > > > > > > > > It was so interesting to read this note after reading the Cognition > > and Instruction essay. All the way through it I kept thinking we have > > been here before. It reminded me of the scholars, especially those > > who had escaped from Germany, trying to make sense of what had > > happened to their society during World War II. The foremost in my > > mind was Lewin. Except I wonder if he would say the process of > > transformative action starts not with emergence of quasi-needs, but > > our willingness and abilities to step back from our quasi-needs and > > the ways that they drive us, often to dysfunctional behaviors that it > > ultimately destructive to both our society and to us as individuals. > > How hard this is to do, we have to keep going back again and again. > > The quasi-needs, tribalism, acceptance, standing are always there. It > is how they shape us that is critical. > > > > > > > > Michael > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto: > > xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole > > > > Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 8:31 PM > > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism > > > > > > > > In following the perezhivanie thread I encountered the note I > re-membered. > > > > And interestingly mis-remembered. A translation into my focus on > > mediational means. He places the starting point of the process of > > transformative action at the emergence of quasi-needs (from Kurt Lewin). > > > > That seems correct to me. The new mediational means emerge under > > environmental presses. Ever functionalist ego need a goal(!). (The > > problem with functionalism) In David's words, > > > > > > > > Perhaps the place we should look for "exaptations" that can save both > > our personalities and our environment is not in our evolved needs, but > > in yet to be designed quasi-needs. Artificial organs, after all, > > always suggest new and ever more artificial functions, like chess and > language. > > > > > > > > This point seems worth keeping in mind as we look at where this group > > of critical scholars who work within the Learning Sciences > > disciplinary framework would like to lead us. > > > > > > > > mike > > > > > > > > > > -- Robert Lake Ed.D. Associate Professor Social Foundations of Education Dept. of Curriculum, Foundations, and Reading Georgia Southern University P. O. Box 8144, Statesboro, GA 30460 Secretary/Treasurer-AERA- Paulo Freire Special Interest Group Webpage: https://georgiasouthern.academia.edu/RobertLake*Democracy must be born anew in every generation, and education is its midwife.* John Dewey-*Democracy and Education*,1916, p. 139 From lpscholar2@gmail.com Sun Jan 22 06:47:02 2017 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2017 06:47:02 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism In-Reply-To: References: <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C71964@CIO-KRC-D1MBX04.osuad.osu.edu> <1485073527094.7145@iped.uio.no> <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C71EF9@CIO-KRC-D1MBX04.osuad.osu.edu> Message-ID: <5884c611.c74b620a.26b89.bf54@mx.google.com> Robert, Michael, Alfredo, Andy, and James Lawson (channeled through Andy) So ... As Robert says the 21st century ?mind? constantly in flight searching for something ?new?. In contrast to perezhivanie as a doubling back?: (living-through AND THEN working-through) experience which each of you exemplify through your ex/pression in the world. A consistent reply to the era of US nationalism embodied in who each of you are. Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Robert Lake Sent: January 22, 2017 6:27 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism Thank you for this posting Michael. I've been thinking for the last few days about how the Internet, social media, 24-hour news, and now electronic versions of the major newspapers in the world, leave very little time for self reflection. This was a large part of Dewey's thinking and and Freire's notion of conscientiza??o ( translated critical consciousness, but like many words that LSV used, there is something lost in translation). The notion of Praxis as Freire used it (reflection and action) also gets at the heart of this immense missing piece in the formation of 21st century "mind" as we witness it jumping to see and hear something "new". Can there be real "progress" without transformative change of thought and action? *Robert Lake* On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 8:41 AM, Glassman, Michael wrote: > Hi Alfredo, > > Your short post is deeply resonant for me and I find your questions at the > end especially poignant. For Dewey and those around him education was > supposed to be the backstop against the rise of somebody like Trump. > Lately I have been thinking that in some ways we treat Trump as if he had > come from some type of other planet to dominate and destroy us - a Twilight > Zone episode - To Serve Man with Small Hands Perhaps. But that keeps us > from thinking about the causes proximal and distal that have caused this to > happen - not only here but around the world. There seems to be limited > self-reflection. How much has what we have let the education systems > become has played into this - the insane competition, the standardization, > the control through ritual. And as education researchers we often say to > the larger society, we'll make your children do better, to be more > competitive, we'll be number one, or at least number six on PISA - instead > of saying we are losing the thread, we are losing too much of what is > possible through education. > > Michael > > -----Original Message----- > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ > mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Alfredo Jornet Gil > Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 3:25 AM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism > > Mike, > > thanks a lot for sharing this article. You and Michael, who have and know > more history, have spoken in terms of reminiscences. I have lived and know > less, and the article feels like fresh air. During my PhD, I begun to > increasingly feel that I had to due something to act and respond to the > increasing ecological and humanitarian globe crises. But how could I do > anything if I had children and a PhD to finalise?? What could I do that > would also be doing my job as researcher in a department of education? It > was very difficult to find anything, partly because almost every academic > quest would focus on learning, but so little on social development. How > many scientific articles are dedicated to socio-political questions in the > most cited educational journals? I felt very powerless. > > To be able to address these questions within my expertise, is a challenge > partly because contrary to Dewey's hope, educational research has only > marginally focused on these questions, and yet they may be exactly the > question that matter to education. What are we educating for? Indeed, what > is education for? I think we face a serious problem when someone (like > myself), being an educational researchers/scholar, still has to scratch her > head wondering < development?>> Vygotsky would be shocked! > > Alfredo > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of mike cole > Sent: 19 January 2017 04:51 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism > > Yes Michael, > > It feels like the world of the later 1930's about the time I was born as > that period came down to me through the prism of a family of "premature > anti fascists." > > For a great re-creation of those times see the highly ambivalent film by > Frank Capra, "meet John Doe." It has American big capital interconnected > with fascism combined with populist collectivism in a manner that points at > the media (as then experienced) as the bad guys in disguise. Happy Ending, > Beethoven Ode to Joy and all. > > It's come round again, nastier this time. > > Mike > On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 6:20 PM Glassman, Michael > wrote: > > > Mike > > > > > > > > It was so interesting to read this note after reading the Cognition > > and Instruction essay. All the way through it I kept thinking we have > > been here before. It reminded me of the scholars, especially those > > who had escaped from Germany, trying to make sense of what had > > happened to their society during World War II. The foremost in my > > mind was Lewin. Except I wonder if he would say the process of > > transformative action starts not with emergence of quasi-needs, but > > our willingness and abilities to step back from our quasi-needs and > > the ways that they drive us, often to dysfunctional behaviors that it > > ultimately destructive to both our society and to us as individuals. > > How hard this is to do, we have to keep going back again and again. > > The quasi-needs, tribalism, acceptance, standing are always there. It > is how they shape us that is critical. > > > > > > > > Michael > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto: > > xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole > > > > Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 8:31 PM > > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism > > > > > > > > In following the perezhivanie thread I encountered the note I > re-membered. > > > > And interestingly mis-remembered. A translation into my focus on > > mediational means. He places the starting point of the process of > > transformative action at the emergence of quasi-needs (from Kurt Lewin). > > > > That seems correct to me. The new mediational means emerge under > > environmental presses. Ever functionalist ego need a goal(!). (The > > problem with functionalism) In David's words, > > > > > > > > Perhaps the place we should look for "exaptations" that can save both > > our personalities and our environment is not in our evolved needs, but > > in yet to be designed quasi-needs. Artificial organs, after all, > > always suggest new and ever more artificial functions, like chess and > language. > > > > > > > > This point seems worth keeping in mind as we look at where this group > > of critical scholars who work within the Learning Sciences > > disciplinary framework would like to lead us. > > > > > > > > mike > > > > > > > > > > -- Robert Lake Ed.D. Associate Professor Social Foundations of Education Dept. of Curriculum, Foundations, and Reading Georgia Southern University P. O. Box 8144, Statesboro, GA 30460 Secretary/Treasurer-AERA- Paulo Freire Special Interest Group Webpage: https://georgiasouthern.academia.edu/RobertLake*Democracy must be born anew in every generation, and education is its midwife.* John Dewey-*Democracy and Education*,1916, p. 139 From mpacker@uniandes.edu.co Sun Jan 22 07:08:55 2017 From: mpacker@uniandes.edu.co (Martin John Packer) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2017 15:08:55 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: <1485031482970.89461@iped.uio.no> References: <1485031482970.89461@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: Hi Alfredo. I think your proposal is very interesting; that we could explore two different ways of hearing and understanding Trump?s words. But if I understand you correctly, I don?t agree that ?in the first case, there is no hope for change, there is contempt.? I have lived in Michigan and Pennsylvania, and in both states industries that were central to the economic rise of the working class, auto manufacturing and steel foundries, collapsed as a result of globalization. I have seen first hand some of the communities that were almost completely destroyed. I believe that people who experienced these changes do hear Trump?s words with hope for change, and if they have contempt it is for professional politicians who they feel speak but do not act. But perhaps you mean it was a lack of hope that *led* people to Trump: The New Yorker has published several articles by George Packer (no relation) on the appeal that Trump has to the white working class. For example: Martin On Jan 21, 2017, at 3:44 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > wrote: Dear Helena, Andy, all, Unfortunately, I have not been able to find the time to watch the movie Fate of a Man, but I have followed the very interesting analyses and conversations about it. I am opening this thread as connexions between those analyses, perezhivanie, and current tragic social and political situation in the US and elsewhere. This also connects with the article that Mike shared on the position of the Learning Sciences with regard to this situation (how happy I was to see this initiative!). In particular, I wanted to pick up on Helena's very true comment that "the US is going to have to produce some works of scholarship or art, or both, that attempt to explain what is happening now here in the US -- for example, this afternoon, under President Trump." Yesterday, we saw at home Trump's speech. Although we had followed Trump's campaign and its denigrating tenor, it was yesterday, for the first time, that my wife and me got this gut feeling of true tragedy, of a real *drama* as we heard those empty, but to recover the prior article for discussion, hollowed and hollowing words coming out of that mouth. It came upon us that there may be lots of people for whom those words are not hollowed, but actually encouraging, rich, beautiful. How can you hear that as beauty? So, I was wondering, and in following up with our 2016 MCA Issue 4 discussion, whether we could not actually conduct an analysis of the sort Marc offers in his article of the perezhivanie. Just as Vygotsky explains how 3 different children experience the situation of an alcoholic mother differently, could not we perform an analysis ?of that perezhivanie in which a person experiences yesterday's situation as one of encouragement, of freedom and hope. Would that not be a way to try to understand what is going on? This would not be a piece of art, but could be something we could do to try to understand and change this situation. We could then contrast that perezhivanie with the one many of as have, in which the situation is experience as a real TRAGEDY. I think in the first case, there is no hope for change, there is contempt; in the second, hearing those words as hollowed and hollowing require that you live the situation as a doubled situation in which you experienced it from a very different developmental stage. One in which the speech sounds as a case of involution. Should we find the transcribed speech and perform such analysis? Going now to support the Woman's march here in Victoria BC. Alfredo From greg.a.thompson@gmail.com Sun Jan 22 07:37:53 2017 From: greg.a.thompson@gmail.com (Greg Thompson) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2017 08:37:53 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: <1485070853888.71427@iped.uio.no> References: <1485031482970.89461@iped.uio.no> <58840b10.4319620a.49c0c.033a@mx.google.com> <0A8D9897-86CD-4674-A823-FB75571AE830@gmail.com> <6F36B192-D012-4CE8-A68F-9DABFBC15BFA@gmail.com> <1485070853888.71427@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: Alfredo, Here is a piece that has already started to do some of the basic work of comparing Trump's speech to other presidents' speeches and also has some breakdown of the language. http://www.wsj.com/articles/donald-trump-strikes-nationalistic-tone-in-inaugural-speech-1484957527?tesla=y&mod=e2tw Seems like a useful resource and a beginning. (I share it with all here b.c. it also seems like a nice article and helps identify the message). -greg On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 12:40 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > Thank you all for following up on the Trump's speech suggestion. > Helena, the way you have re-phrased my proposal is exactly they way I had > hoped it to be heard. I think Andy, Helena, Sue, Greg and Larry have > offered empirical materials for and analyses of the type we would be > producing if we were to follow the proposal. Thanks Greg for the reference, > which seems right to the point, and Sue for the glimpse to people's best > protest signs (they are good empirical materials for sure). Thanks Andy, > too, offering your body and soul to scientific progress and undergoing the > inaugural speech again. The way you describe it is very close to how I > thought and felt yesterday. > My family and friends today joined the march here in Victoria, and, like > Helena mentions, we all commented on how well it felt. There was a very > cheerful, friendly atmosphere, and lots of affection. I too felt better > today. > > In case we wanted to go forward with this project, I have created a google > doc in which I am collecting the resources, empirical cases, and analyses > that we have begun producing. I have also added additional links (like one > to the "Bikers for Trump" site, and the full transcript of the inaugural > speech plus a link from the Washington Post. > > The document should be accessible to everyone who follow this link: > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Nmn77hKa8XhDJ043ZfVuTUtT7NxDA > ibuzdv0KJDGqCo/edit?usp=sharing > I guess the easiest way is that I curate it, populating it with content > shared in xmca, but everyone is able and welcome to edit. > Alfredo > > > > > > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of Helena Worthen > Sent: 22 January 2017 06:54 > To: ablunden@mira.net; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie > > OK, got it. > > H > > Helena Worthen > helenaworthen@gmail.com > Berkeley, CA 94707 > Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com > > > > > On Jan 21, 2017, at 9:29 PM, Andy Blunden wrote: > > > > No, Helena, the *environment* is the same, but each are in a different > *social situation of development*, thus the different perezhivanie. > > > > Andy > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > Andy Blunden > > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > On 22/01/2017 3:48 PM, Helena Worthen wrote: > >> ... The social situation ? like the alcoholic mother in the case with > the three children each with a different perezvhanie - is the same for both > people who are listening to the speech, but the people (like the children) > respond differently. > >> > >> > > > > -- Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Department of Anthropology 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower Brigham Young University Provo, UT 84602 http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson From greg.a.thompson@gmail.com Sun Jan 22 07:49:57 2017 From: greg.a.thompson@gmail.com (Greg Thompson) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2017 08:49:57 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: References: <1485031482970.89461@iped.uio.no> <58840b10.4319620a.49c0c.033a@mx.google.com> <0A8D9897-86CD-4674-A823-FB75571AE830@gmail.com> Message-ID: Andy, A decade or so? not very optimistic (but perhaps accurate). A few thoughts: 1. Hillary wasn't just talking about the way people speak, she referred to them (as they understood it) as a "basket of deplorables" (and previously Obama had that comment about these people "clinging to their guns and religion" - that pissed a lot of these people off too). Here is a collection of t-shirts supporting Trump that make reference to Clinton's quote about deplorables: https://www.spreadshirt.com/adorable+deplorable+t-shirts Hard to know exactly what these mean to someone wearing them, or how they feel about it, but I bet that they wouldn't think that it was saying "I'm a racist" (although other people might think this). 2. I'm still a perezhivanie neophyte and am wondering how perezhivanie might be linked to something beyond the individual (as we saw yesterday in the marches, and, yes, the day before in those in solidarity and support for Trump). What of something like "the mood of the country" or at least of a group? How does perezhivanie speak to that? Is this simply a "collection" of individual perezhivanie? Or is the whole greater than the sum of the parts? Just some initial thoughts/questions. -greg On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 1:24 AM, Andy Blunden wrote: > Greg, > > As Marc has made clear, we can talk about perezhivanie with reference to > Trump's capture of the Presidency at several different levels. > > I chose to interpret the directions very literally and discussed listening > to the Inauguration Speech as an experience, that is, as one of innumerable > perezhivaniya in my life through which my view on things has been formed. > As Helena points out, listening to this speech would be a different > experience for men and women who live with industrial decline, and have > been humiliated countless times by professionals like Hillary picking on > their way of speaking. But this speech is only one moment in an experience > for them which will be decades long. It is doubtful if this Speech will be > a very significant moment in the perezhivanie of a Trump voter. The crucial > moment will be some incident when suddenly the whole episode takes on a new > meaning, perhaps betrayal, perhaps life-changing redemption, who can tell? > > The perezhivanie of listening to Trump's speech is not going to be a fully > developed perezhivanie because if you knew he was a conman what you heard > only confirmed that; if you thought he was the saviour of the nation, the > Speech confirms that too. It is the experience which does not confirm but > overthrows one's view which belong to perezhivanie. Such a moment (e.g. the > announcement from the medical professional that you do not have access to > the procedure needed to save your life) is not in itself the perezhivanie, > which includes the process of digesting this news and re-organising your > life accordingly. > > There is, as Mike referred to, also the issue of a collective > perezhivanie, of the entire nation discovering what Trump's election is all > about and overcoming it. Give America a decade or so. The Vietnam War is > something comparable, I think. > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Andy Blunden > http://home.mira.net/~andy > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > On 22/01/2017 6:21 PM, Greg Thompson wrote: > >> Loving everything I'm seeing on facebook about the marches today around >> the >> country and around the world. Really inspiring stuff, particularly after >> what happened yesterday. And yes, there is a feeling, a mood here that >> gives me great hope. (and thanks Peg for the sign slogan, I posted it to >> my >> fb page). >> >> But back to the nasty business that Alfredo proposed we deal with, here is >> a description of some of Mr. Trump's words: >> "Mr. Trump on Friday described the nation as a landscape of ?rusted-out >> factories scattered like tombstones? and inner cities infested with crime, >> gangs and drugs." >> I wonder, for whom might this resonate? >> >> Similarly, who would accept the premise of this statement: >> "The American carnage stops right here and stops right now," >> I fear that this is striking a nerve with many people's perezhivanie >> abuilding over the past 10 years or so (I'm still a little unsure of how >> best to use perezhivanie, help please). Anyway, I'm still wondering about >> the circumstances and experiences of Trump sympathizers. Some of you out >> there must have some first-hand contact with such folks. >> >> But perhaps this is getting too far afield from CHAT since it seems like >> it >> starts to get into an area of communication theory called Media Ecology - >> the media environments of people in various places (The problem of the >> (media) environment?). >> >> Alfredo, Peg, Helena, Andy, maybe you guys can give us some advice about >> how to go about treating Trump's speech in a CHAT kind of way? How to >> proceed with this endeavor? >> >> -greg >> >> >> >> >> On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 9:48 PM, Helena Worthen >> wrote: >> >> Hello - >>> >>> I hope we pause and consider Alfredo?s suggestion. Thank you, Alfredo >>> for >>> the phrase ?gut feeling of true tragedy.? Can we work with that? >>> >>> How, given the xmca medium of long-chain texts from voices all over the >>> world, would we carry out such a project? Let me see if I can say >>> Alfredo?s >>> proposal in my own words: to read Trump?s speech at his inauguration and >>> ask, ?Who could find this speech hopeful, inspiring, uplifting, >>> comforting? >>> Who would listen to it and think, ?I am glad I voted for this man and I >>> am >>> glad he is my President.?? But also ask, ?Who could find this speech >>> horrifying and frightening? This man Trump is lying to us all and I am >>> sick >>> to think that he is my President.? The social situation ? like the >>> alcoholic mother in the case with the three children each with a >>> different >>> perezvhanie - is the same for both people who are listening to the >>> speech, >>> but the people (like the children) respond differently. >>> >>> This sounds to me like a project for going out and finding strangers to >>> talk with. Thank you, Greg, for bringing attention to Arlie Hochschild's >>> book, Strangers in their Own Land. I have only read the first chapter of >>> it, but I think this is what she is trying to do: give us insight into >>> the >>> person who might find the inauguration speech something other than a case >>> of a celebrity clown practicing The Big Lie. >>> >>> Joe and I spent today at the Women?s March in Oakland, California. The >>> police estimated 60,000 people there. Although there was supposed to be >>> first a march and then a rally, there were too many people to fit into >>> the >>> streets between the starting point of the march and the destination, so >>> many marchers never got to the end. However, that didn?t seem to be a >>> problem. there were all kinds of small (200 person) gatherings going on >>> all >>> over the place. The mood was cheerful, mainstream, determined, friendly ? >>> tremendous variety of signs including the one that Peg saw in DC about >>> regulating women?s bodies but not corporations. I actually feel better >>> right now than I did yesterday at this time. There sure were a lot of us >>> out there. So my perezvhanie has been expanded by a day on the street. >>> >>> Helena >>> >>> >>> Helena Worthen >>> helenaworthen@gmail.com >>> Berkeley, CA 94707 >>> Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com >>> >>> >>> >>> On Jan 21, 2017, at 5:47 PM, Greg Thompson >>>> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Alfredo, >>>> I find this to be a fantastic suggestion. >>>> >>>> One interesting analysis that helps us understand the >>>> >>> circumstances/context >>> >>>> in which many people experience Trump's speech as beautiful, even >>>> >>> hopeful, >>> >>>> is this book: >>>> http://thenewpress.com/books/strangers-their-own-land >>>> >>>> Democracy Now did a nice interview with her as well: >>>> https://www.democracynow.org/2016/9/28/what_drives_trump_ >>>> >>> supporters_sociologist_arlie >>> >>>> In the book (and the interview) Hochschild engages with, among others, >>>> >>> the >>> >>>> question of why someone who has had been directly deleteriously affected >>>> >>> by >>> >>>> the impact of fracking and oil production would support politicians who >>>> >>> are >>> >>>> against government regulation of those industries. She appears to deal >>>> >>> with >>> >>>> the situation very thoughtfully and compassionately, helping those of us >>>> who can't understand Trump supporters see how they might have a >>>> different >>>> experience of what Trump has to say. >>>> >>>> Hopefully this doesn't take too far off track, but seems relevant to >>>> >>> really >>> >>>> consider the circumstances of Trump supporters in order to understand >>>> >>> their >>> >>>> experiences. >>>> >>>> Just a thought. >>>> >>>> -greg >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 6:29 PM, wrote: >>>> >>>> Alfredo, >>>>> I will share an impression I had as I listened to a particular group >>>>> >>>> being >>> >>>> interviewed who were inspired by the Trump speech. >>>>> The group were ?the biker?s for Trump?. I asked what symbolic form they >>>>> were inhabiting or living out? The answer i came up with was the modern >>>>> symbolic of being ?On the Road Again? and distancing from the perceived >>>>> limitations of social con/striction. Then Thelma and Louise came to >>>>> >>>> mind. >>> >>>> Now how does this modern American cultural imaginary of being on the >>>>> >>>> road >>> >>>> again inter/sect with Trump?s speech. >>>>> Trump said now there is only the future. No doubling back. The form >>>>> changes, but there is a deeper (layered) imaginary being expressed that >>>>> >>>> is >>> >>>> shared between the biker?s for Trump and Trump?s speech. This symbolic >>>>> (taking multiple forms) is profoundly anti-historical in rhetoric. It >>>>> creates ?dramatic places? in which people ?fall into? and become >>>>> >>>> animated >>> >>>> and encouraged and re-enchanted and re-vitalized. There is a re/lease >>>>> >>>> from >>> >>>> perceived constraints. >>>>> >>>>> Alfredo, My impression watching the inauguration and the motivating >>>>> dramatic place Trump opens for some while sending a shudder down the >>>>> >>>> spine >>> >>>> for others. The myth of escape from the shackles of history runs deep >>>>> >>>> as a >>> >>>> symbolic imaginary that takes multiple ?forms? in the American dream. >>>>> >>>>> This is only one quick pass through as an impression. >>>>> >>>>> Sent from my Windows 10 phone >>>>> >>>>> From: Alfredo Jornet Gil >>>>> Sent: January 21, 2017 12:46 PM >>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Trump's speech and Perezhivanie >>>>> >>>>> Dear Helena, Andy, all, >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Unfortunately, I have not been able to find the time to watch the movie >>>>> Fate of a Man, but I have followed the very interesting analyses and >>>>> conversations about it. I am opening this thread as connexions between >>>>> those analyses, perezhivanie, and current tragic social and political >>>>> situation in the US and elsewhere. This also connects with the article >>>>> >>>> that >>> >>>> Mike shared on the position of the Learning Sciences with regard to this >>>>> situation (how happy I was to see this initiative!). >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> In particular, I wanted to pick up on Helena's very true comment that >>>>> >>>> "the >>> >>>> US is going to have to produce some works of scholarship or art, or >>>>> >>>> both, >>> >>>> that attempt to explain what is happening now here in the US -- for >>>>> example, this afternoon, under President Trump." >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Yesterday, we saw at home Trump's speech. Although we had followed >>>>> >>>> Trump's >>> >>>> campaign and its denigrating tenor, it was yesterday, for the first >>>>> >>>> time, >>> >>>> that my wife and me got this gut feeling of true tragedy, of a real >>>>> >>>> *drama* >>> >>>> as we heard those empty, but to recover the prior article for >>>>> >>>> discussion, >>> >>>> hollowed and hollowing words coming out of that mouth. It came upon us >>>>> >>>> that >>> >>>> there may be lots of people for whom those words are not hollowed, but >>>>> actually encouraging, rich, beautiful. How can you hear that as beauty? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> So, I was wondering, and in following up with our 2016 MCA Issue 4 >>>>> discussion, whether we could not actually conduct an analysis of the >>>>> >>>> sort >>> >>>> Marc offers in his article of the perezhivanie. Just as Vygotsky >>>>> >>>> explains >>> >>>> how 3 different children experience the situation of an alcoholic mother >>>>> differently, could not we perform an analysis ?of that perezhivanie in >>>>> which a person experiences yesterday's situation as one of >>>>> >>>> encouragement, >>> >>>> of freedom and hope. Would that not be a way to try to understand what >>>>> >>>> is >>> >>>> going on? This would not be a piece of art, but could be something we >>>>> >>>> could >>> >>>> do to try to understand and change this situation. >>>>> >>>>> We could then contrast that perezhivanie with the one many of as have, >>>>> >>>> in >>> >>>> which the situation is experience as a real TRAGEDY. I think in the >>>>> >>>> first >>> >>>> case, there is no hope for change, there is contempt; in the second, >>>>> hearing those words as hollowed and hollowing require that you live the >>>>> situation as a doubled situation in which you experienced it from a >>>>> very >>>>> different developmental stage. One in which the speech sounds as a case >>>>> >>>> of >>> >>>> involution. >>>>> >>>>> Should we find the transcribed speech and perform such analysis? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Going now to support the Woman's march here in Victoria BC. >>>>> >>>>> Alfredo >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> -- >>>> Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. >>>> Assistant Professor >>>> Department of Anthropology >>>> 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower >>>> Brigham Young University >>>> Provo, UT 84602 >>>> http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson >>>> >>> >>> >> > -- Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Department of Anthropology 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower Brigham Young University Provo, UT 84602 http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson From glassman.13@osu.edu Sun Jan 22 08:09:02 2017 From: glassman.13@osu.edu (Glassman, Michael) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2017 16:09:02 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: References: <1485031482970.89461@iped.uio.no> <58840b10.4319620a.49c0c.033a@mx.google.com> <0A8D9897-86CD-4674-A823-FB75571AE830@gmail.com> Message-ID: <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C71FC0@CIO-KRC-D1MBX04.osuad.osu.edu> So I am still not exactly sure what perezhivanie is, but I think I am getting a better idea through this discussion. Being an analogous thinker usually I sort of tie it to the combination of praxis and conscientization that Robert was talking about - maybe I am getting this wrong. But anyway, I have recently had a renewed interest in Bateson's idea of the double bind, exploring some of the conversations of the period has given me a new appreciation for concept - the idea that we know there is something wrong with what is happening but we cannot really challenge it because we fear the collapse of the system we live within. I think of this idea of the basket of deplorables that was mentioned. When Hillary first said it I thought it was a harsh truth. An uncomfortable percentage of Trump supporters are alt-right and/or racists. There is no way around this. I don't think Hillary Clinton was making fun of or picking on anybody. What I also think though is it may have put many others in very uncomfortable positions. There alt-right individuals are perhaps integral parts of the communities they live in, people who will help them when they have an emergency, people they see as dealing with the same heroin and opoid epidemic. If they turn against them they may see the local systems they depend upon as being in danger of collapse. They may think what they do is wrong, but they also identify with them much as members of a family with an abusive parent identifies with the parent because losing the parent means dissolution of the only system they have and feel they can depend on. It's not just realization or insight that what you are doing isn't working on some level, it is trust that when the system you depend on collapses there will be something there to take its place. So individual wear t-shirts that say basket of deplorables to protect the system that they have. Michael -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Greg Thompson Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 10:50 AM To: Andy Blunden ; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie Andy, A decade or so? not very optimistic (but perhaps accurate). A few thoughts: 1. Hillary wasn't just talking about the way people speak, she referred to them (as they understood it) as a "basket of deplorables" (and previously Obama had that comment about these people "clinging to their guns and religion" - that pissed a lot of these people off too). Here is a collection of t-shirts supporting Trump that make reference to Clinton's quote about deplorables: https://www.spreadshirt.com/adorable+deplorable+t-shirts Hard to know exactly what these mean to someone wearing them, or how they feel about it, but I bet that they wouldn't think that it was saying "I'm a racist" (although other people might think this). 2. I'm still a perezhivanie neophyte and am wondering how perezhivanie might be linked to something beyond the individual (as we saw yesterday in the marches, and, yes, the day before in those in solidarity and support for Trump). What of something like "the mood of the country" or at least of a group? How does perezhivanie speak to that? Is this simply a "collection" of individual perezhivanie? Or is the whole greater than the sum of the parts? Just some initial thoughts/questions. -greg On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 1:24 AM, Andy Blunden wrote: > Greg, > > As Marc has made clear, we can talk about perezhivanie with reference > to Trump's capture of the Presidency at several different levels. > > I chose to interpret the directions very literally and discussed > listening to the Inauguration Speech as an experience, that is, as one > of innumerable perezhivaniya in my life through which my view on things has been formed. > As Helena points out, listening to this speech would be a different > experience for men and women who live with industrial decline, and > have been humiliated countless times by professionals like Hillary > picking on their way of speaking. But this speech is only one moment > in an experience for them which will be decades long. It is doubtful > if this Speech will be a very significant moment in the perezhivanie > of a Trump voter. The crucial moment will be some incident when > suddenly the whole episode takes on a new meaning, perhaps betrayal, perhaps life-changing redemption, who can tell? > > The perezhivanie of listening to Trump's speech is not going to be a > fully developed perezhivanie because if you knew he was a conman what > you heard only confirmed that; if you thought he was the saviour of > the nation, the Speech confirms that too. It is the experience which > does not confirm but overthrows one's view which belong to > perezhivanie. Such a moment (e.g. the announcement from the medical > professional that you do not have access to the procedure needed to > save your life) is not in itself the perezhivanie, which includes the > process of digesting this news and re-organising your life accordingly. > > There is, as Mike referred to, also the issue of a collective > perezhivanie, of the entire nation discovering what Trump's election > is all about and overcoming it. Give America a decade or so. The > Vietnam War is something comparable, I think. > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Andy Blunden > http://home.mira.net/~andy > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > On 22/01/2017 6:21 PM, Greg Thompson wrote: > >> Loving everything I'm seeing on facebook about the marches today >> around the country and around the world. Really inspiring stuff, >> particularly after what happened yesterday. And yes, there is a >> feeling, a mood here that gives me great hope. (and thanks Peg for >> the sign slogan, I posted it to my fb page). >> >> But back to the nasty business that Alfredo proposed we deal with, >> here is a description of some of Mr. Trump's words: >> "Mr. Trump on Friday described the nation as a landscape of >> ?rusted-out factories scattered like tombstones? and inner cities >> infested with crime, gangs and drugs." >> I wonder, for whom might this resonate? >> >> Similarly, who would accept the premise of this statement: >> "The American carnage stops right here and stops right now," >> I fear that this is striking a nerve with many people's perezhivanie >> abuilding over the past 10 years or so (I'm still a little unsure of >> how best to use perezhivanie, help please). Anyway, I'm still >> wondering about the circumstances and experiences of Trump >> sympathizers. Some of you out there must have some first-hand contact with such folks. >> >> But perhaps this is getting too far afield from CHAT since it seems >> like it starts to get into an area of communication theory called >> Media Ecology - the media environments of people in various places >> (The problem of the >> (media) environment?). >> >> Alfredo, Peg, Helena, Andy, maybe you guys can give us some advice >> about how to go about treating Trump's speech in a CHAT kind of way? >> How to proceed with this endeavor? >> >> -greg >> >> >> >> >> On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 9:48 PM, Helena Worthen >> >> wrote: >> >> Hello - >>> >>> I hope we pause and consider Alfredo?s suggestion. Thank you, >>> Alfredo for the phrase ?gut feeling of true tragedy.? Can we work >>> with that? >>> >>> How, given the xmca medium of long-chain texts from voices all over >>> the world, would we carry out such a project? Let me see if I can >>> say Alfredo?s proposal in my own words: to read Trump?s speech at >>> his inauguration and ask, ?Who could find this speech hopeful, >>> inspiring, uplifting, comforting? >>> Who would listen to it and think, ?I am glad I voted for this man >>> and I am glad he is my President.?? But also ask, ?Who could find >>> this speech horrifying and frightening? This man Trump is lying to >>> us all and I am sick to think that he is my President.? The social >>> situation ? like the alcoholic mother in the case with the three >>> children each with a different perezvhanie - is the same for both >>> people who are listening to the speech, but the people (like the >>> children) respond differently. >>> >>> This sounds to me like a project for going out and finding strangers >>> to talk with. Thank you, Greg, for bringing attention to Arlie >>> Hochschild's book, Strangers in their Own Land. I have only read the >>> first chapter of it, but I think this is what she is trying to do: >>> give us insight into the person who might find the inauguration >>> speech something other than a case of a celebrity clown practicing >>> The Big Lie. >>> >>> Joe and I spent today at the Women?s March in Oakland, California. >>> The police estimated 60,000 people there. Although there was >>> supposed to be first a march and then a rally, there were too many >>> people to fit into the streets between the starting point of the >>> march and the destination, so many marchers never got to the end. >>> However, that didn?t seem to be a problem. there were all kinds of >>> small (200 person) gatherings going on all over the place. The mood >>> was cheerful, mainstream, determined, friendly ? tremendous variety >>> of signs including the one that Peg saw in DC about regulating >>> women?s bodies but not corporations. I actually feel better right >>> now than I did yesterday at this time. There sure were a lot of us >>> out there. So my perezvhanie has been expanded by a day on the street. >>> >>> Helena >>> >>> >>> Helena Worthen >>> helenaworthen@gmail.com >>> Berkeley, CA 94707 >>> Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com >>> >>> >>> >>> On Jan 21, 2017, at 5:47 PM, Greg Thompson >>> >>>> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Alfredo, >>>> I find this to be a fantastic suggestion. >>>> >>>> One interesting analysis that helps us understand the >>>> >>> circumstances/context >>> >>>> in which many people experience Trump's speech as beautiful, even >>>> >>> hopeful, >>> >>>> is this book: >>>> http://thenewpress.com/books/strangers-their-own-land >>>> >>>> Democracy Now did a nice interview with her as well: >>>> https://www.democracynow.org/2016/9/28/what_drives_trump_ >>>> >>> supporters_sociologist_arlie >>> >>>> In the book (and the interview) Hochschild engages with, among >>>> others, >>>> >>> the >>> >>>> question of why someone who has had been directly deleteriously >>>> affected >>>> >>> by >>> >>>> the impact of fracking and oil production would support politicians >>>> who >>>> >>> are >>> >>>> against government regulation of those industries. She appears to >>>> deal >>>> >>> with >>> >>>> the situation very thoughtfully and compassionately, helping those >>>> of us who can't understand Trump supporters see how they might have >>>> a different experience of what Trump has to say. >>>> >>>> Hopefully this doesn't take too far off track, but seems relevant >>>> to >>>> >>> really >>> >>>> consider the circumstances of Trump supporters in order to >>>> understand >>>> >>> their >>> >>>> experiences. >>>> >>>> Just a thought. >>>> >>>> -greg >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 6:29 PM, wrote: >>>> >>>> Alfredo, >>>>> I will share an impression I had as I listened to a particular >>>>> group >>>>> >>>> being >>> >>>> interviewed who were inspired by the Trump speech. >>>>> The group were ?the biker?s for Trump?. I asked what symbolic form >>>>> they were inhabiting or living out? The answer i came up with was >>>>> the modern symbolic of being ?On the Road Again? and distancing >>>>> from the perceived limitations of social con/striction. Then >>>>> Thelma and Louise came to >>>>> >>>> mind. >>> >>>> Now how does this modern American cultural imaginary of being on >>>> the >>>>> >>>> road >>> >>>> again inter/sect with Trump?s speech. >>>>> Trump said now there is only the future. No doubling back. The >>>>> form changes, but there is a deeper (layered) imaginary being >>>>> expressed that >>>>> >>>> is >>> >>>> shared between the biker?s for Trump and Trump?s speech. This >>>> symbolic >>>>> (taking multiple forms) is profoundly anti-historical in rhetoric. >>>>> It creates ?dramatic places? in which people ?fall into? and >>>>> become >>>>> >>>> animated >>> >>>> and encouraged and re-enchanted and re-vitalized. There is a >>>> re/lease >>>>> >>>> from >>> >>>> perceived constraints. >>>>> >>>>> Alfredo, My impression watching the inauguration and the >>>>> motivating dramatic place Trump opens for some while sending a >>>>> shudder down the >>>>> >>>> spine >>> >>>> for others. The myth of escape from the shackles of history runs >>>> deep >>>>> >>>> as a >>> >>>> symbolic imaginary that takes multiple ?forms? in the American dream. >>>>> >>>>> This is only one quick pass through as an impression. >>>>> >>>>> Sent from my Windows 10 phone >>>>> >>>>> From: Alfredo Jornet Gil >>>>> Sent: January 21, 2017 12:46 PM >>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Trump's speech and Perezhivanie >>>>> >>>>> Dear Helena, Andy, all, >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Unfortunately, I have not been able to find the time to watch the >>>>> movie Fate of a Man, but I have followed the very interesting >>>>> analyses and conversations about it. I am opening this thread as >>>>> connexions between those analyses, perezhivanie, and current >>>>> tragic social and political situation in the US and elsewhere. >>>>> This also connects with the article >>>>> >>>> that >>> >>>> Mike shared on the position of the Learning Sciences with regard to >>>> this >>>>> situation (how happy I was to see this initiative!). >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> In particular, I wanted to pick up on Helena's very true comment >>>>> that >>>>> >>>> "the >>> >>>> US is going to have to produce some works of scholarship or art, or >>>>> >>>> both, >>> >>>> that attempt to explain what is happening now here in the US -- for >>>>> example, this afternoon, under President Trump." >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Yesterday, we saw at home Trump's speech. Although we had followed >>>>> >>>> Trump's >>> >>>> campaign and its denigrating tenor, it was yesterday, for the first >>>>> >>>> time, >>> >>>> that my wife and me got this gut feeling of true tragedy, of a real >>>>> >>>> *drama* >>> >>>> as we heard those empty, but to recover the prior article for >>>>> >>>> discussion, >>> >>>> hollowed and hollowing words coming out of that mouth. It came upon >>>> us >>>>> >>>> that >>> >>>> there may be lots of people for whom those words are not hollowed, >>>> but >>>>> actually encouraging, rich, beautiful. How can you hear that as beauty? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> So, I was wondering, and in following up with our 2016 MCA Issue 4 >>>>> discussion, whether we could not actually conduct an analysis of >>>>> the >>>>> >>>> sort >>> >>>> Marc offers in his article of the perezhivanie. Just as Vygotsky >>>>> >>>> explains >>> >>>> how 3 different children experience the situation of an alcoholic >>>> mother >>>>> differently, could not we perform an analysis ?of that >>>>> perezhivanie in which a person experiences yesterday's situation >>>>> as one of >>>>> >>>> encouragement, >>> >>>> of freedom and hope. Would that not be a way to try to understand >>>> what >>>>> >>>> is >>> >>>> going on? This would not be a piece of art, but could be something >>>> we >>>>> >>>> could >>> >>>> do to try to understand and change this situation. >>>>> >>>>> We could then contrast that perezhivanie with the one many of as >>>>> have, >>>>> >>>> in >>> >>>> which the situation is experience as a real TRAGEDY. I think in the >>>>> >>>> first >>> >>>> case, there is no hope for change, there is contempt; in the >>>> second, >>>>> hearing those words as hollowed and hollowing require that you >>>>> live the situation as a doubled situation in which you experienced >>>>> it from a very different developmental stage. One in which the >>>>> speech sounds as a case >>>>> >>>> of >>> >>>> involution. >>>>> >>>>> Should we find the transcribed speech and perform such analysis? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Going now to support the Woman's march here in Victoria BC. >>>>> >>>>> Alfredo >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> -- >>>> Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. >>>> Assistant Professor >>>> Department of Anthropology >>>> 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower >>>> Brigham Young University >>>> Provo, UT 84602 >>>> http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson >>>> >>> >>> >> > -- Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Department of Anthropology 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower Brigham Young University Provo, UT 84602 http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson From mpacker@uniandes.edu.co Sun Jan 22 08:17:04 2017 From: mpacker@uniandes.edu.co (Martin John Packer) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2017 16:17:04 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: References: <1485031482970.89461@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <87D9A363-C5A0-403C-8AA6-DECF6AC9A5AF@uniandes.edu.co> Long but interesting: Martin From lpscholar2@gmail.com Sun Jan 22 08:24:44 2017 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2017 08:24:44 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: References: <1485031482970.89461@iped.uio.no> <58840b10.4319620a.49c0c.033a@mx.google.com> <0A8D9897-86CD-4674-A823-FB75571AE830@gmail.com> Message-ID: <5884dcf7.d1cc620a.cac5b.e0f3@mx.google.com> Martin, This article in the Atlantic struck a cord. The folks who actually lost a way of life did not vote for Trump. White males with a high school diploma are the group who most inhabit a social situation without hope for the future. So... The central phenomena is anticipatory anxiety. This can be explored as the (not-yet) the potential, the possible, the un-known, the un-certain, the sense of loosing what one now has. The lack or withdrawal of ?hope? re/placed by ?dread?, and ?forboding? The question then becomes how to re-generate hope among folk who now anticipate the future leading to dread? Perezhivanie being the experience of once having hope, but now that hope has withdrawn from the ?scene?. Life stands still. Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Greg Thompson Sent: January 22, 2017 7:51 AM To: Andy Blunden; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie Andy, A decade or so? not very optimistic (but perhaps accurate). A few thoughts: 1. Hillary wasn't just talking about the way people speak, she referred to them (as they understood it) as a "basket of deplorables" (and previously Obama had that comment about these people "clinging to their guns and religion" - that pissed a lot of these people off too). Here is a collection of t-shirts supporting Trump that make reference to Clinton's quote about deplorables: https://www.spreadshirt.com/adorable+deplorable+t-shirts Hard to know exactly what these mean to someone wearing them, or how they feel about it, but I bet that they wouldn't think that it was saying "I'm a racist" (although other people might think this). 2. I'm still a perezhivanie neophyte and am wondering how perezhivanie might be linked to something beyond the individual (as we saw yesterday in the marches, and, yes, the day before in those in solidarity and support for Trump). What of something like "the mood of the country" or at least of a group? How does perezhivanie speak to that? Is this simply a "collection" of individual perezhivanie? Or is the whole greater than the sum of the parts? Just some initial thoughts/questions. -greg On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 1:24 AM, Andy Blunden wrote: > Greg, > > As Marc has made clear, we can talk about perezhivanie with reference to > Trump's capture of the Presidency at several different levels. > > I chose to interpret the directions very literally and discussed listening > to the Inauguration Speech as an experience, that is, as one of innumerable > perezhivaniya in my life through which my view on things has been formed. > As Helena points out, listening to this speech would be a different > experience for men and women who live with industrial decline, and have > been humiliated countless times by professionals like Hillary picking on > their way of speaking. But this speech is only one moment in an experience > for them which will be decades long. It is doubtful if this Speech will be > a very significant moment in the perezhivanie of a Trump voter. The crucial > moment will be some incident when suddenly the whole episode takes on a new > meaning, perhaps betrayal, perhaps life-changing redemption, who can tell? > > The perezhivanie of listening to Trump's speech is not going to be a fully > developed perezhivanie because if you knew he was a conman what you heard > only confirmed that; if you thought he was the saviour of the nation, the > Speech confirms that too. It is the experience which does not confirm but > overthrows one's view which belong to perezhivanie. Such a moment (e.g. the > announcement from the medical professional that you do not have access to > the procedure needed to save your life) is not in itself the perezhivanie, > which includes the process of digesting this news and re-organising your > life accordingly. > > There is, as Mike referred to, also the issue of a collective > perezhivanie, of the entire nation discovering what Trump's election is all > about and overcoming it. Give America a decade or so. The Vietnam War is > something comparable, I think. > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Andy Blunden > http://home.mira.net/~andy > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > On 22/01/2017 6:21 PM, Greg Thompson wrote: > >> Loving everything I'm seeing on facebook about the marches today around >> the >> country and around the world. Really inspiring stuff, particularly after >> what happened yesterday. And yes, there is a feeling, a mood here that >> gives me great hope. (and thanks Peg for the sign slogan, I posted it to >> my >> fb page). >> >> But back to the nasty business that Alfredo proposed we deal with, here is >> a description of some of Mr. Trump's words: >> "Mr. Trump on Friday described the nation as a landscape of ?rusted-out >> factories scattered like tombstones? and inner cities infested with crime, >> gangs and drugs." >> I wonder, for whom might this resonate? >> >> Similarly, who would accept the premise of this statement: >> "The American carnage stops right here and stops right now," >> I fear that this is striking a nerve with many people's perezhivanie >> abuilding over the past 10 years or so (I'm still a little unsure of how >> best to use perezhivanie, help please). Anyway, I'm still wondering about >> the circumstances and experiences of Trump sympathizers. Some of you out >> there must have some first-hand contact with such folks. >> >> But perhaps this is getting too far afield from CHAT since it seems like >> it >> starts to get into an area of communication theory called Media Ecology - >> the media environments of people in various places (The problem of the >> (media) environment?). >> >> Alfredo, Peg, Helena, Andy, maybe you guys can give us some advice about >> how to go about treating Trump's speech in a CHAT kind of way? How to >> proceed with this endeavor? >> >> -greg >> >> >> >> >> On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 9:48 PM, Helena Worthen >> wrote: >> >> Hello - >>> >>> I hope we pause and consider Alfredo?s suggestion. Thank you, Alfredo >>> for >>> the phrase ?gut feeling of true tragedy.? Can we work with that? >>> >>> How, given the xmca medium of long-chain texts from voices all over the >>> world, would we carry out such a project? Let me see if I can say >>> Alfredo?s >>> proposal in my own words: to read Trump?s speech at his inauguration and >>> ask, ?Who could find this speech hopeful, inspiring, uplifting, >>> comforting? >>> Who would listen to it and think, ?I am glad I voted for this man and I >>> am >>> glad he is my President.?? But also ask, ?Who could find this speech >>> horrifying and frightening? This man Trump is lying to us all and I am >>> sick >>> to think that he is my President.? The social situation ? like the >>> alcoholic mother in the case with the three children each with a >>> different >>> perezvhanie - is the same for both people who are listening to the >>> speech, >>> but the people (like the children) respond differently. >>> >>> This sounds to me like a project for going out and finding strangers to >>> talk with. Thank you, Greg, for bringing attention to Arlie Hochschild's >>> book, Strangers in their Own Land. I have only read the first chapter of >>> it, but I think this is what she is trying to do: give us insight into >>> the >>> person who might find the inauguration speech something other than a case >>> of a celebrity clown practicing The Big Lie. >>> >>> Joe and I spent today at the Women?s March in Oakland, California. The >>> police estimated 60,000 people there. Although there was supposed to be >>> first a march and then a rally, there were too many people to fit into >>> the >>> streets between the starting point of the march and the destination, so >>> many marchers never got to the end. However, that didn?t seem to be a >>> problem. there were all kinds of small (200 person) gatherings going on >>> all >>> over the place. The mood was cheerful, mainstream, determined, friendly ? >>> tremendous variety of signs including the one that Peg saw in DC about >>> regulating women?s bodies but not corporations. I actually feel better >>> right now than I did yesterday at this time. There sure were a lot of us >>> out there. So my perezvhanie has been expanded by a day on the street. >>> >>> Helena >>> >>> >>> Helena Worthen >>> helenaworthen@gmail.com >>> Berkeley, CA 94707 >>> Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com >>> >>> >>> >>> On Jan 21, 2017, at 5:47 PM, Greg Thompson >>>> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Alfredo, >>>> I find this to be a fantastic suggestion. >>>> >>>> One interesting analysis that helps us understand the >>>> >>> circumstances/context >>> >>>> in which many people experience Trump's speech as beautiful, even >>>> >>> hopeful, >>> >>>> is this book: >>>> http://thenewpress.com/books/strangers-their-own-land >>>> >>>> Democracy Now did a nice interview with her as well: >>>> https://www.democracynow.org/2016/9/28/what_drives_trump_ >>>> >>> supporters_sociologist_arlie >>> >>>> In the book (and the interview) Hochschild engages with, among others, >>>> >>> the >>> >>>> question of why someone who has had been directly deleteriously affected >>>> >>> by >>> >>>> the impact of fracking and oil production would support politicians who >>>> >>> are >>> >>>> against government regulation of those industries. She appears to deal >>>> >>> with >>> >>>> the situation very thoughtfully and compassionately, helping those of us >>>> who can't understand Trump supporters see how they might have a >>>> different >>>> experience of what Trump has to say. >>>> >>>> Hopefully this doesn't take too far off track, but seems relevant to >>>> >>> really >>> >>>> consider the circumstances of Trump supporters in order to understand >>>> >>> their >>> >>>> experiences. >>>> >>>> Just a thought. >>>> >>>> -greg >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 6:29 PM, wrote: >>>> >>>> Alfredo, >>>>> I will share an impression I had as I listened to a particular group >>>>> >>>> being >>> >>>> interviewed who were inspired by the Trump speech. >>>>> The group were ?the biker?s for Trump?. I asked what symbolic form they >>>>> were inhabiting or living out? The answer i came up with was the modern >>>>> symbolic of being ?On the Road Again? and distancing from the perceived >>>>> limitations of social con/striction. Then Thelma and Louise came to >>>>> >>>> mind. >>> >>>> Now how does this modern American cultural imaginary of being on the >>>>> >>>> road >>> >>>> again inter/sect with Trump?s speech. >>>>> Trump said now there is only the future. No doubling back. The form >>>>> changes, but there is a deeper (layered) imaginary being expressed that >>>>> >>>> is >>> >>>> shared between the biker?s for Trump and Trump?s speech. This symbolic >>>>> (taking multiple forms) is profoundly anti-historical in rhetoric. It >>>>> creates ?dramatic places? in which people ?fall into? and become >>>>> >>>> animated >>> >>>> and encouraged and re-enchanted and re-vitalized. There is a re/lease >>>>> >>>> from >>> >>>> perceived constraints. >>>>> >>>>> Alfredo, My impression watching the inauguration and the motivating >>>>> dramatic place Trump opens for some while sending a shudder down the >>>>> >>>> spine >>> >>>> for others. The myth of escape from the shackles of history runs deep >>>>> >>>> as a >>> >>>> symbolic imaginary that takes multiple ?forms? in the American dream. >>>>> >>>>> This is only one quick pass through as an impression. >>>>> >>>>> Sent from my Windows 10 phone >>>>> >>>>> From: Alfredo Jornet Gil >>>>> Sent: January 21, 2017 12:46 PM >>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Trump's speech and Perezhivanie >>>>> >>>>> Dear Helena, Andy, all, >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Unfortunately, I have not been able to find the time to watch the movie >>>>> Fate of a Man, but I have followed the very interesting analyses and >>>>> conversations about it. I am opening this thread as connexions between >>>>> those analyses, perezhivanie, and current tragic social and political >>>>> situation in the US and elsewhere. This also connects with the article >>>>> >>>> that >>> >>>> Mike shared on the position of the Learning Sciences with regard to this >>>>> situation (how happy I was to see this initiative!). >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> In particular, I wanted to pick up on Helena's very true comment that >>>>> >>>> "the >>> >>>> US is going to have to produce some works of scholarship or art, or >>>>> >>>> both, >>> >>>> that attempt to explain what is happening now here in the US -- for >>>>> example, this afternoon, under President Trump." >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Yesterday, we saw at home Trump's speech. Although we had followed >>>>> >>>> Trump's >>> >>>> campaign and its denigrating tenor, it was yesterday, for the first >>>>> >>>> time, >>> >>>> that my wife and me got this gut feeling of true tragedy, of a real >>>>> >>>> *drama* >>> >>>> as we heard those empty, but to recover the prior article for >>>>> >>>> discussion, >>> >>>> hollowed and hollowing words coming out of that mouth. It came upon us >>>>> >>>> that >>> >>>> there may be lots of people for whom those words are not hollowed, but >>>>> actually encouraging, rich, beautiful. How can you hear that as beauty? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> So, I was wondering, and in following up with our 2016 MCA Issue 4 >>>>> discussion, whether we could not actually conduct an analysis of the >>>>> >>>> sort >>> >>>> Marc offers in his article of the perezhivanie. Just as Vygotsky >>>>> >>>> explains >>> >>>> how 3 different children experience the situation of an alcoholic mother >>>>> differently, could not we perform an analysis ?of that perezhivanie in >>>>> which a person experiences yesterday's situation as one of >>>>> >>>> encouragement, >>> >>>> of freedom and hope. Would that not be a way to try to understand what >>>>> >>>> is >>> >>>> going on? This would not be a piece of art, but could be something we >>>>> >>>> could >>> >>>> do to try to understand and change this situation. >>>>> >>>>> We could then contrast that perezhivanie with the one many of as have, >>>>> >>>> in >>> >>>> which the situation is experience as a real TRAGEDY. I think in the >>>>> >>>> first >>> >>>> case, there is no hope for change, there is contempt; in the second, >>>>> hearing those words as hollowed and hollowing require that you live the >>>>> situation as a doubled situation in which you experienced it from a >>>>> very >>>>> different developmental stage. One in which the speech sounds as a case >>>>> >>>> of >>> >>>> involution. >>>>> >>>>> Should we find the transcribed speech and perform such analysis? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Going now to support the Woman's march here in Victoria BC. >>>>> >>>>> Alfredo >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> -- >>>> Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. >>>> Assistant Professor >>>> Department of Anthropology >>>> 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower >>>> Brigham Young University >>>> Provo, UT 84602 >>>> http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson >>>> >>> >>> >> > -- Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Department of Anthropology 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower Brigham Young University Provo, UT 84602 http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson From Peg.Griffin@att.net Sun Jan 22 08:27:28 2017 From: Peg.Griffin@att.net (Peg Griffin) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2017 11:27:28 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: References: <1485031482970.89461@iped.uio.no> <58840b10.4319620a.49c0c.033a@mx.google.com> <0A8D9897-86CD-4674-A823-FB75571AE830@gmail.com> Message-ID: <002b01d274cc$6d8922e0$489b68a0$@att.net> Sorry, Greg, I can't help with treating that "speech in a CHAT kind of way." But I'll read with interest what develops. >From my perspective, there's a whole (and some holes?) that would need to be considered. Sometime, I'd like to think with this group about "intersectionality vs. unity" which a lot of folks around the WMW have been grappling with. Right now there is too much grunt work to do to get into either of those properly. MEANWHILE, a warning! Periods have been conscripted for duty in the WTWS (?Whatever T-rump Wants Service,? not clear yet if it is openly and officially one of the armed services). Here's an example: ?Despite the lack of numbers he cited, Spicer went on to assert 'this was the largest audience to ever witness the inauguration period both in person and around the globe.'" http://www.cbsnews.com/news/sean-spicer-media-coverage-inauguration-crowd/ CBS has partially acceded to the new way. Typical of the unfair media they still use the punctuation mark version. It used to be used at the ends of sentences and abbreviations. That's too complicated; a space or a new line is enough and will cut down on costs at the Government Printing Office. Saving billions. Many people have been asking for this for a long time but they have been ignored. (Well, there should have been a pre-warning: I find myself fondly revisiting the Yippies of yore, especially the Pie Man, but of course cannot really do that work very well.) Peg -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Greg Thompson Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 2:22 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Cc: Alfredo Jornet Gil Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie Loving everything I'm seeing on facebook about the marches today around the country and around the world. Really inspiring stuff, particularly after what happened yesterday. And yes, there is a feeling, a mood here that gives me great hope. (and thanks Peg for the sign slogan, I posted it to my fb page). But back to the nasty business that Alfredo proposed we deal with, here is a description of some of Mr. Trump's words: "Mr. Trump on Friday described the nation as a landscape of ?rusted-out factories scattered like tombstones? and inner cities infested with crime, gangs and drugs." I wonder, for whom might this resonate? Similarly, who would accept the premise of this statement: "The American carnage stops right here and stops right now," I fear that this is striking a nerve with many people's perezhivanie abuilding over the past 10 years or so (I'm still a little unsure of how best to use perezhivanie, help please). Anyway, I'm still wondering about the circumstances and experiences of Trump sympathizers. Some of you out there must have some first-hand contact with such folks. But perhaps this is getting too far afield from CHAT since it seems like it starts to get into an area of communication theory called Media Ecology - the media environments of people in various places (The problem of the (media) environment?). Alfredo, Peg, Helena, Andy, maybe you guys can give us some advice about how to go about treating Trump's speech in a CHAT kind of way? How to proceed with this endeavor? -greg On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 9:48 PM, Helena Worthen wrote: > Hello - > > I hope we pause and consider Alfredo?s suggestion. Thank you, Alfredo > for the phrase ?gut feeling of true tragedy.? Can we work with that? > > How, given the xmca medium of long-chain texts from voices all over > the world, would we carry out such a project? Let me see if I can say > Alfredo?s proposal in my own words: to read Trump?s speech at his > inauguration and ask, ?Who could find this speech hopeful, inspiring, uplifting, comforting? > Who would listen to it and think, ?I am glad I voted for this man and > I am glad he is my President.?? But also ask, ?Who could find this > speech horrifying and frightening? This man Trump is lying to us all > and I am sick to think that he is my President.? The social situation > ? like the alcoholic mother in the case with the three children each > with a different perezvhanie - is the same for both people who are > listening to the speech, but the people (like the children) respond differently. > > This sounds to me like a project for going out and finding strangers > to talk with. Thank you, Greg, for bringing attention to Arlie > Hochschild's book, Strangers in their Own Land. I have only read the > first chapter of it, but I think this is what she is trying to do: > give us insight into the person who might find the inauguration speech > something other than a case of a celebrity clown practicing The Big Lie. > > Joe and I spent today at the Women?s March in Oakland, California. The > police estimated 60,000 people there. Although there was supposed to > be first a march and then a rally, there were too many people to fit > into the streets between the starting point of the march and the > destination, so many marchers never got to the end. However, that > didn?t seem to be a problem. there were all kinds of small (200 > person) gatherings going on all over the place. The mood was cheerful, > mainstream, determined, friendly ? tremendous variety of signs > including the one that Peg saw in DC about regulating women?s bodies > but not corporations. I actually feel better right now than I did > yesterday at this time. There sure were a lot of us out there. So my perezvhanie has been expanded by a day on the street. > > Helena > > > Helena Worthen > helenaworthen@gmail.com > Berkeley, CA 94707 > Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com > > > > > On Jan 21, 2017, at 5:47 PM, Greg Thompson > > > wrote: > > > > Alfredo, > > I find this to be a fantastic suggestion. > > > > One interesting analysis that helps us understand the > circumstances/context > > in which many people experience Trump's speech as beautiful, even > hopeful, > > is this book: > > http://thenewpress.com/books/strangers-their-own-land > > > > Democracy Now did a nice interview with her as well: > > https://www.democracynow.org/2016/9/28/what_drives_trump_ > supporters_sociologist_arlie > > > > In the book (and the interview) Hochschild engages with, among > > others, > the > > question of why someone who has had been directly deleteriously > > affected > by > > the impact of fracking and oil production would support politicians > > who > are > > against government regulation of those industries. She appears to > > deal > with > > the situation very thoughtfully and compassionately, helping those > > of us who can't understand Trump supporters see how they might have > > a different experience of what Trump has to say. > > > > Hopefully this doesn't take too far off track, but seems relevant to > really > > consider the circumstances of Trump supporters in order to > > understand > their > > experiences. > > > > Just a thought. > > > > -greg > > > > > > > > On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 6:29 PM, wrote: > > > >> Alfredo, > >> I will share an impression I had as I listened to a particular > >> group > being > >> interviewed who were inspired by the Trump speech. > >> The group were ?the biker?s for Trump?. I asked what symbolic form > >> they were inhabiting or living out? The answer i came up with was > >> the modern symbolic of being ?On the Road Again? and distancing > >> from the perceived limitations of social con/striction. Then Thelma > >> and Louise came to > mind. > >> Now how does this modern American cultural imaginary of being on > >> the > road > >> again inter/sect with Trump?s speech. > >> Trump said now there is only the future. No doubling back. The form > >> changes, but there is a deeper (layered) imaginary being expressed > >> that > is > >> shared between the biker?s for Trump and Trump?s speech. This > >> symbolic (taking multiple forms) is profoundly anti-historical in > >> rhetoric. It creates ?dramatic places? in which people ?fall into? > >> and become > animated > >> and encouraged and re-enchanted and re-vitalized. There is a > >> re/lease > from > >> perceived constraints. > >> > >> Alfredo, My impression watching the inauguration and the motivating > >> dramatic place Trump opens for some while sending a shudder down > >> the > spine > >> for others. The myth of escape from the shackles of history runs > >> deep > as a > >> symbolic imaginary that takes multiple ?forms? in the American dream. > >> > >> This is only one quick pass through as an impression. > >> > >> Sent from my Windows 10 phone > >> > >> From: Alfredo Jornet Gil > >> Sent: January 21, 2017 12:46 PM > >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Trump's speech and Perezhivanie > >> > >> Dear Helena, Andy, all, > >> > >> > >> Unfortunately, I have not been able to find the time to watch the > >> movie Fate of a Man, but I have followed the very interesting > >> analyses and conversations about it. I am opening this thread as > >> connexions between those analyses, perezhivanie, and current tragic > >> social and political situation in the US and elsewhere. This also > >> connects with the article > that > >> Mike shared on the position of the Learning Sciences with regard to > >> this situation (how happy I was to see this initiative!). > >> > >> > >> In particular, I wanted to pick up on Helena's very true comment > >> that > "the > >> US is going to have to produce some works of scholarship or art, or > both, > >> that attempt to explain what is happening now here in the US -- for > >> example, this afternoon, under President Trump." > >> > >> > >> Yesterday, we saw at home Trump's speech. Although we had followed > Trump's > >> campaign and its denigrating tenor, it was yesterday, for the first > time, > >> that my wife and me got this gut feeling of true tragedy, of a real > *drama* > >> as we heard those empty, but to recover the prior article for > discussion, > >> hollowed and hollowing words coming out of that mouth. It came upon > >> us > that > >> there may be lots of people for whom those words are not hollowed, > >> but actually encouraging, rich, beautiful. How can you hear that as beauty? > >> > >> > >> So, I was wondering, and in following up with our 2016 MCA Issue 4 > >> discussion, whether we could not actually conduct an analysis of > >> the > sort > >> Marc offers in his article of the perezhivanie. Just as Vygotsky > explains > >> how 3 different children experience the situation of an alcoholic > >> mother differently, could not we perform an analysis ?of that > >> perezhivanie in which a person experiences yesterday's situation as > >> one of > encouragement, > >> of freedom and hope. Would that not be a way to try to understand > >> what > is > >> going on? This would not be a piece of art, but could be something > >> we > could > >> do to try to understand and change this situation. > >> > >> We could then contrast that perezhivanie with the one many of as > >> have, > in > >> which the situation is experience as a real TRAGEDY. I think in the > first > >> case, there is no hope for change, there is contempt; in the > >> second, hearing those words as hollowed and hollowing require that > >> you live the situation as a doubled situation in which you > >> experienced it from a very different developmental stage. One in > >> which the speech sounds as a case > of > >> involution. > >> > >> Should we find the transcribed speech and perform such analysis? > >> > >> > >> Going now to support the Woman's march here in Victoria BC. > >> > >> Alfredo > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > -- > > Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. > > Assistant Professor > > Department of Anthropology > > 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower > > Brigham Young University > > Provo, UT 84602 > > http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson > > -- Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Department of Anthropology 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower Brigham Young University Provo, UT 84602 http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson From mpacker@uniandes.edu.co Sun Jan 22 08:36:51 2017 From: mpacker@uniandes.edu.co (Martin John Packer) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2017 16:36:51 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: References: <1485031482970.89461@iped.uio.no> <58840b10.4319620a.49c0c.033a@mx.google.com> <0A8D9897-86CD-4674-A823-FB75571AE830@gmail.com> Message-ID: Alessandro Duranti has a new book that includes analysis of political discourse and debate. I attach my review? Martin On Jan 22, 2017, at 2:21 AM, Greg Thompson > wrote: Alfredo, Peg, Helena, Andy, maybe you guys can give us some advice about how to go about treating Trump's speech in a CHAT kind of way? How to proceed with this endeavor? -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Packer 2016, by alessandro duranti - Cambridge, ma- Cambridge university press, 2015, 237 pp., $34.9.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 479525 bytes Desc: Packer 2016, by alessandro duranti - Cambridge, ma- Cambridge university press, 2015, 237 pp., $34.9.pdf Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20170122/5faf7d70/attachment-0001.pdf From mcole@ucsd.edu Sun Jan 22 09:59:11 2017 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2017 09:59:11 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism In-Reply-To: <5884c611.c74b620a.26b89.bf54@mx.google.com> References: <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C71964@CIO-KRC-D1MBX04.osuad.osu.edu> <1485073527094.7145@iped.uio.no> <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C71EF9@CIO-KRC-D1MBX04.osuad.osu.edu> <5884c611.c74b620a.26b89.bf54@mx.google.com> Message-ID: Alfredo et al- Larry spoke of the a-historical, "future oriented" nature of the Trump rhetoric. Many of us have railed against the a-historicalness of our social science discourses.A rare agreement among all varieties of socio-cultural- historical theories, is that to understand behavior is to understand the history of behavior including of course of nation states, homosapiens, etc. Alfredo mentions that in conversations with him I have said that to me this is a "second coming" because the circumstances now have returned me to the conditions of my birth. (Of course, it is a third, fourth, nnnnnnth coming but that takes us beyond surviving generations with personal experience* of the war to end all wars that ended in 1918. Gosh, 100 years.) One thing we can do is remember. In this context, Milan Kundera's statement that the struggle of humans against power is the struggle of memory against forgetting. So, one thing the oldsters on the list can do is to provide information about that period, before World War II, and bring to everyone's mind those events in the hope that current generations may profit from their living past. In that spirit, I thought it might be useful to consider how the phrase America First was playing out in the late 1930's and beyond. Look at the caste of characters. I think you will be surprised if you know any of the names. If you do not, sing out and someone can identify them, left and right. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/America_First_Committee mike On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 6:47 AM, wrote: > Robert, Michael, Alfredo, Andy, and James Lawson (channeled through Andy) > > So ... As Robert says the 21st century ?mind? constantly in flight > searching for something ?new?. > In contrast to perezhivanie as a doubling back : (living-through AND THEN > working-through) experience which each of you exemplify through your > ex/pression in the world. > A consistent reply to the era of US nationalism embodied in who each of > you are. > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > From: Robert Lake > Sent: January 22, 2017 6:27 AM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism > > Thank you for this posting Michael. I've been thinking for the last few > days > about how the Internet, social media, 24-hour news, and now electronic > versions of the major newspapers in the world, leave very little time > for self reflection. This was a large part of Dewey's thinking and > and Freire's notion of conscientiza??o ( translated critical > consciousness, but like many words that LSV used, there is something > lost in translation). The notion of Praxis as Freire used it (reflection > and action) > also gets at the heart of this immense missing piece in the formation of > 21st century "mind" as we > witness it jumping to see and hear something "new". Can there be > real "progress" without transformative change of thought and action? > > *Robert Lake* > > > On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 8:41 AM, Glassman, Michael > wrote: > > > Hi Alfredo, > > > > Your short post is deeply resonant for me and I find your questions at > the > > end especially poignant. For Dewey and those around him education was > > supposed to be the backstop against the rise of somebody like Trump. > > Lately I have been thinking that in some ways we treat Trump as if he had > > come from some type of other planet to dominate and destroy us - a > Twilight > > Zone episode - To Serve Man with Small Hands Perhaps. But that keeps us > > from thinking about the causes proximal and distal that have caused this > to > > happen - not only here but around the world. There seems to be limited > > self-reflection. How much has what we have let the education systems > > become has played into this - the insane competition, the > standardization, > > the control through ritual. And as education researchers we often say to > > the larger society, we'll make your children do better, to be more > > competitive, we'll be number one, or at least number six on PISA - > instead > > of saying we are losing the thread, we are losing too much of what is > > possible through education. > > > > Michael > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ > > mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Alfredo Jornet Gil > > Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 3:25 AM > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. > Nationalism > > > > Mike, > > > > thanks a lot for sharing this article. You and Michael, who have and know > > more history, have spoken in terms of reminiscences. I have lived and > know > > less, and the article feels like fresh air. During my PhD, I begun to > > increasingly feel that I had to due something to act and respond to the > > increasing ecological and humanitarian globe crises. But how could I do > > anything if I had children and a PhD to finalise?? What could I do that > > would also be doing my job as researcher in a department of education? It > > was very difficult to find anything, partly because almost every academic > > quest would focus on learning, but so little on social development. How > > many scientific articles are dedicated to socio-political questions in > the > > most cited educational journals? I felt very powerless. > > > > To be able to address these questions within my expertise, is a challenge > > partly because contrary to Dewey's hope, educational research has only > > marginally focused on these questions, and yet they may be exactly the > > question that matter to education. What are we educating for? Indeed, > what > > is education for? I think we face a serious problem when someone (like > > myself), being an educational researchers/scholar, still has to scratch > her > > head wondering < > development?>> Vygotsky would be shocked! > > > > Alfredo > > > > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > on behalf of mike cole > > Sent: 19 January 2017 04:51 > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. > Nationalism > > > > Yes Michael, > > > > It feels like the world of the later 1930's about the time I was born as > > that period came down to me through the prism of a family of "premature > > anti fascists." > > > > For a great re-creation of those times see the highly ambivalent film by > > Frank Capra, "meet John Doe." It has American big capital interconnected > > with fascism combined with populist collectivism in a manner that points > at > > the media (as then experienced) as the bad guys in disguise. Happy > Ending, > > Beethoven Ode to Joy and all. > > > > It's come round again, nastier this time. > > > > Mike > > On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 6:20 PM Glassman, Michael > > wrote: > > > > > Mike > > > > > > > > > > > > It was so interesting to read this note after reading the Cognition > > > and Instruction essay. All the way through it I kept thinking we have > > > been here before. It reminded me of the scholars, especially those > > > who had escaped from Germany, trying to make sense of what had > > > happened to their society during World War II. The foremost in my > > > mind was Lewin. Except I wonder if he would say the process of > > > transformative action starts not with emergence of quasi-needs, but > > > our willingness and abilities to step back from our quasi-needs and > > > the ways that they drive us, often to dysfunctional behaviors that it > > > ultimately destructive to both our society and to us as individuals. > > > How hard this is to do, we have to keep going back again and again. > > > The quasi-needs, tribalism, acceptance, standing are always there. It > > is how they shape us that is critical. > > > > > > > > > > > > Michael > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto: > > > xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 8:31 PM > > > > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism > > > > > > > > > > > > In following the perezhivanie thread I encountered the note I > > re-membered. > > > > > > And interestingly mis-remembered. A translation into my focus on > > > mediational means. He places the starting point of the process of > > > transformative action at the emergence of quasi-needs (from Kurt > Lewin). > > > > > > That seems correct to me. The new mediational means emerge under > > > environmental presses. Ever functionalist ego need a goal(!). (The > > > problem with functionalism) In David's words, > > > > > > > > > > > > Perhaps the place we should look for "exaptations" that can save both > > > our personalities and our environment is not in our evolved needs, but > > > in yet to be designed quasi-needs. Artificial organs, after all, > > > always suggest new and ever more artificial functions, like chess and > > language. > > > > > > > > > > > > This point seems worth keeping in mind as we look at where this group > > > of critical scholars who work within the Learning Sciences > > > disciplinary framework would like to lead us. > > > > > > > > > > > > mike > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Robert Lake Ed.D. > Associate Professor > Social Foundations of Education > Dept. of Curriculum, Foundations, and Reading > Georgia Southern University > P. O. Box 8144, Statesboro, GA 30460 > Secretary/Treasurer-AERA- Paulo Freire Special Interest Group > Webpage: https://georgiasouthern.academia.edu/RobertLake*Democracy must be > born anew in every generation, and education is its midwife.* John > Dewey-*Democracy > and Education*,1916, p. 139 > > From Peg.Griffin@att.net Sun Jan 22 10:21:12 2017 From: Peg.Griffin@att.net (Peg Griffin) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2017 13:21:12 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism In-Reply-To: References: <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C71964@CIO-KRC-D1MBX04.osuad.osu.edu> <1485073527094.7145@iped.uio.no> <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C71EF9@CIO-KRC-D1MBX04.osuad.osu.edu> <5884c611.c74b620a.26b89.bf54@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <004d01d274dc$50a5b570$f1f12050$@att.net> Borders? Canadians? https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jan/20/womens-march-canada-protesters-denied-entry-us -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 12:59 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism Alfredo et al- Larry spoke of the a-historical, "future oriented" nature of the Trump rhetoric. Many of us have railed against the a-historicalness of our social science discourses.A rare agreement among all varieties of socio-cultural- historical theories, is that to understand behavior is to understand the history of behavior including of course of nation states, homosapiens, etc. Alfredo mentions that in conversations with him I have said that to me this is a "second coming" because the circumstances now have returned me to the conditions of my birth. (Of course, it is a third, fourth, nnnnnnth coming but that takes us beyond surviving generations with personal experience* of the war to end all wars that ended in 1918. Gosh, 100 years.) One thing we can do is remember. In this context, Milan Kundera's statement that the struggle of humans against power is the struggle of memory against forgetting. So, one thing the oldsters on the list can do is to provide information about that period, before World War II, and bring to everyone's mind those events in the hope that current generations may profit from their living past. In that spirit, I thought it might be useful to consider how the phrase America First was playing out in the late 1930's and beyond. Look at the caste of characters. I think you will be surprised if you know any of the names. If you do not, sing out and someone can identify them, left and right. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/America_First_Committee mike On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 6:47 AM, wrote: > Robert, Michael, Alfredo, Andy, and James Lawson (channeled through > Andy) > > So ... As Robert says the 21st century ?mind? constantly in flight > searching for something ?new?. > In contrast to perezhivanie as a doubling back : (living-through AND > THEN > working-through) experience which each of you exemplify through your > ex/pression in the world. > A consistent reply to the era of US nationalism embodied in who each > of you are. > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > From: Robert Lake > Sent: January 22, 2017 6:27 AM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. > Nationalism > > Thank you for this posting Michael. I've been thinking for the last > few days about how the Internet, social media, 24-hour news, and now > electronic versions of the major newspapers in the world, leave very > little time for self reflection. This was a large part of Dewey's > thinking and and Freire's notion of conscientiza??o ( translated > critical consciousness, but like many words that LSV used, there is > something lost in translation). The notion of Praxis as Freire used > it (reflection and action) also gets at the heart of this immense > missing piece in the formation of 21st century "mind" as we witness it > jumping to see and hear something "new". Can there be real "progress" > without transformative change of thought and action? > > *Robert Lake* > > > On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 8:41 AM, Glassman, Michael > > wrote: > > > Hi Alfredo, > > > > Your short post is deeply resonant for me and I find your questions > > at > the > > end especially poignant. For Dewey and those around him education > > was supposed to be the backstop against the rise of somebody like Trump. > > Lately I have been thinking that in some ways we treat Trump as if > > he had come from some type of other planet to dominate and destroy > > us - a > Twilight > > Zone episode - To Serve Man with Small Hands Perhaps. But that > > keeps us from thinking about the causes proximal and distal that > > have caused this > to > > happen - not only here but around the world. There seems to be > > limited self-reflection. How much has what we have let the > > education systems become has played into this - the insane > > competition, the > standardization, > > the control through ritual. And as education researchers we often > > say to the larger society, we'll make your children do better, to be > > more competitive, we'll be number one, or at least number six on > > PISA - > instead > > of saying we are losing the thread, we are losing too much of what > > is possible through education. > > > > Michael > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ > > mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Alfredo Jornet Gil > > Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 3:25 AM > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. > Nationalism > > > > Mike, > > > > thanks a lot for sharing this article. You and Michael, who have and > > know more history, have spoken in terms of reminiscences. I have > > lived and > know > > less, and the article feels like fresh air. During my PhD, I begun > > to increasingly feel that I had to due something to act and respond > > to the increasing ecological and humanitarian globe crises. But how > > could I do anything if I had children and a PhD to finalise?? What > > could I do that would also be doing my job as researcher in a > > department of education? It was very difficult to find anything, > > partly because almost every academic quest would focus on learning, > > but so little on social development. How many scientific articles > > are dedicated to socio-political questions in > the > > most cited educational journals? I felt very powerless. > > > > To be able to address these questions within my expertise, is a > > challenge partly because contrary to Dewey's hope, educational > > research has only marginally focused on these questions, and yet > > they may be exactly the question that matter to education. What are > > we educating for? Indeed, > what > > is education for? I think we face a serious problem when someone > > (like myself), being an educational researchers/scholar, still has > > to scratch > her > > head wondering < > change and development?>> Vygotsky would be shocked! > > > > Alfredo > > > > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > on behalf of mike cole > > > > Sent: 19 January 2017 04:51 > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. > Nationalism > > > > Yes Michael, > > > > It feels like the world of the later 1930's about the time I was > > born as that period came down to me through the prism of a family of > > "premature anti fascists." > > > > For a great re-creation of those times see the highly ambivalent > > film by Frank Capra, "meet John Doe." It has American big capital > > interconnected with fascism combined with populist collectivism in a > > manner that points > at > > the media (as then experienced) as the bad guys in disguise. Happy > Ending, > > Beethoven Ode to Joy and all. > > > > It's come round again, nastier this time. > > > > Mike > > On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 6:20 PM Glassman, Michael > > > > wrote: > > > > > Mike > > > > > > > > > > > > It was so interesting to read this note after reading the > > > Cognition and Instruction essay. All the way through it I kept > > > thinking we have been here before. It reminded me of the > > > scholars, especially those who had escaped from Germany, trying to > > > make sense of what had happened to their society during World War > > > II. The foremost in my mind was Lewin. Except I wonder if he > > > would say the process of transformative action starts not with > > > emergence of quasi-needs, but our willingness and abilities to > > > step back from our quasi-needs and the ways that they drive us, > > > often to dysfunctional behaviors that it ultimately destructive to both our society and to us as individuals. > > > How hard this is to do, we have to keep going back again and again. > > > The quasi-needs, tribalism, acceptance, standing are always there. > > > It > > is how they shape us that is critical. > > > > > > > > > > > > Michael > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto: > > > xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 8:31 PM > > > > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. > > > Nationalism > > > > > > > > > > > > In following the perezhivanie thread I encountered the note I > > re-membered. > > > > > > And interestingly mis-remembered. A translation into my focus on > > > mediational means. He places the starting point of the process of > > > transformative action at the emergence of quasi-needs (from Kurt > Lewin). > > > > > > That seems correct to me. The new mediational means emerge under > > > environmental presses. Ever functionalist ego need a goal(!). (The > > > problem with functionalism) In David's words, > > > > > > > > > > > > Perhaps the place we should look for "exaptations" that can save > > > both our personalities and our environment is not in our evolved > > > needs, but in yet to be designed quasi-needs. Artificial organs, > > > after all, always suggest new and ever more artificial functions, > > > like chess and > > language. > > > > > > > > > > > > This point seems worth keeping in mind as we look at where this > > > group of critical scholars who work within the Learning Sciences > > > disciplinary framework would like to lead us. > > > > > > > > > > > > mike > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Robert Lake Ed.D. > Associate Professor > Social Foundations of Education > Dept. of Curriculum, Foundations, and Reading Georgia Southern > University P. O. Box 8144, Statesboro, GA 30460 > Secretary/Treasurer-AERA- Paulo Freire Special Interest Group > Webpage: https://georgiasouthern.academia.edu/RobertLake*Democracy > must be born anew in every generation, and education is its midwife.* > John Dewey-*Democracy and Education*,1916, p. 139 > > From mcole@ucsd.edu Sun Jan 22 10:35:27 2017 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2017 10:35:27 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism In-Reply-To: <004d01d274dc$50a5b570$f1f12050$@att.net> References: <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C71964@CIO-KRC-D1MBX04.osuad.osu.edu> <1485073527094.7145@iped.uio.no> <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C71EF9@CIO-KRC-D1MBX04.osuad.osu.edu> <5884c611.c74b620a.26b89.bf54@mx.google.com> <004d01d274dc$50a5b570$f1f12050$@att.net> Message-ID: There is a new Department of Justice, Peg. Why would we allow in Canadian protesters? Foreign interference, clearly. :-( A MAJOR set of concerns for figuring how what we, in our work lives, should be doing to address the social crisis created by the return of u.s. and global nationalism is that the rules by which people have been operating do not apply. There is a fox in every hen house. It makes cozy nesting unusually difficult. Seems like one of those times when we need some exaptation other than one produced by a thermonuclear food fight. So where do the learning sciences, LS, fit? (For those who have lost the thread and want to know the article that started it, see mike mike On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 10:21 AM, Peg Griffin wrote: > Borders? Canadians? https://www.theguardian.com/ > world/2017/jan/20/womens-march-canada-protesters-denied-entry-us > > -----Original Message----- > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ > mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole > Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 12:59 PM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism > > Alfredo et al- > > Larry spoke of the a-historical, "future oriented" nature of the Trump > rhetoric. Many of us have railed against the a-historicalness of our social > science discourses.A rare agreement among all varieties of socio-cultural- > historical theories, is that to understand behavior is to understand the > history of behavior including of course of nation states, homosapiens, etc. > > Alfredo mentions that in conversations with him I have said that to me > this is a "second coming" because the circumstances now have returned me to > the conditions of my birth. (Of course, it is a third, fourth, nnnnnnth > coming but that takes us beyond surviving generations with personal > experience* of the war to end all wars that ended in 1918. Gosh, 100 years.) > > One thing we can do is remember. In this context, Milan Kundera's > statement that the struggle of humans against power is the struggle of > memory against forgetting. So, one thing the oldsters on the list can do is > to provide information about that period, before World War II, and bring to > everyone's mind those events in the hope that current generations may > profit from their living past. > > In that spirit, I thought it might be useful to consider how the phrase > America First was playing out in the late 1930's and beyond. Look at the > caste of characters. I think you will be surprised if you know any of the > names. If you do not, sing out and someone can identify them, left and > right. > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/America_First_Committee > > mike > > On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 6:47 AM, wrote: > > > Robert, Michael, Alfredo, Andy, and James Lawson (channeled through > > Andy) > > > > So ... As Robert says the 21st century ?mind? constantly in flight > > searching for something ?new?. > > In contrast to perezhivanie as a doubling back : (living-through AND > > THEN > > working-through) experience which each of you exemplify through your > > ex/pression in the world. > > A consistent reply to the era of US nationalism embodied in who each > > of you are. > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > From: Robert Lake > > Sent: January 22, 2017 6:27 AM > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. > > Nationalism > > > > Thank you for this posting Michael. I've been thinking for the last > > few days about how the Internet, social media, 24-hour news, and now > > electronic versions of the major newspapers in the world, leave very > > little time for self reflection. This was a large part of Dewey's > > thinking and and Freire's notion of conscientiza??o ( translated > > critical consciousness, but like many words that LSV used, there is > > something lost in translation). The notion of Praxis as Freire used > > it (reflection and action) also gets at the heart of this immense > > missing piece in the formation of 21st century "mind" as we witness it > > jumping to see and hear something "new". Can there be real "progress" > > without transformative change of thought and action? > > > > *Robert Lake* > > > > > > On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 8:41 AM, Glassman, Michael > > > > wrote: > > > > > Hi Alfredo, > > > > > > Your short post is deeply resonant for me and I find your questions > > > at > > the > > > end especially poignant. For Dewey and those around him education > > > was supposed to be the backstop against the rise of somebody like > Trump. > > > Lately I have been thinking that in some ways we treat Trump as if > > > he had come from some type of other planet to dominate and destroy > > > us - a > > Twilight > > > Zone episode - To Serve Man with Small Hands Perhaps. But that > > > keeps us from thinking about the causes proximal and distal that > > > have caused this > > to > > > happen - not only here but around the world. There seems to be > > > limited self-reflection. How much has what we have let the > > > education systems become has played into this - the insane > > > competition, the > > standardization, > > > the control through ritual. And as education researchers we often > > > say to the larger society, we'll make your children do better, to be > > > more competitive, we'll be number one, or at least number six on > > > PISA - > > instead > > > of saying we are losing the thread, we are losing too much of what > > > is possible through education. > > > > > > Michael > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ > > > mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Alfredo Jornet Gil > > > Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 3:25 AM > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. > > Nationalism > > > > > > Mike, > > > > > > thanks a lot for sharing this article. You and Michael, who have and > > > know more history, have spoken in terms of reminiscences. I have > > > lived and > > know > > > less, and the article feels like fresh air. During my PhD, I begun > > > to increasingly feel that I had to due something to act and respond > > > to the increasing ecological and humanitarian globe crises. But how > > > could I do anything if I had children and a PhD to finalise?? What > > > could I do that would also be doing my job as researcher in a > > > department of education? It was very difficult to find anything, > > > partly because almost every academic quest would focus on learning, > > > but so little on social development. How many scientific articles > > > are dedicated to socio-political questions in > > the > > > most cited educational journals? I felt very powerless. > > > > > > To be able to address these questions within my expertise, is a > > > challenge partly because contrary to Dewey's hope, educational > > > research has only marginally focused on these questions, and yet > > > they may be exactly the question that matter to education. What are > > > we educating for? Indeed, > > what > > > is education for? I think we face a serious problem when someone > > > (like myself), being an educational researchers/scholar, still has > > > to scratch > > her > > > head wondering < > > change and development?>> Vygotsky would be shocked! > > > > > > Alfredo > > > > > > > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > on behalf of mike cole > > > > > > Sent: 19 January 2017 04:51 > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. > > Nationalism > > > > > > Yes Michael, > > > > > > It feels like the world of the later 1930's about the time I was > > > born as that period came down to me through the prism of a family of > > > "premature anti fascists." > > > > > > For a great re-creation of those times see the highly ambivalent > > > film by Frank Capra, "meet John Doe." It has American big capital > > > interconnected with fascism combined with populist collectivism in a > > > manner that points > > at > > > the media (as then experienced) as the bad guys in disguise. Happy > > Ending, > > > Beethoven Ode to Joy and all. > > > > > > It's come round again, nastier this time. > > > > > > Mike > > > On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 6:20 PM Glassman, Michael > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Mike > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It was so interesting to read this note after reading the > > > > Cognition and Instruction essay. All the way through it I kept > > > > thinking we have been here before. It reminded me of the > > > > scholars, especially those who had escaped from Germany, trying to > > > > make sense of what had happened to their society during World War > > > > II. The foremost in my mind was Lewin. Except I wonder if he > > > > would say the process of transformative action starts not with > > > > emergence of quasi-needs, but our willingness and abilities to > > > > step back from our quasi-needs and the ways that they drive us, > > > > often to dysfunctional behaviors that it ultimately destructive to > both our society and to us as individuals. > > > > How hard this is to do, we have to keep going back again and again. > > > > The quasi-needs, tribalism, acceptance, standing are always there. > > > > It > > > is how they shape us that is critical. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Michael > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto: > > > > xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole > > > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 8:31 PM > > > > > > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. > > > > Nationalism > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In following the perezhivanie thread I encountered the note I > > > re-membered. > > > > > > > > And interestingly mis-remembered. A translation into my focus on > > > > mediational means. He places the starting point of the process of > > > > transformative action at the emergence of quasi-needs (from Kurt > > Lewin). > > > > > > > > That seems correct to me. The new mediational means emerge under > > > > environmental presses. Ever functionalist ego need a goal(!). (The > > > > problem with functionalism) In David's words, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Perhaps the place we should look for "exaptations" that can save > > > > both our personalities and our environment is not in our evolved > > > > needs, but in yet to be designed quasi-needs. Artificial organs, > > > > after all, always suggest new and ever more artificial functions, > > > > like chess and > > > language. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This point seems worth keeping in mind as we look at where this > > > > group of critical scholars who work within the Learning Sciences > > > > disciplinary framework would like to lead us. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mike > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Robert Lake Ed.D. > > Associate Professor > > Social Foundations of Education > > Dept. of Curriculum, Foundations, and Reading Georgia Southern > > University P. O. Box 8144, Statesboro, GA 30460 > > Secretary/Treasurer-AERA- Paulo Freire Special Interest Group > > Webpage: https://georgiasouthern.academia.edu/RobertLake*Democracy > > must be born anew in every generation, and education is its midwife.* > > John Dewey-*Democracy and Education*,1916, p. 139 > > > > > > > From helenaworthen@gmail.com Sun Jan 22 11:22:58 2017 From: helenaworthen@gmail.com (Helena Worthen) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2017 11:22:58 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: James Lawson and perezhivanie In-Reply-To: <628ebbd3-8b51-8e15-47d0-9164e8352c36@mira.net> References: <628ebbd3-8b51-8e15-47d0-9164e8352c36@mira.net> Message-ID: Glad you posted this, Andy. For XMCA?ers who have not (yet) got a copy of this book and read it, I wrote a review of it for WorkingUSA: The Journal of Labor and Society. https://www.academia.edu/31034073/Review_of_Blunden_The_Origins_of_Collective_Decision_Making._Brill_Haymarket It?s an important book that helped me get a handle on how decisions get made in the collective situations I have been a part of (everything from labor unions to faculty committees). It could easily be a teaching tool. It raises ethical questions that are pertinent to how we got where we are now. Helena Worthen helenaworthen@gmail.com Berkeley, CA 94707 Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com > On Jan 22, 2017, at 1:40 AM, Andy Blunden wrote: > > James Lawson is the Methodist preacher who trained the young members of the SNCC in non-violent action and wrote their constitution. I paste below and attach an excerpt from my book "The Origins of Collective Decision Making" which narrates Lawson's life up until April 1960. Perezhivanie was not the topic under discussion so it is not mentioned in the text, but xmca-ers should be able to see it, an example of perezhivanie: > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > James Lawson was born in 1928, in Uniontown, Pennsylvania. His father, James Snr., was the grandson of an escaped slave, and a Minister for the African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church in New England. > > Via the Free African Society(FAS) the Methodists had recruited freed slaves in Philadelphiain 1787, but as a result of a racist incident, some left to found the African Methodist Episcopal Church(AMEC). Nonetheless, many African Americans stayed with the United Methodist Church. The AMEC split started in Philadelphia and the AMEC Zion Church was a split that came out of New York. It was to AMEC Zion, James Lawson was born. > > However, Lawson returned to The United Methodist Church, created by a 1939 merger of several branches of the Methodist Church, which set up five regional ?jurisdictions? of Methodists in the US, organized to maintain regionally identity and a sixth, called the ?Central Jurisdiction? which combined the Black annual conferences, thus building segregation into the constitution of the Church.The Methodists went through a long and painful process, carried out in accordance with the Methodist Code of Discipline, which mandates the principle of Majority, to re-integrate the white and Black, but it was not till after 1964 that Black conferences started to merge into white conferences. At the local level, congregations continued much as before. So it was within the Black section of the segregated United Methodist Church, that James Lawson became a Methodist. > > James Snr. was a militant preacher; he packed a 38 pistol and set up branches of the NAACP wherever he was assigned to preach. After serving at St. James AMEZ Church in Massillon, Ohio, he transferred to the Lexington Annual Conference of the Central Jurisdiction of the United Methodist Church. James Snr. was no pacifist and according to Lawson he ?refused to take any guff from anyone, particularly on the point of race? and ?insisted that he was going to be treated as a man.? > > Lawson?s mother, Philane May Cover, on the other hand, was decidedly nonviolent. Lawson?s challenge, which was to form his character, was to reconcile his father?s militancy with his mother?s nonviolence. Lawson grew up in Massillon. One day, at the age of 10, Lawson was asked by his mother to run an errand: > > A little white child in an automobile yelled ?nigger? out the opened window. I walked over ... and, since I was in a hurry running my mother?s errand, I smacked the child and went on my way. When the Lawson kids got called ?nigger? on the streets or at school, we usually fought. I don?t know where we got that from, except that we figured that it was something to fight over. (Lawson, cited in King, 1999) > > On the return trip home, aware of possible repercussions, Lawson tried to find the parents of the offending child, to talk to them, but the car was gone. Once home, he told his mother of the incident. Lawson?s mother replied, ?Jimmy, what good did that do?? > > She talked about who I was, the fact of God?s love, that we were a family of love and that such an incident could not hurt me, because of who I was. I don?t remember anyone else being around, but a stillness took over my being at that moment. It was, as I realized much later on, a mystical experience. In a very real way, my life stood still. I realized in that stillness that I had changed forever. One of the phrases my mother used in her conversation with me was that ?there must be a better way?. I determined, from then on, that I would find the better way. (Lawson, cited in King, 1999, pp. 187-188) > > He first became acquainted with Gandhi?s experiments in nonviolence as a child, thanks to the African-American press which the family discussed around the dinner table, and had read Gandhi?s autobiography as a teenager. At Baldwin Wallace College, a liberal arts Methodistcollege in Berea, Ohio, he studied Thoreau, Gandhi and Tolstoy, and the pacifist theologians Dietrich Bonhoeffer and Reinhold Niebuhr. At age 19, he became a draft resister, refusing service in the Korean War. Executive director of Fellowship Of Reconciliation (FOR), A. J. Muste,frequently visited to lecture at the College: > > All of us in history classes were required to hear Muste. I was thrilled. He made me realize that I was not alone in my experimentation, that there was a world movement, and a national movement. ... He acquainted me with the Fellowship Of Reconciliation, which I joined on the spot in 1947. That meant that I got exposed to their book list. > > After hearing a lecture by A. J. Muste, he joined FOR and CORE. Muste was instrumental thereafter in strengthening Lawson?s nonviolent orientation, directing him towards Gandhi and later facilitating his entry into the sit-in and boycott movement beginning in the South. In the late 1940s and early 1950s Lawson had organized sit-ins and protests directed at establishments that discriminated against blacks in Massillon, long before the Montgomery bus-boycott. > > He was also active with the National Conference of Methodist Youth. Although a member of a segregated Methodist Church, he found plenty of support for his stands against racial discrimination and war from his white colleagues and church fellows. While he was in prison serving thirteen months of a two and a half year term for draft resistance in 1952, he was re-elected as Vice-President of the NCMY. > > Wesleyan Methodism was central to Lawson?s outlook. Just as John Wesley had sought to cleanse individuals of iniquity, so could society be purged of the social sins of slavery, segregation, poverty, and war.Generations of African American Methodists from Harriet Tubman (AMEZ) and Henry M. Turner (AME) in the nineteenth century, to Rosa Parks (AME) and James Farmer (MEC), were led to social justice activism by this Methodist heritage. > > Lawson used his prison time to read and think. Writing from prison in 1952 aged 23 years old and yet to enter the seminary, Lawson said he aspired to emulate ?the life of Jesus, St. Francis, George Fox, Gandhi, Buddha... and other great religious persons.? These figures attached little importance to ?theology but (to their) experience with God.?Further, he noted ?religious failures today are in (the arena of) experience and practice, not theology.? When Lawson entered prison, he was a Christian pacifist.He told Mary King however, that his ?first commitment was to work on race,? and conscientious objection came second.By the time of his release, he had advanced to Gandhian nonviolence. He wondered ?why can?t a mass non-violent revolution be staged throughout the South where the segregation pattern is much like the ?untouchables? of India? Such a movement would have to start with one person who had the Christian vision to make such a revolution a reality in his own life.? Gandhian nonviolence became the synthesizing factor for Lawson?s religious thinking: the militancy of his father?s Methodism and the Christian pacifism that he drew from his mother. > > Muste arranged for Lawson to visit India after his release from prison with a letter of introduction to activists in the Gandhian movement, and he remained in India from May 1953 to 1956, working at Hislop College in Nagpur, reading Indian literature and working with Gandhi?s movement. Lawson?s practice would remain deeply religious; his nonviolence was saturated with the message of Christian love, and blended with principles synthesized from a broad range of religious and secular sources, both Eastern and Western. His aim was the ?mass education and training of people in the use of nonviolent direct action techniques.? Lawson insisted that ?you are fighting a system, not an individual, not a race, or not the people of another country, but a system.? > > He continued his study of pacifism and Gandhian nonviolence at Oberlin College, Ohio. While still in India, he had read about Martin Luther King and his successful leadership of the Montgomery bus boycott.King?s lecture at Oberlin on February 6, 1957, fortified his long-held intention to work in the South for transformative social change. After King?s lecture to a packed audience, he and Lawson talked together at dinner.Though Lawson was contemplating study for a Ph.D., King told him ?don?t wait, but come south now!? adding that there was no one else like Lawson.Muste arranged for FOR to hire Lawson as southern field secretary to be stationed at Nashville in January 1958. Upon his arrival, he found that Glenn Smiley, national field director of FOR, had arranged for Lawson to run a full schedule of workshops ? including one to take place early that year at the first annual meeting of the SCLC in Columbia, South Carolina. > > At the SCLC meeting, King made an exuberant introduction of Lawson as FOR?s new regional representative and discussed the organization?s role in Montgomery, telling delegates to be sure to attend Lawson?s workshop on nonviolence. King took his seat in the first pew, waiting for the three-hour session to start: > > Martin did that at every SCLC meeting as long as he lived. He would ask me to conduct an afternoon workshop, usually two or three hours, and he would arrange for it to be ?at-large? so that everyone could attend, with nothing else to compete. He put it on the schedule himself. A few minutes early, he would show up and sit alone, as an example, in the front row. > > Back in Nashville, Lawson continued with Monday evening workshops during the autumn of 1959 in which he trained the students who were to be the core of the Nashville sit-in movement. As a result of his involvement with the sit-ins Lawson was expelled from Vanderbilt, but he enrolled with Boston University to finish his degree in theology,while continuing to work with the students. Several professors in the School of Theology resigned over his expulsion. > > The techniques that the students deployed were drawn from Lawson?s workshops. In 1958 and 1959, Lawson mobilized all that he knew about Christian pacifism, Gandhian nonviolence, and Methodist social ministry and blended them into an unprecedented curriculum that influenced the civil rights movement in Nashville and beyond. > > Blending Christianity and interreligious sources, he did not present its philosophy and practice as a secular doctrine, but as the essence of religion itself. Core to nonviolence was mirroring God?s love for humankind and exhibiting it through concrete relationships of human solidarity and community. ?Nonviolence,? Lawson taught, is the aggressive, forgiving, patient, long-suffering Christ-like and Christ-commanded love or good-will for all humankind even in the face of tension, fear, hatred, or demonic evil.? Moreover, ?it is the readiness to absorb suffering with forgiveness and courage rather than to inflict suffering on others.? > > Lawson divided his instruction into four modules: how nonviolence reacts, training for nonviolence, the virtues of nonviolence, and the methods of nonviolence. Practitioners prepared themselves by jettisoning anger, hostility and fear thus ?minimizing the effect of an attack,? valuing love, courage, fearlessness, and forgiveness, and pursuing redemptive suffering which ?releases unknown elements for good.? Preparation included meditation and prayer, study of the scriptures, practicing nonviolence through challenges to segregation in bus transportation and in other public facilities.The practice steps included fact-finding, negotiation, education of the community, and various methods of nonviolent direct action including sit-ins, boycotts, strikes, and civil disobedience. Lawson provided an extensive bibliography including relevant verses from the Bible, the Bhagavad Gita, and from the Chinese philosopher, Mo Ti and the Hebrew prophet, Isaiah. > > The Nashville sit-ins and those led by students in other southern cities convinced Ella Baker of the SCLC to call a conference in April, 1960, at Shaw University in Raleigh, North Carolina. Out of this meeting emerged the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee.Lawson delivered an opening keynote address that helped to frame SNCC?s nonviolent trajectory.Later, Lawson summarized discussions and consensus that emerged out of the conference, and his synopsis received the approval of everyone there. Lawson?s overall comments said that ?nonviolence as it grows from Judaic-Christian tradition seeks a social order of justice permeated by love.? > > It was Lawson who delivered the keynote address and framed SNCC?s nonviolent orientation. > > The whole group, perhaps 120 participants, all in the room, asked me to draft a statement. Eventually, three different drafts emerged. The Nashville group was cohesive. The extant draft was the third, influenced by the Nashville group, after two earlier conversations. (Interview with King, June 2014) > > Lawson?s synopsis was approved by the Conference. > > In a private email message Mary King told me: > > He [James Lawson] was reading from the FOR booklist from a young age, but I don?t think that he was influenced on notions of Consensus by Quakers, because the connection was too abstract. Let me underscore that he says it was for him Methodist origins. (Private email, 15 April 2014) > > In his interview with Mary King, Lawson confirmed that the origin of Consensus in SNCC was the Nashville Central Committee, confirming what Mary King had told me in April. As to the roots Consensus in Lawson?s own experience, he emphasized that: > > It was the Methodist youth and student movements with which I had grown up, and this is how they made decisions. They knew the rules of parliamentary procedures, but they wanted to find a common mind. (Interview with King, June 2014) > > The Methodist Church to this very day still mandates Majority decisions, but this would never have entailed children voting ? in general youngsters in these organizations were simply told what to do. The Black congregations had operated separately for more than a century, so there was some room for Lawson to develop a consensual model of collaboration in working with young people. It is also possible the Black congregations, like other Black Churches in America, drew on other traditions of decision making. > > -- > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Andy Blunden > http://home.mira.net/~andy > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > From helenaworthen@gmail.com Sun Jan 22 11:24:23 2017 From: helenaworthen@gmail.com (Helena Worthen) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2017 11:24:23 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism In-Reply-To: <1485073527094.7145@iped.uio.no> References: <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C71964@CIO-KRC-D1MBX04.osuad.osu.edu> <1485073527094.7145@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <5E5B95EA-374F-48EB-B308-BCE49DA52760@gmail.com> Someone please re-send the link to this article? I think I?m going to want to read it and respond to Mike?s question. Thanks ? H Helena Worthen helenaworthen@gmail.com Berkeley, CA 94707 Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com > On Jan 22, 2017, at 12:25 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > > Mike, > > thanks a lot for sharing this article. You and Michael, who have and know more history, have spoken in terms of reminiscences. I have lived and know less, and the article feels like fresh air. During my PhD, I begun to increasingly feel that I had to due something to act and respond to the increasing ecological and humanitarian globe crises. But how could I do anything if I had children and a PhD to finalise?? What could I do that would also be doing my job as researcher in a department of education? It was very difficult to find anything, partly because almost every academic quest would focus on learning, but so little on social development. How many scientific articles are dedicated to socio-political questions in the most cited educational journals? I felt very powerless. > > To be able to address these questions within my expertise, is a challenge partly because contrary to Dewey's hope, educational research has only marginally focused on these questions, and yet they may be exactly the question that matter to education. What are we educating for? Indeed, what is education for? I think we face a serious problem when someone (like myself), being an educational researchers/scholar, still has to scratch her head wondering <> Vygotsky would be shocked! > > Alfredo > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of mike cole > Sent: 19 January 2017 04:51 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism > > Yes Michael, > > It feels like the world of the later 1930's about the time I was born as > that period came down to me through the prism of a family of "premature > anti fascists." > > For a great re-creation of those times see the highly ambivalent film by > Frank Capra, "meet John Doe." It has American big capital interconnected > with fascism combined with populist collectivism in a manner that points at > the media (as then experienced) as the bad guys in disguise. Happy Ending, > Beethoven Ode to Joy and all. > > It's come round again, nastier this time. > > Mike > On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 6:20 PM Glassman, Michael > wrote: > >> Mike >> >> >> >> It was so interesting to read this note after reading the Cognition and >> Instruction essay. All the way through it I kept thinking we have been >> here before. It reminded me of the scholars, especially those who had >> escaped from Germany, trying to make sense of what had happened to their >> society during World War II. The foremost in my mind was Lewin. Except I >> wonder if he would say the process of transformative action starts not with >> emergence of quasi-needs, but our willingness and abilities to step back >> from our quasi-needs and the ways that they drive us, often to >> dysfunctional behaviors that it ultimately destructive to both our society >> and to us as individuals. How hard this is to do, we have to keep going >> back again and again. The quasi-needs, tribalism, acceptance, standing are >> always there. It is how they shape us that is critical. >> >> >> >> Michael >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto: >> xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole >> >> Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 8:31 PM >> >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> >> Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism >> >> >> >> In following the perezhivanie thread I encountered the note I re-membered. >> >> And interestingly mis-remembered. A translation into my focus on >> mediational means. He places the starting point of the process of >> transformative action at the emergence of quasi-needs (from Kurt Lewin). >> >> That seems correct to me. The new mediational means emerge under >> environmental presses. Ever functionalist ego need a goal(!). (The problem >> with functionalism) In David's words, >> >> >> >> Perhaps the place we should look for "exaptations" that can save both our >> personalities and our environment is not in our evolved needs, but in yet >> to be designed quasi-needs. Artificial organs, after all, always suggest >> new and ever more artificial functions, like chess and language. >> >> >> >> This point seems worth keeping in mind as we look at where this group of >> critical scholars who work within the Learning Sciences disciplinary >> framework would like to lead us. >> >> >> >> mike >> >> >> >> From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Sun Jan 22 11:38:10 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2017 19:38:10 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism In-Reply-To: <5E5B95EA-374F-48EB-B308-BCE49DA52760@gmail.com> References: <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C71964@CIO-KRC-D1MBX04.osuad.osu.edu> <1485073527094.7145@iped.uio.no>, <5E5B95EA-374F-48EB-B308-BCE49DA52760@gmail.com> Message-ID: <1485113892233.91870@iped.uio.no> Here it is, http://cognitionandinstruction.com/engagements-the-learning-sciences-in-a-new-era-of-u-s-nationalism/ Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Helena Worthen Sent: 22 January 2017 20:24 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism Someone please re-send the link to this article? I think I?m going to want to read it and respond to Mike?s question. Thanks ? H Helena Worthen helenaworthen@gmail.com Berkeley, CA 94707 Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com > On Jan 22, 2017, at 12:25 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > > Mike, > > thanks a lot for sharing this article. You and Michael, who have and know more history, have spoken in terms of reminiscences. I have lived and know less, and the article feels like fresh air. During my PhD, I begun to increasingly feel that I had to due something to act and respond to the increasing ecological and humanitarian globe crises. But how could I do anything if I had children and a PhD to finalise?? What could I do that would also be doing my job as researcher in a department of education? It was very difficult to find anything, partly because almost every academic quest would focus on learning, but so little on social development. How many scientific articles are dedicated to socio-political questions in the most cited educational journals? I felt very powerless. > > To be able to address these questions within my expertise, is a challenge partly because contrary to Dewey's hope, educational research has only marginally focused on these questions, and yet they may be exactly the question that matter to education. What are we educating for? Indeed, what is education for? I think we face a serious problem when someone (like myself), being an educational researchers/scholar, still has to scratch her head wondering <> Vygotsky would be shocked! > > Alfredo > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of mike cole > Sent: 19 January 2017 04:51 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism > > Yes Michael, > > It feels like the world of the later 1930's about the time I was born as > that period came down to me through the prism of a family of "premature > anti fascists." > > For a great re-creation of those times see the highly ambivalent film by > Frank Capra, "meet John Doe." It has American big capital interconnected > with fascism combined with populist collectivism in a manner that points at > the media (as then experienced) as the bad guys in disguise. Happy Ending, > Beethoven Ode to Joy and all. > > It's come round again, nastier this time. > > Mike > On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 6:20 PM Glassman, Michael > wrote: > >> Mike >> >> >> >> It was so interesting to read this note after reading the Cognition and >> Instruction essay. All the way through it I kept thinking we have been >> here before. It reminded me of the scholars, especially those who had >> escaped from Germany, trying to make sense of what had happened to their >> society during World War II. The foremost in my mind was Lewin. Except I >> wonder if he would say the process of transformative action starts not with >> emergence of quasi-needs, but our willingness and abilities to step back >> from our quasi-needs and the ways that they drive us, often to >> dysfunctional behaviors that it ultimately destructive to both our society >> and to us as individuals. How hard this is to do, we have to keep going >> back again and again. The quasi-needs, tribalism, acceptance, standing are >> always there. It is how they shape us that is critical. >> >> >> >> Michael >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto: >> xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole >> >> Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 8:31 PM >> >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> >> Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism >> >> >> >> In following the perezhivanie thread I encountered the note I re-membered. >> >> And interestingly mis-remembered. A translation into my focus on >> mediational means. He places the starting point of the process of >> transformative action at the emergence of quasi-needs (from Kurt Lewin). >> >> That seems correct to me. The new mediational means emerge under >> environmental presses. Ever functionalist ego need a goal(!). (The problem >> with functionalism) In David's words, >> >> >> >> Perhaps the place we should look for "exaptations" that can save both our >> personalities and our environment is not in our evolved needs, but in yet >> to be designed quasi-needs. Artificial organs, after all, always suggest >> new and ever more artificial functions, like chess and language. >> >> >> >> This point seems worth keeping in mind as we look at where this group of >> critical scholars who work within the Learning Sciences disciplinary >> framework would like to lead us. >> >> >> >> mike >> >> >> >> From helenaworthen@gmail.com Sun Jan 22 11:47:24 2017 From: helenaworthen@gmail.com (Helena Worthen) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2017 11:47:24 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: <1485070853888.71427@iped.uio.no> References: <1485031482970.89461@iped.uio.no> <58840b10.4319620a.49c0c.033a@mx.google.com> <0A8D9897-86CD-4674-A823-FB75571AE830@gmail.com> <6F36B192-D012-4CE8-A68F-9DABFBC15BFA@gmail.com> <1485070853888.71427@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: One more thought, before plowing ahead into this thickening conversation: The Destiny of a Man can be seen as an attempt (1959) to tell "The Russian/Soviet Story" in a way that brought as many as possible of the clashing contradictions into one narrative that makes it possible for the people who might watch it go forward. We can look around at examples of comparable attempts to tell ?The American story.? The nature of the story will correspond to the time in history when it ?worked? as the right story for the time. The Destiny of a Man ?worked? in 1959, when the generation that had suffered in the Great Patriotic War was still healing but a turning point (Kruschev?s speech) had been reached. It interpreted the perezvanhie of the war for the generation that had survived it. It distorted some things (what often happened to ex-prisoners of war, for example) and confirmed others (the gas chambers). It wasn?t history; it was art. I notice that Vygotsky says that perezvanhie is a unit that joins the internal emotional experience and the external situation. I am tempted to play with the Engestrom ?unit of analysis? here but all refrain. So what works of art can we point out that would serve comparable purposes, related to their moment in time? How about Uncle Tom?s Cabin? The images of African Americans are cartoonish to modern eyes, but the book itself made the Black experience accessible to the readers of 1852. It widened the circle of perezvhanie - the environment - for white readers who were no doubt troubled but uncertain (social situation of development?) as they sensed the tremors that would flare up into the Civil War 10 years later. Note that the work of art that achieves this purpose (creates the right story for the time) is created in the moment when uncertainty, fear, etc are dominant ? when it is needed, in other words - not when 100 years have gone by (or 60, as in the case of The Destiny of a Man) and we know, or think we know, what happened next. When its time is past, it becomes a ?classic.? Example: Steinbeck: The Grapes of Wrath. So what can we point to that achieves this purpose for us today? Helena Worthen helenaworthen@gmail.com Berkeley, CA 94707 Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com > On Jan 21, 2017, at 11:40 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > > Thank you all for following up on the Trump's speech suggestion. > Helena, the way you have re-phrased my proposal is exactly they way I had hoped it to be heard. I think Andy, Helena, Sue, Greg and Larry have offered empirical materials for and analyses of the type we would be producing if we were to follow the proposal. Thanks Greg for the reference, which seems right to the point, and Sue for the glimpse to people's best protest signs (they are good empirical materials for sure). Thanks Andy, too, offering your body and soul to scientific progress and undergoing the inaugural speech again. The way you describe it is very close to how I thought and felt yesterday. > My family and friends today joined the march here in Victoria, and, like Helena mentions, we all commented on how well it felt. There was a very cheerful, friendly atmosphere, and lots of affection. I too felt better today. > > In case we wanted to go forward with this project, I have created a google doc in which I am collecting the resources, empirical cases, and analyses that we have begun producing. I have also added additional links (like one to the "Bikers for Trump" site, and the full transcript of the inaugural speech plus a link from the Washington Post. > > The document should be accessible to everyone who follow this link: > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Nmn77hKa8XhDJ043ZfVuTUtT7NxDAibuzdv0KJDGqCo/edit?usp=sharing > I guess the easiest way is that I curate it, populating it with content shared in xmca, but everyone is able and welcome to edit. > Alfredo > > > > > > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Helena Worthen > Sent: 22 January 2017 06:54 > To: ablunden@mira.net; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie > > OK, got it. > > H > > Helena Worthen > helenaworthen@gmail.com > Berkeley, CA 94707 > Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com > > > >> On Jan 21, 2017, at 9:29 PM, Andy Blunden wrote: >> >> No, Helena, the *environment* is the same, but each are in a different *social situation of development*, thus the different perezhivanie. >> >> Andy >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------ >> Andy Blunden >> http://home.mira.net/~andy >> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making >> On 22/01/2017 3:48 PM, Helena Worthen wrote: >>> ... The social situation ? like the alcoholic mother in the case with the three children each with a different perezvhanie - is the same for both people who are listening to the speech, but the people (like the children) respond differently. >>> >>> >> > From helenaworthen@gmail.com Sun Jan 22 12:22:23 2017 From: helenaworthen@gmail.com (Helena Worthen) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2017 12:22:23 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism In-Reply-To: <1485113892233.91870@iped.uio.no> References: <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C71964@CIO-KRC-D1MBX04.osuad.osu.edu> <1485073527094.7145@iped.uio.no> <5E5B95EA-374F-48EB-B308-BCE49DA52760@gmail.com> <1485113892233.91870@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: Thank you, Alfredo - I gave it a read. Sure, of course they?re right. But I am very disappointed. I was hoping that the following was only item #1 in a long list of "what the 2016 election made apparent": The 2016 election has made apparent the need for scholarship that explicitly defends and furthers the rights and well-being of people of color, immigrants, Muslims, women, people who are differently abled, LGBTQ communities, and the earth. These are stances that have been limited, at least explicitly, in the Learning Sciences. But the call for inclusion was not just #1, it seems to be the whole thing. In other words, it?s all about identity ?plus the earth, of course. While inclusion is necessary, it?s not even a start. Yes, research, teaching, publishing, promotion, conferences ? everything associated with teaching and learning has to include everyone as equals (see Andy?s book) in one way or another ? but then what? What are they (we) supposed to do? Where does the pretty language touch the ground? I was listening to a broadcast of the Women?s March in DC on Saturday morning, and Kamala Harris, who was the California State Attorney General and is now a junior Senator from CA, was addressing the rally. She said, ?People always ask me to talk about women?s issues. I say, ?Oh, I?m SO glad you?re interested in economics!! Let?s talk about economics.? And she ran through a whole set of parallel back-and-forths, always pulling identity questions back to wages, jobs, earning, supporting your family, etc etc. Much as we need to wipe away any barriers to the Learning Sciences (and the professions and institutions dedicated to them) due to identity, until the Learning Sciences start taking a look at the place where most people spend most of their lives ? not school, I mean ? but work, they will be engaging in a soft conversation at the edge of the real issue. It?s a pleasant conversation but it doesn?t put a hand on the levers that translate skill and knowledge into rent and groceries. H Helena Worthen helenaworthen@gmail.com Berkeley, CA 94707 Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com > On Jan 22, 2017, at 11:38 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > > Here it is, > > http://cognitionandinstruction.com/engagements-the-learning-sciences-in-a-new-era-of-u-s-nationalism/ > > Alfredo > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Helena Worthen > Sent: 22 January 2017 20:24 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism > > Someone please re-send the link to this article? I think I?m going to want to read it and respond to Mike?s question. > > Thanks ? H > > > Helena Worthen > helenaworthen@gmail.com > Berkeley, CA 94707 > Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com > > > >> On Jan 22, 2017, at 12:25 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: >> >> Mike, >> >> thanks a lot for sharing this article. You and Michael, who have and know more history, have spoken in terms of reminiscences. I have lived and know less, and the article feels like fresh air. During my PhD, I begun to increasingly feel that I had to due something to act and respond to the increasing ecological and humanitarian globe crises. But how could I do anything if I had children and a PhD to finalise?? What could I do that would also be doing my job as researcher in a department of education? It was very difficult to find anything, partly because almost every academic quest would focus on learning, but so little on social development. How many scientific articles are dedicated to socio-political questions in the most cited educational journals? I felt very powerless. >> >> To be able to address these questions within my expertise, is a challenge partly because contrary to Dewey's hope, educational research has only marginally focused on these questions, and yet they may be exactly the question that matter to education. What are we educating for? Indeed, what is education for? I think we face a serious problem when someone (like myself), being an educational researchers/scholar, still has to scratch her head wondering <> Vygotsky would be shocked! >> >> Alfredo >> >> >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of mike cole >> Sent: 19 January 2017 04:51 >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism >> >> Yes Michael, >> >> It feels like the world of the later 1930's about the time I was born as >> that period came down to me through the prism of a family of "premature >> anti fascists." >> >> For a great re-creation of those times see the highly ambivalent film by >> Frank Capra, "meet John Doe." It has American big capital interconnected >> with fascism combined with populist collectivism in a manner that points at >> the media (as then experienced) as the bad guys in disguise. Happy Ending, >> Beethoven Ode to Joy and all. >> >> It's come round again, nastier this time. >> >> Mike >> On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 6:20 PM Glassman, Michael >> wrote: >> >>> Mike >>> >>> >>> >>> It was so interesting to read this note after reading the Cognition and >>> Instruction essay. All the way through it I kept thinking we have been >>> here before. It reminded me of the scholars, especially those who had >>> escaped from Germany, trying to make sense of what had happened to their >>> society during World War II. The foremost in my mind was Lewin. Except I >>> wonder if he would say the process of transformative action starts not with >>> emergence of quasi-needs, but our willingness and abilities to step back >>> from our quasi-needs and the ways that they drive us, often to >>> dysfunctional behaviors that it ultimately destructive to both our society >>> and to us as individuals. How hard this is to do, we have to keep going >>> back again and again. The quasi-needs, tribalism, acceptance, standing are >>> always there. It is how they shape us that is critical. >>> >>> >>> >>> Michael >>> >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto: >>> xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole >>> >>> Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 8:31 PM >>> >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>> >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism >>> >>> >>> >>> In following the perezhivanie thread I encountered the note I re-membered. >>> >>> And interestingly mis-remembered. A translation into my focus on >>> mediational means. He places the starting point of the process of >>> transformative action at the emergence of quasi-needs (from Kurt Lewin). >>> >>> That seems correct to me. The new mediational means emerge under >>> environmental presses. Ever functionalist ego need a goal(!). (The problem >>> with functionalism) In David's words, >>> >>> >>> >>> Perhaps the place we should look for "exaptations" that can save both our >>> personalities and our environment is not in our evolved needs, but in yet >>> to be designed quasi-needs. Artificial organs, after all, always suggest >>> new and ever more artificial functions, like chess and language. >>> >>> >>> >>> This point seems worth keeping in mind as we look at where this group of >>> critical scholars who work within the Learning Sciences disciplinary >>> framework would like to lead us. >>> >>> >>> >>> mike >>> >>> >>> >>> > > From mcole@ucsd.edu Sun Jan 22 13:01:13 2017 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2017 13:01:13 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism In-Reply-To: References: <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C71964@CIO-KRC-D1MBX04.osuad.osu.edu> <1485073527094.7145@iped.uio.no> <5E5B95EA-374F-48EB-B308-BCE49DA52760@gmail.com> <1485113892233.91870@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: Helena et al -- An important emphasis in the article for me was on the fact that although the article focused on the American nationalist movement that has just pulled of an alt-right coup, similar movements are poised to take hold in a lot of places in Europe to join the many already entrenched unsavory governments in other parts of the world. The CRADLE center in Helsinki is under very concerted attack and the right wing government appears, from this distance, to be making great progress on destroying its legacy. The same process has been in Denmark for some time, also with apparent success. What do our international colleagues who have already felt the hot breath of right wing nationalism have to offer in terms of strategies of resistence? Back to "what is to be done," that sombre question from an earlier era. The answer last time did not produce what it promised. mike mike On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 12:22 PM, Helena Worthen wrote: > Thank you, Alfredo - I gave it a read. > > Sure, of course they?re right. But I am very disappointed. > > I was hoping that the following was only item #1 in a long list of "what > the 2016 election made apparent": > > The 2016 election has made apparent the need for scholarship that > explicitly defends and furthers the rights and well-being of people of > color, immigrants, Muslims, women, people who are differently abled, LGBTQ > communities, and the earth. These are stances that have been limited, at > least explicitly, in the Learning Sciences. > > But the call for inclusion was not just #1, it seems to be the whole > thing. In other words, it?s all about identity ?plus the earth, of course. > While inclusion is necessary, it?s not even a start. Yes, research, > teaching, publishing, promotion, conferences ? everything associated with > teaching and learning has to include everyone as equals (see Andy?s book) > in one way or another ? but then what? What are they (we) supposed to do? > Where does the pretty language touch the ground? > > I was listening to a broadcast of the Women?s March in DC on Saturday > morning, and Kamala Harris, who was the California State Attorney General > and is now a junior Senator from CA, was addressing the rally. She said, > ?People always ask me to talk about women?s issues. I say, ?Oh, I?m SO glad > you?re interested in economics!! Let?s talk about economics.? And she ran > through a whole set of parallel back-and-forths, always pulling identity > questions back to wages, jobs, earning, supporting your family, etc etc. > > Much as we need to wipe away any barriers to the Learning Sciences (and > the professions and institutions dedicated to them) due to identity, until > the Learning Sciences start taking a look at the place where most people > spend most of their lives ? not school, I mean ? but work, they will be > engaging in a soft conversation at the edge of the real issue. It?s a > pleasant conversation but it doesn?t put a hand on the levers that > translate skill and knowledge into rent and groceries. > > H > > > Helena Worthen > helenaworthen@gmail.com > Berkeley, CA 94707 > Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com > > > > > On Jan 22, 2017, at 11:38 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > wrote: > > > > Here it is, > > > > http://cognitionandinstruction.com/engagements-the-learning- > sciences-in-a-new-era-of-u-s-nationalism/ > > > > Alfredo > > ________________________________________ > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of Helena Worthen > > Sent: 22 January 2017 20:24 > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. > Nationalism > > > > Someone please re-send the link to this article? I think I?m going to > want to read it and respond to Mike?s question. > > > > Thanks ? H > > > > > > Helena Worthen > > helenaworthen@gmail.com > > Berkeley, CA 94707 > > Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com > > > > > > > >> On Jan 22, 2017, at 12:25 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > wrote: > >> > >> Mike, > >> > >> thanks a lot for sharing this article. You and Michael, who have and > know more history, have spoken in terms of reminiscences. I have lived and > know less, and the article feels like fresh air. During my PhD, I begun to > increasingly feel that I had to due something to act and respond to the > increasing ecological and humanitarian globe crises. But how could I do > anything if I had children and a PhD to finalise?? What could I do that > would also be doing my job as researcher in a department of education? It > was very difficult to find anything, partly because almost every academic > quest would focus on learning, but so little on social development. How > many scientific articles are dedicated to socio-political questions in the > most cited educational journals? I felt very powerless. > >> > >> To be able to address these questions within my expertise, is a > challenge partly because contrary to Dewey's hope, educational research has > only marginally focused on these questions, and yet they may be exactly the > question that matter to education. What are we educating for? Indeed, what > is education for? I think we face a serious problem when someone (like > myself), being an educational researchers/scholar, still has to scratch her > head wondering < development?>> Vygotsky would be shocked! > >> > >> Alfredo > >> > >> > >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of mike cole > >> Sent: 19 January 2017 04:51 > >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. > Nationalism > >> > >> Yes Michael, > >> > >> It feels like the world of the later 1930's about the time I was born as > >> that period came down to me through the prism of a family of "premature > >> anti fascists." > >> > >> For a great re-creation of those times see the highly ambivalent film by > >> Frank Capra, "meet John Doe." It has American big capital interconnected > >> with fascism combined with populist collectivism in a manner that > points at > >> the media (as then experienced) as the bad guys in disguise. Happy > Ending, > >> Beethoven Ode to Joy and all. > >> > >> It's come round again, nastier this time. > >> > >> Mike > >> On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 6:20 PM Glassman, Michael > >> wrote: > >> > >>> Mike > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> It was so interesting to read this note after reading the Cognition and > >>> Instruction essay. All the way through it I kept thinking we have been > >>> here before. It reminded me of the scholars, especially those who had > >>> escaped from Germany, trying to make sense of what had happened to > their > >>> society during World War II. The foremost in my mind was Lewin. > Except I > >>> wonder if he would say the process of transformative action starts not > with > >>> emergence of quasi-needs, but our willingness and abilities to step > back > >>> from our quasi-needs and the ways that they drive us, often to > >>> dysfunctional behaviors that it ultimately destructive to both our > society > >>> and to us as individuals. How hard this is to do, we have to keep > going > >>> back again and again. The quasi-needs, tribalism, acceptance, > standing are > >>> always there. It is how they shape us that is critical. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> Michael > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> -----Original Message----- > >>> > >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto: > >>> xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole > >>> > >>> Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 8:31 PM > >>> > >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > >>> > >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> In following the perezhivanie thread I encountered the note I > re-membered. > >>> > >>> And interestingly mis-remembered. A translation into my focus on > >>> mediational means. He places the starting point of the process of > >>> transformative action at the emergence of quasi-needs (from Kurt > Lewin). > >>> > >>> That seems correct to me. The new mediational means emerge under > >>> environmental presses. Ever functionalist ego need a goal(!). (The > problem > >>> with functionalism) In David's words, > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> Perhaps the place we should look for "exaptations" that can save both > our > >>> personalities and our environment is not in our evolved needs, but in > yet > >>> to be designed quasi-needs. Artificial organs, after all, always > suggest > >>> new and ever more artificial functions, like chess and language. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> This point seems worth keeping in mind as we look at where this group > of > >>> critical scholars who work within the Learning Sciences disciplinary > >>> framework would like to lead us. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> mike > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > > > > > > From mcole@ucsd.edu Sun Jan 22 13:57:38 2017 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2017 13:57:38 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism In-Reply-To: References: <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C71964@CIO-KRC-D1MBX04.osuad.osu.edu> <1485073527094.7145@iped.uio.no> <5E5B95EA-374F-48EB-B308-BCE49DA52760@gmail.com> <1485113892233.91870@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: Helena - You asked about art for our times. This article in the NY Times has an interesting example. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/22/world/europe/undersea-museum-keeps-fish-feeding-and-its-social-commentary-biting.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=second-column-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0 mike On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 1:01 PM, mike cole wrote: > Helena et al -- > > An important emphasis in the article for me was on the fact that although > the article focused on the American nationalist movement that has just > pulled of an alt-right coup, similar movements are poised to take hold in a > lot of places in Europe to join the many already entrenched unsavory > governments in other parts of the world. > > The CRADLE center in Helsinki is under very concerted attack and the right > wing government appears, from this distance, to be making great progress on > destroying its legacy. The same process has been in Denmark for some time, > also with apparent success. > > What do our international colleagues who have already felt the hot breath > of right wing nationalism have to offer in terms of strategies of > resistence? > > Back to "what is to be done," that sombre question from an earlier era. > The answer last time did not produce what it promised. > > mike > > mike > > On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 12:22 PM, Helena Worthen > wrote: > >> Thank you, Alfredo - I gave it a read. >> >> Sure, of course they?re right. But I am very disappointed. >> >> I was hoping that the following was only item #1 in a long list of "what >> the 2016 election made apparent": >> >> The 2016 election has made apparent the need for scholarship that >> explicitly defends and furthers the rights and well-being of people of >> color, immigrants, Muslims, women, people who are differently abled, LGBTQ >> communities, and the earth. These are stances that have been limited, at >> least explicitly, in the Learning Sciences. >> >> But the call for inclusion was not just #1, it seems to be the whole >> thing. In other words, it?s all about identity ?plus the earth, of course. >> While inclusion is necessary, it?s not even a start. Yes, research, >> teaching, publishing, promotion, conferences ? everything associated with >> teaching and learning has to include everyone as equals (see Andy?s book) >> in one way or another ? but then what? What are they (we) supposed to do? >> Where does the pretty language touch the ground? >> >> I was listening to a broadcast of the Women?s March in DC on Saturday >> morning, and Kamala Harris, who was the California State Attorney General >> and is now a junior Senator from CA, was addressing the rally. She said, >> ?People always ask me to talk about women?s issues. I say, ?Oh, I?m SO glad >> you?re interested in economics!! Let?s talk about economics.? And she ran >> through a whole set of parallel back-and-forths, always pulling identity >> questions back to wages, jobs, earning, supporting your family, etc etc. >> >> Much as we need to wipe away any barriers to the Learning Sciences (and >> the professions and institutions dedicated to them) due to identity, until >> the Learning Sciences start taking a look at the place where most people >> spend most of their lives ? not school, I mean ? but work, they will be >> engaging in a soft conversation at the edge of the real issue. It?s a >> pleasant conversation but it doesn?t put a hand on the levers that >> translate skill and knowledge into rent and groceries. >> >> H >> >> >> Helena Worthen >> helenaworthen@gmail.com >> Berkeley, CA 94707 >> Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com >> >> >> >> > On Jan 22, 2017, at 11:38 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >> wrote: >> > >> > Here it is, >> > >> > http://cognitionandinstruction.com/engagements-the-learning- >> sciences-in-a-new-era-of-u-s-nationalism/ >> > >> > Alfredo >> > ________________________________________ >> > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> on behalf of Helena Worthen >> > Sent: 22 January 2017 20:24 >> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >> Nationalism >> > >> > Someone please re-send the link to this article? I think I?m going to >> want to read it and respond to Mike?s question. >> > >> > Thanks ? H >> > >> > >> > Helena Worthen >> > helenaworthen@gmail.com >> > Berkeley, CA 94707 >> > Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com >> > >> > >> > >> >> On Jan 22, 2017, at 12:25 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >> wrote: >> >> >> >> Mike, >> >> >> >> thanks a lot for sharing this article. You and Michael, who have and >> know more history, have spoken in terms of reminiscences. I have lived and >> know less, and the article feels like fresh air. During my PhD, I begun to >> increasingly feel that I had to due something to act and respond to the >> increasing ecological and humanitarian globe crises. But how could I do >> anything if I had children and a PhD to finalise?? What could I do that >> would also be doing my job as researcher in a department of education? It >> was very difficult to find anything, partly because almost every academic >> quest would focus on learning, but so little on social development. How >> many scientific articles are dedicated to socio-political questions in the >> most cited educational journals? I felt very powerless. >> >> >> >> To be able to address these questions within my expertise, is a >> challenge partly because contrary to Dewey's hope, educational research has >> only marginally focused on these questions, and yet they may be exactly the >> question that matter to education. What are we educating for? Indeed, what >> is education for? I think we face a serious problem when someone (like >> myself), being an educational researchers/scholar, still has to scratch her >> head wondering <> development?>> Vygotsky would be shocked! >> >> >> >> Alfredo >> >> >> >> >> >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> on behalf of mike cole >> >> Sent: 19 January 2017 04:51 >> >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >> Nationalism >> >> >> >> Yes Michael, >> >> >> >> It feels like the world of the later 1930's about the time I was born >> as >> >> that period came down to me through the prism of a family of "premature >> >> anti fascists." >> >> >> >> For a great re-creation of those times see the highly ambivalent film >> by >> >> Frank Capra, "meet John Doe." It has American big capital >> interconnected >> >> with fascism combined with populist collectivism in a manner that >> points at >> >> the media (as then experienced) as the bad guys in disguise. Happy >> Ending, >> >> Beethoven Ode to Joy and all. >> >> >> >> It's come round again, nastier this time. >> >> >> >> Mike >> >> On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 6:20 PM Glassman, Michael > > >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >>> Mike >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> It was so interesting to read this note after reading the Cognition >> and >> >>> Instruction essay. All the way through it I kept thinking we have >> been >> >>> here before. It reminded me of the scholars, especially those who had >> >>> escaped from Germany, trying to make sense of what had happened to >> their >> >>> society during World War II. The foremost in my mind was Lewin. >> Except I >> >>> wonder if he would say the process of transformative action starts >> not with >> >>> emergence of quasi-needs, but our willingness and abilities to step >> back >> >>> from our quasi-needs and the ways that they drive us, often to >> >>> dysfunctional behaviors that it ultimately destructive to both our >> society >> >>> and to us as individuals. How hard this is to do, we have to keep >> going >> >>> back again and again. The quasi-needs, tribalism, acceptance, >> standing are >> >>> always there. It is how they shape us that is critical. >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> Michael >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> -----Original Message----- >> >>> >> >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto: >> >>> xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole >> >>> >> >>> Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 8:31 PM >> >>> >> >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> >>> >> >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> In following the perezhivanie thread I encountered the note I >> re-membered. >> >>> >> >>> And interestingly mis-remembered. A translation into my focus on >> >>> mediational means. He places the starting point of the process of >> >>> transformative action at the emergence of quasi-needs (from Kurt >> Lewin). >> >>> >> >>> That seems correct to me. The new mediational means emerge under >> >>> environmental presses. Ever functionalist ego need a goal(!). (The >> problem >> >>> with functionalism) In David's words, >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> Perhaps the place we should look for "exaptations" that can save both >> our >> >>> personalities and our environment is not in our evolved needs, but in >> yet >> >>> to be designed quasi-needs. Artificial organs, after all, always >> suggest >> >>> new and ever more artificial functions, like chess and language. >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> This point seems worth keeping in mind as we look at where this group >> of >> >>> critical scholars who work within the Learning Sciences disciplinary >> >>> framework would like to lead us. >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> mike >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> > >> > >> >> > From mcole@ucsd.edu Sun Jan 22 14:04:24 2017 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2017 14:04:24 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism In-Reply-To: References: <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C71964@CIO-KRC-D1MBX04.osuad.osu.edu> <1485073527094.7145@iped.uio.no> <5E5B95EA-374F-48EB-B308-BCE49DA52760@gmail.com> <1485113892233.91870@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: Larry - Your noticings about the deletion of the past and a rhetoric of looking to the future is echoed in this review of a Chinese historian writing about the cultural revolution. David K will doubtless be able to provide a more informed account, but "the struggle of memory over forgetting" seems evident here. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/21/world/asia/china-historian-yang-jisheng-book-mao.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fbooks&action=click&contentCollection=books®ion=stream&module=stream_unit&version=latest&contentPlacement=1&pgtype=sectionfront mike On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 1:57 PM, mike cole wrote: > Helena - You asked about art for our times. This article in the NY Times > has an interesting example. > > https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/22/world/europe/undersea- > museum-keeps-fish-feeding-and-its-social-commentary-biting. > html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story- > heading&module=second-column-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0 > > mike > > > > On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 1:01 PM, mike cole wrote: > >> Helena et al -- >> >> An important emphasis in the article for me was on the fact that although >> the article focused on the American nationalist movement that has just >> pulled of an alt-right coup, similar movements are poised to take hold in a >> lot of places in Europe to join the many already entrenched unsavory >> governments in other parts of the world. >> >> The CRADLE center in Helsinki is under very concerted attack and the >> right wing government appears, from this distance, to be making great >> progress on destroying its legacy. The same process has been in Denmark for >> some time, also with apparent success. >> >> What do our international colleagues who have already felt the hot breath >> of right wing nationalism have to offer in terms of strategies of >> resistence? >> >> Back to "what is to be done," that sombre question from an earlier era. >> The answer last time did not produce what it promised. >> >> mike >> >> mike >> >> On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 12:22 PM, Helena Worthen > > wrote: >> >>> Thank you, Alfredo - I gave it a read. >>> >>> Sure, of course they?re right. But I am very disappointed. >>> >>> I was hoping that the following was only item #1 in a long list of "what >>> the 2016 election made apparent": >>> >>> The 2016 election has made apparent the need for scholarship that >>> explicitly defends and furthers the rights and well-being of people of >>> color, immigrants, Muslims, women, people who are differently abled, LGBTQ >>> communities, and the earth. These are stances that have been limited, at >>> least explicitly, in the Learning Sciences. >>> >>> But the call for inclusion was not just #1, it seems to be the whole >>> thing. In other words, it?s all about identity ?plus the earth, of course. >>> While inclusion is necessary, it?s not even a start. Yes, research, >>> teaching, publishing, promotion, conferences ? everything associated with >>> teaching and learning has to include everyone as equals (see Andy?s book) >>> in one way or another ? but then what? What are they (we) supposed to do? >>> Where does the pretty language touch the ground? >>> >>> I was listening to a broadcast of the Women?s March in DC on Saturday >>> morning, and Kamala Harris, who was the California State Attorney General >>> and is now a junior Senator from CA, was addressing the rally. She said, >>> ?People always ask me to talk about women?s issues. I say, ?Oh, I?m SO glad >>> you?re interested in economics!! Let?s talk about economics.? And she ran >>> through a whole set of parallel back-and-forths, always pulling identity >>> questions back to wages, jobs, earning, supporting your family, etc etc. >>> >>> Much as we need to wipe away any barriers to the Learning Sciences (and >>> the professions and institutions dedicated to them) due to identity, until >>> the Learning Sciences start taking a look at the place where most people >>> spend most of their lives ? not school, I mean ? but work, they will be >>> engaging in a soft conversation at the edge of the real issue. It?s a >>> pleasant conversation but it doesn?t put a hand on the levers that >>> translate skill and knowledge into rent and groceries. >>> >>> H >>> >>> >>> Helena Worthen >>> helenaworthen@gmail.com >>> Berkeley, CA 94707 >>> Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com >>> >>> >>> >>> > On Jan 22, 2017, at 11:38 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >>> wrote: >>> > >>> > Here it is, >>> > >>> > http://cognitionandinstruction.com/engagements-the-learning- >>> sciences-in-a-new-era-of-u-s-nationalism/ >>> > >>> > Alfredo >>> > ________________________________________ >>> > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>> on behalf of Helena Worthen >>> > Sent: 22 January 2017 20:24 >>> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >>> Nationalism >>> > >>> > Someone please re-send the link to this article? I think I?m going to >>> want to read it and respond to Mike?s question. >>> > >>> > Thanks ? H >>> > >>> > >>> > Helena Worthen >>> > helenaworthen@gmail.com >>> > Berkeley, CA 94707 >>> > Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> >> On Jan 22, 2017, at 12:25 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >>> wrote: >>> >> >>> >> Mike, >>> >> >>> >> thanks a lot for sharing this article. You and Michael, who have and >>> know more history, have spoken in terms of reminiscences. I have lived and >>> know less, and the article feels like fresh air. During my PhD, I begun to >>> increasingly feel that I had to due something to act and respond to the >>> increasing ecological and humanitarian globe crises. But how could I do >>> anything if I had children and a PhD to finalise?? What could I do that >>> would also be doing my job as researcher in a department of education? It >>> was very difficult to find anything, partly because almost every academic >>> quest would focus on learning, but so little on social development. How >>> many scientific articles are dedicated to socio-political questions in the >>> most cited educational journals? I felt very powerless. >>> >> >>> >> To be able to address these questions within my expertise, is a >>> challenge partly because contrary to Dewey's hope, educational research has >>> only marginally focused on these questions, and yet they may be exactly the >>> question that matter to education. What are we educating for? Indeed, what >>> is education for? I think we face a serious problem when someone (like >>> myself), being an educational researchers/scholar, still has to scratch her >>> head wondering <>> development?>> Vygotsky would be shocked! >>> >> >>> >> Alfredo >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> du> on behalf of mike cole >>> >> Sent: 19 January 2017 04:51 >>> >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>> >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >>> Nationalism >>> >> >>> >> Yes Michael, >>> >> >>> >> It feels like the world of the later 1930's about the time I was born >>> as >>> >> that period came down to me through the prism of a family of >>> "premature >>> >> anti fascists." >>> >> >>> >> For a great re-creation of those times see the highly ambivalent film >>> by >>> >> Frank Capra, "meet John Doe." It has American big capital >>> interconnected >>> >> with fascism combined with populist collectivism in a manner that >>> points at >>> >> the media (as then experienced) as the bad guys in disguise. Happy >>> Ending, >>> >> Beethoven Ode to Joy and all. >>> >> >>> >> It's come round again, nastier this time. >>> >> >>> >> Mike >>> >> On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 6:20 PM Glassman, Michael < >>> glassman.13@osu.edu> >>> >> wrote: >>> >> >>> >>> Mike >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> It was so interesting to read this note after reading the Cognition >>> and >>> >>> Instruction essay. All the way through it I kept thinking we have >>> been >>> >>> here before. It reminded me of the scholars, especially those who >>> had >>> >>> escaped from Germany, trying to make sense of what had happened to >>> their >>> >>> society during World War II. The foremost in my mind was Lewin. >>> Except I >>> >>> wonder if he would say the process of transformative action starts >>> not with >>> >>> emergence of quasi-needs, but our willingness and abilities to step >>> back >>> >>> from our quasi-needs and the ways that they drive us, often to >>> >>> dysfunctional behaviors that it ultimately destructive to both our >>> society >>> >>> and to us as individuals. How hard this is to do, we have to keep >>> going >>> >>> back again and again. The quasi-needs, tribalism, acceptance, >>> standing are >>> >>> always there. It is how they shape us that is critical. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Michael >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> >>> >>> >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto: >>> >>> xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole >>> >>> >>> >>> Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 8:31 PM >>> >>> >>> >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>> >>> >>> >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >>> Nationalism >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> In following the perezhivanie thread I encountered the note I >>> re-membered. >>> >>> >>> >>> And interestingly mis-remembered. A translation into my focus on >>> >>> mediational means. He places the starting point of the process of >>> >>> transformative action at the emergence of quasi-needs (from Kurt >>> Lewin). >>> >>> >>> >>> That seems correct to me. The new mediational means emerge under >>> >>> environmental presses. Ever functionalist ego need a goal(!). (The >>> problem >>> >>> with functionalism) In David's words, >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Perhaps the place we should look for "exaptations" that can save >>> both our >>> >>> personalities and our environment is not in our evolved needs, but >>> in yet >>> >>> to be designed quasi-needs. Artificial organs, after all, always >>> suggest >>> >>> new and ever more artificial functions, like chess and language. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> This point seems worth keeping in mind as we look at where this >>> group of >>> >>> critical scholars who work within the Learning Sciences disciplinary >>> >>> framework would like to lead us. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> mike >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> > >>> > >>> >>> >> > From mpacker@uniandes.edu.co Sun Jan 22 14:52:55 2017 From: mpacker@uniandes.edu.co (Martin John Packer) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2017 22:52:55 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism In-Reply-To: References: <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C71964@CIO-KRC-D1MBX04.osuad.osu.edu> <1485073527094.7145@iped.uio.no> <5E5B95EA-374F-48EB-B308-BCE49DA52760@gmail.com> <1485113892233.91870@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <149FB274-70A4-439C-9CC9-C1012D787D09@uniandes.edu.co> There are so many places where schooling connects with globalization, as you know Helena, that the list of things to do ? and things on which to conduct research ? seems to me to be long. On Jan 22, 2017, at 3:22 PM, Helena Worthen > wrote: But the call for inclusion was not just #1, it seems to be the whole thing. In other words, it?s all about identity ?plus the earth, of course. While inclusion is necessary, it?s not even a start. Yes, research, teaching, publishing, promotion, conferences ? everything associated with teaching and learning has to include everyone as equals (see Andy?s book) in one way or another ? but then what? What are they (we) supposed to do? Where does the pretty language touch the ground? From lpscholar2@gmail.com Sun Jan 22 14:55:44 2017 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2017 14:55:44 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism In-Reply-To: References: <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C71964@CIO-KRC-D1MBX04.osuad.osu.edu> <1485073527094.7145@iped.uio.no> <5E5B95EA-374F-48EB-B308-BCE49DA52760@gmail.com> <1485113892233.91870@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <5885389b.0edf620a.6a0c5.39d9@mx.google.com> Mike, I remember watching documentary narratives that capture the mobility of workers who arrive in Europe from homelands for employment, but every year return home to places where they continue to gather around fires to share memories. I was struck by the power of this need. Their way of not forgetting. This n?cessity of memory and not forgetting is a powerful force. Making this need for memory explicit seems deeply relevant and generative. Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: mike cole Sent: January 22, 2017 2:07 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Cc: Mariane Hedegaard; Reijo Miettinen; Seth Chaiklin Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism Larry - Your noticings about the deletion of the past and a rhetoric of looking to the future is echoed in this review of a Chinese historian writing about the cultural revolution. David K will doubtless be able to provide a more informed account, but "the struggle of memory over forgetting" seems evident here. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/21/world/asia/china-historian-yang-jisheng-book-mao.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fbooks&action=click&contentCollection=books®ion=stream&module=stream_unit&version=latest&contentPlacement=1&pgtype=sectionfront mike On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 1:57 PM, mike cole wrote: > Helena - You asked about art for our times. This article in the NY Times > has an interesting example. > > https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/22/world/europe/undersea- > museum-keeps-fish-feeding-and-its-social-commentary-biting. > html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story- > heading&module=second-column-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0 > > mike > > > > On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 1:01 PM, mike cole wrote: > >> Helena et al -- >> >> An important emphasis in the article for me was on the fact that although >> the article focused on the American nationalist movement that has just >> pulled of an alt-right coup, similar movements are poised to take hold in a >> lot of places in Europe to join the many already entrenched unsavory >> governments in other parts of the world. >> >> The CRADLE center in Helsinki is under very concerted attack and the >> right wing government appears, from this distance, to be making great >> progress on destroying its legacy. The same process has been in Denmark for >> some time, also with apparent success. >> >> What do our international colleagues who have already felt the hot breath >> of right wing nationalism have to offer in terms of strategies of >> resistence? >> >> Back to "what is to be done," that sombre question from an earlier era. >> The answer last time did not produce what it promised. >> >> mike >> >> mike >> >> On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 12:22 PM, Helena Worthen > > wrote: >> >>> Thank you, Alfredo - I gave it a read. >>> >>> Sure, of course they?re right. But I am very disappointed. >>> >>> I was hoping that the following was only item #1 in a long list of "what >>> the 2016 election made apparent": >>> >>> The 2016 election has made apparent the need for scholarship that >>> explicitly defends and furthers the rights and well-being of people of >>> color, immigrants, Muslims, women, people who are differently abled, LGBTQ >>> communities, and the earth. These are stances that have been limited, at >>> least explicitly, in the Learning Sciences. >>> >>> But the call for inclusion was not just #1, it seems to be the whole >>> thing. In other words, it?s all about identity ?plus the earth, of course. >>> While inclusion is necessary, it?s not even a start. Yes, research, >>> teaching, publishing, promotion, conferences ? everything associated with >>> teaching and learning has to include everyone as equals (see Andy?s book) >>> in one way or another ? but then what? What are they (we) supposed to do? >>> Where does the pretty language touch the ground? >>> >>> I was listening to a broadcast of the Women?s March in DC on Saturday >>> morning, and Kamala Harris, who was the California State Attorney General >>> and is now a junior Senator from CA, was addressing the rally. She said, >>> ?People always ask me to talk about women?s issues. I say, ?Oh, I?m SO glad >>> you?re interested in economics!! Let?s talk about economics.? And she ran >>> through a whole set of parallel back-and-forths, always pulling identity >>> questions back to wages, jobs, earning, supporting your family, etc etc. >>> >>> Much as we need to wipe away any barriers to the Learning Sciences (and >>> the professions and institutions dedicated to them) due to identity, until >>> the Learning Sciences start taking a look at the place where most people >>> spend most of their lives ? not school, I mean ? but work, they will be >>> engaging in a soft conversation at the edge of the real issue. It?s a >>> pleasant conversation but it doesn?t put a hand on the levers that >>> translate skill and knowledge into rent and groceries. >>> >>> H >>> >>> >>> Helena Worthen >>> helenaworthen@gmail.com >>> Berkeley, CA 94707 >>> Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com >>> >>> >>> >>> > On Jan 22, 2017, at 11:38 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >>> wrote: >>> > >>> > Here it is, >>> > >>> > http://cognitionandinstruction.com/engagements-the-learning- >>> sciences-in-a-new-era-of-u-s-nationalism/ >>> > >>> > Alfredo >>> > ________________________________________ >>> > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>> on behalf of Helena Worthen >>> > Sent: 22 January 2017 20:24 >>> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >>> Nationalism >>> > >>> > Someone please re-send the link to this article? I think I?m going to >>> want to read it and respond to Mike?s question. >>> > >>> > Thanks ? H >>> > >>> > >>> > Helena Worthen >>> > helenaworthen@gmail.com >>> > Berkeley, CA 94707 >>> > Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> >> On Jan 22, 2017, at 12:25 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >>> wrote: >>> >> >>> >> Mike, >>> >> >>> >> thanks a lot for sharing this article. You and Michael, who have and >>> know more history, have spoken in terms of reminiscences. I have lived and >>> know less, and the article feels like fresh air. During my PhD, I begun to >>> increasingly feel that I had to due something to act and respond to the >>> increasing ecological and humanitarian globe crises. But how could I do >>> anything if I had children and a PhD to finalise?? What could I do that >>> would also be doing my job as researcher in a department of education? It >>> was very difficult to find anything, partly because almost every academic >>> quest would focus on learning, but so little on social development. How >>> many scientific articles are dedicated to socio-political questions in the >>> most cited educational journals? I felt very powerless. >>> >> >>> >> To be able to address these questions within my expertise, is a >>> challenge partly because contrary to Dewey's hope, educational research has >>> only marginally focused on these questions, and yet they may be exactly the >>> question that matter to education. What are we educating for? Indeed, what >>> is education for? I think we face a serious problem when someone (like >>> myself), being an educational researchers/scholar, still has to scratch her >>> head wondering <>> development?>> Vygotsky would be shocked! >>> >> >>> >> Alfredo >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> du> on behalf of mike cole >>> >> Sent: 19 January 2017 04:51 >>> >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>> >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >>> Nationalism >>> >> >>> >> Yes Michael, >>> >> >>> >> It feels like the world of the later 1930's about the time I was born >>> as >>> >> that period came down to me through the prism of a family of >>> "premature >>> >> anti fascists." >>> >> >>> >> For a great re-creation of those times see the highly ambivalent film >>> by >>> >> Frank Capra, "meet John Doe." It has American big capital >>> interconnected >>> >> with fascism combined with populist collectivism in a manner that >>> points at >>> >> the media (as then experienced) as the bad guys in disguise. Happy >>> Ending, >>> >> Beethoven Ode to Joy and all. >>> >> >>> >> It's come round again, nastier this time. >>> >> >>> >> Mike >>> >> On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 6:20 PM Glassman, Michael < >>> glassman.13@osu.edu> >>> >> wrote: >>> >> >>> >>> Mike >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> It was so interesting to read this note after reading the Cognition >>> and >>> >>> Instruction essay. All the way through it I kept thinking we have >>> been >>> >>> here before. It reminded me of the scholars, especially those who >>> had >>> >>> escaped from Germany, trying to make sense of what had happened to >>> their >>> >>> society during World War II. The foremost in my mind was Lewin. >>> Except I >>> >>> wonder if he would say the process of transformative action starts >>> not with >>> >>> emergence of quasi-needs, but our willingness and abilities to step >>> back >>> >>> from our quasi-needs and the ways that they drive us, often to >>> >>> dysfunctional behaviors that it ultimately destructive to both our >>> society >>> >>> and to us as individuals. How hard this is to do, we have to keep >>> going >>> >>> back again and again. The quasi-needs, tribalism, acceptance, >>> standing are >>> >>> always there. It is how they shape us that is critical. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Michael >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> >>> >>> >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto: >>> >>> xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole >>> >>> >>> >>> Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 8:31 PM >>> >>> >>> >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>> >>> >>> >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >>> Nationalism >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> In following the perezhivanie thread I encountered the note I >>> re-membered. >>> >>> >>> >>> And interestingly mis-remembered. A translation into my focus on >>> >>> mediational means. He places the starting point of the process of >>> >>> transformative action at the emergence of quasi-needs (from Kurt >>> Lewin). >>> >>> >>> >>> That seems correct to me. The new mediational means emerge under >>> >>> environmental presses. Ever functionalist ego need a goal(!). (The >>> problem >>> >>> with functionalism) In David's words, >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Perhaps the place we should look for "exaptations" that can save >>> both our >>> >>> personalities and our environment is not in our evolved needs, but >>> in yet >>> >>> to be designed quasi-needs. Artificial organs, after all, always >>> suggest >>> >>> new and ever more artificial functions, like chess and language. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> This point seems worth keeping in mind as we look at where this >>> group of >>> >>> critical scholars who work within the Learning Sciences disciplinary >>> >>> framework would like to lead us. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> mike >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> > >>> > >>> >>> >> > From s.davis@cqu.edu.au Sun Jan 22 15:47:17 2017 From: s.davis@cqu.edu.au (Susan Davis) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2017 23:47:17 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: <1485070853888.71427@iped.uio.no> References: <1485031482970.89461@iped.uio.no> <58840b10.4319620a.49c0c.033a@mx.google.com> <0A8D9897-86CD-4674-A823-FB75571AE830@gmail.com> <6F36B192-D012-4CE8-A68F-9DABFBC15BFA@gmail.com> <1485070853888.71427@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: Thank you Alfredo for summarising some of the discussion and propositions thus far about Trump?s speech & rise and perezhivanie! In relation to the lived experience of those who may be Trump supporters or from the areas that voted for him, here is an interesting article I read this morning that might be worth adding to the list of materials. https://nyti.ms/2kdeQlg And also another page of protest signs:http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2017/01/21/the_best_protest_sign s_from_the_women_s_march_on_washington.html? As for various ways to research and respond going forward,could I add a few more thoughts about this. M any people are living through experiences and are feeling emotions very deeply, they are also expressing ideas that may be deeply held and felt. The phenomenon we are watching and experiencing is individual and personal, but it is also highly collective, participatory and mediated. I think the phenomenon of various social media and global communications means there is interesting work to be done in exploring ?collective? and ?cultural? perezhivanie. Experience is being documented through artefacts and shared within local and global communities with ?meanings? are being made and re-made as we speak (e.g. Trump and his media spokesperson?s ?truth? of the numbers attending the inauguration). Over time there are usually certain cultural narratives that may achieve a kind of ?stability? in the greater scheme of things (while acknowledging these are often contested and incomplete, you can still generally identify such narratives when you look back at ?key incidents? and times in history). Some of us, most notably Andy have found that in considering the notion of perezhivanie that it has also been helpful to draw upon Dewey?s work of having ?an experience?. This also draws attention to the notion of struggle, reflection, consummation, completion and transformation through form (in Dewey?s Art as experience ? this was expressed then through various art forms). So how can we work with this? Cultural-historical discussions around perezhivanie highlight that this concept is not just having an ?emotional experience?, but is also a unit of analysis which takes into account subjective and environmental factors (?constitutional characteristics? and the ?social situation of development?) that contribute to meaning making and learning. There is also recognition of the interrelation of affective and cognitive domains, and the re-living of experience (and remaking through art and expressive forms) and relationship to meaning making ? So what could be analysed might include individual and collective units of ?experience?, the various factors and the various means (tools, processes, signs) that are using to mediate and then meaning make around those experiences. In the longer term it may be worth tracking that meaning making and sense of significance or not that emerges, both in the dominant narratives (e.g. via various news sources online), but also for people in smaller groups (communities) and at the individual level. It could be that people investigate their own perezhivanie, or those of groups and collectives including the online communities. What sense people make of these and what action is taken from here is going to be worth watching, documenting and analysing. The strength of these experiences (e.g. the ?high? of being part of a collective taking to the streets) may be significant but fleeting, and still to be processed and revisited in order to determine if there are implications for future action. Does the experience mean enough for people to do something else next ? that is an interesting question. and communications, the re-living and re-storying that is and will occur, the various media and tools that have been generated and how they are being interpreted and re-mediated etc etc? there is certainly a lot of scope for individual and shared endeavours I would think! Kind regards Sue On 22/01/2017 5:40 pm, "xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil" wrote: >Thank you all for following up on the Trump's speech suggestion. >Helena, the way you have re-phrased my proposal is exactly they way I had >hoped it to be heard. I think Andy, Helena, Sue, Greg and Larry have >offered empirical materials for and analyses of the type we would be >producing if we were to follow the proposal. Thanks Greg for the >reference, which seems right to the point, and Sue for the glimpse to >people's best protest signs (they are good empirical materials for sure). >Thanks Andy, too, offering your body and soul to scientific progress and >undergoing the inaugural speech again. The way you describe it is very >close to how I thought and felt yesterday. >My family and friends today joined the march here in Victoria, and, like >Helena mentions, we all commented on how well it felt. There was a very >cheerful, friendly atmosphere, and lots of affection. I too felt better >today. > >In case we wanted to go forward with this project, I have created a >google doc in which I am collecting the resources, empirical cases, and >analyses that we have begun producing. I have also added additional links >(like one to the "Bikers for Trump" site, and the full transcript of the >inaugural speech plus a link from the Washington Post. > >The document should be accessible to everyone who follow this link: >https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Nmn77hKa8XhDJ043ZfVuTUtT7NxDAibuzdv0KJ >DGqCo/edit?usp=sharing >I guess the easiest way is that I curate it, populating it with content >shared in xmca, but everyone is able and welcome to edit. >Alfredo > > > > > >________________________________________ >From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >on behalf of Helena Worthen >Sent: 22 January 2017 06:54 >To: ablunden@mira.net; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie > >OK, got it. > >H > >Helena Worthen >helenaworthen@gmail.com >Berkeley, CA 94707 >Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com > > > >> On Jan 21, 2017, at 9:29 PM, Andy Blunden wrote: >> >> No, Helena, the *environment* is the same, but each are in a different >>*social situation of development*, thus the different perezhivanie. >> >> Andy >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------ >> Andy Blunden >> http://home.mira.net/~andy >> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making >> On 22/01/2017 3:48 PM, Helena Worthen wrote: >>> ... The social situation ? like the alcoholic mother in the case with >>>the three children each with a different perezvhanie - is the same for >>>both people who are listening to the speech, but the people (like the >>>children) respond differently. >>> >>> >> > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: default.xml Type: application/xml Size: 3222 bytes Desc: default.xml Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20170122/440c0925/attachment.rdf From ablunden@mira.net Sun Jan 22 18:39:20 2017 From: ablunden@mira.net (Andy Blunden) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2017 13:39:20 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism In-Reply-To: References: <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C71964@CIO-KRC-D1MBX04.osuad.osu.edu> <1485073527094.7145@iped.uio.no> <5E5B95EA-374F-48EB-B308-BCE49DA52760@gmail.com> <1485113892233.91870@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: One paragraph from the article on Learning Sciences and US Nationalism: Our scholarship has the potential to be a form of transformative resistance against the most significant political threats to our democracy today by explicitly defending and furthering the rights and well-being of people of color, immigrants, Muslims, women, people who are differently abled, LGBTQ communities, and the earth. So I take this to mean that the authors think that the fact that inequality has reached a point where 2 individuals own as much wealth as the poorest 50% of the world's population and 26 individuals own half of the world's wealth is a non-issue. That the de-industrialisation of US cities is a matter of no importance. To use one of the catchphrases of the election, they are "doubling down" on the claim that inequality is a matter of cultural prejudice and if only we were all much more careful in our use of language and showed respect for cultural differences, then we can safely leave the world in the hands of Walmart and Exxon. Andy ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making On 23/01/2017 8:01 AM, mike cole wrote: > Helena et al -- > > An important emphasis in the article for me was on the fact that although > the article focused on the American nationalist movement that has just > pulled of an alt-right coup, similar movements are poised to take hold in a > lot of places in Europe to join the many already entrenched unsavory > governments in other parts of the world. > > The CRADLE center in Helsinki is under very concerted attack and the right > wing government appears, from this distance, to be making great progress on > destroying its legacy. The same process has been in Denmark for some time, > also with apparent success. > > What do our international colleagues who have already felt the hot breath > of right wing nationalism have to offer in terms of strategies of > resistence? > > Back to "what is to be done," that sombre question from an earlier era. The > answer last time did not produce what it promised. > > mike > > mike > > On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 12:22 PM, Helena Worthen > wrote: > >> Thank you, Alfredo - I gave it a read. >> >> Sure, of course they?re right. But I am very disappointed. >> >> I was hoping that the following was only item #1 in a long list of "what >> the 2016 election made apparent": >> >> The 2016 election has made apparent the need for scholarship that >> explicitly defends and furthers the rights and well-being of people of >> color, immigrants, Muslims, women, people who are differently abled, LGBTQ >> communities, and the earth. These are stances that have been limited, at >> least explicitly, in the Learning Sciences. >> >> But the call for inclusion was not just #1, it seems to be the whole >> thing. In other words, it?s all about identity ?plus the earth, of course. >> While inclusion is necessary, it?s not even a start. Yes, research, >> teaching, publishing, promotion, conferences ? everything associated with >> teaching and learning has to include everyone as equals (see Andy?s book) >> in one way or another ? but then what? What are they (we) supposed to do? >> Where does the pretty language touch the ground? >> >> I was listening to a broadcast of the Women?s March in DC on Saturday >> morning, and Kamala Harris, who was the California State Attorney General >> and is now a junior Senator from CA, was addressing the rally. She said, >> ?People always ask me to talk about women?s issues. I say, ?Oh, I?m SO glad >> you?re interested in economics!! Let?s talk about economics.? And she ran >> through a whole set of parallel back-and-forths, always pulling identity >> questions back to wages, jobs, earning, supporting your family, etc etc. >> >> Much as we need to wipe away any barriers to the Learning Sciences (and >> the professions and institutions dedicated to them) due to identity, until >> the Learning Sciences start taking a look at the place where most people >> spend most of their lives ? not school, I mean ? but work, they will be >> engaging in a soft conversation at the edge of the real issue. It?s a >> pleasant conversation but it doesn?t put a hand on the levers that >> translate skill and knowledge into rent and groceries. >> >> H >> >> >> Helena Worthen >> helenaworthen@gmail.com >> Berkeley, CA 94707 >> Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com >> >> >> >>> On Jan 22, 2017, at 11:38 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >> wrote: >>> Here it is, >>> >>> http://cognitionandinstruction.com/engagements-the-learning- >> sciences-in-a-new-era-of-u-s-nationalism/ >>> Alfredo >>> ________________________________________ >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> on behalf of Helena Worthen >>> Sent: 22 January 2017 20:24 >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >> Nationalism >>> Someone please re-send the link to this article? I think I?m going to >> want to read it and respond to Mike?s question. >>> Thanks ? H >>> >>> >>> Helena Worthen >>> helenaworthen@gmail.com >>> Berkeley, CA 94707 >>> Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com >>> >>> >>> >>>> On Jan 22, 2017, at 12:25 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >> wrote: >>>> Mike, >>>> >>>> thanks a lot for sharing this article. You and Michael, who have and >> know more history, have spoken in terms of reminiscences. I have lived and >> know less, and the article feels like fresh air. During my PhD, I begun to >> increasingly feel that I had to due something to act and respond to the >> increasing ecological and humanitarian globe crises. But how could I do >> anything if I had children and a PhD to finalise?? What could I do that >> would also be doing my job as researcher in a department of education? It >> was very difficult to find anything, partly because almost every academic >> quest would focus on learning, but so little on social development. How >> many scientific articles are dedicated to socio-political questions in the >> most cited educational journals? I felt very powerless. >>>> To be able to address these questions within my expertise, is a >> challenge partly because contrary to Dewey's hope, educational research has >> only marginally focused on these questions, and yet they may be exactly the >> question that matter to education. What are we educating for? Indeed, what >> is education for? I think we face a serious problem when someone (like >> myself), being an educational researchers/scholar, still has to scratch her >> head wondering <> development?>> Vygotsky would be shocked! >>>> Alfredo >>>> >>>> >>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> on behalf of mike cole >>>> Sent: 19 January 2017 04:51 >>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >> Nationalism >>>> Yes Michael, >>>> >>>> It feels like the world of the later 1930's about the time I was born as >>>> that period came down to me through the prism of a family of "premature >>>> anti fascists." >>>> >>>> For a great re-creation of those times see the highly ambivalent film by >>>> Frank Capra, "meet John Doe." It has American big capital interconnected >>>> with fascism combined with populist collectivism in a manner that >> points at >>>> the media (as then experienced) as the bad guys in disguise. Happy >> Ending, >>>> Beethoven Ode to Joy and all. >>>> >>>> It's come round again, nastier this time. >>>> >>>> Mike >>>> On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 6:20 PM Glassman, Michael >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Mike >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> It was so interesting to read this note after reading the Cognition and >>>>> Instruction essay. All the way through it I kept thinking we have been >>>>> here before. It reminded me of the scholars, especially those who had >>>>> escaped from Germany, trying to make sense of what had happened to >> their >>>>> society during World War II. The foremost in my mind was Lewin. >> Except I >>>>> wonder if he would say the process of transformative action starts not >> with >>>>> emergence of quasi-needs, but our willingness and abilities to step >> back >>>>> from our quasi-needs and the ways that they drive us, often to >>>>> dysfunctional behaviors that it ultimately destructive to both our >> society >>>>> and to us as individuals. How hard this is to do, we have to keep >> going >>>>> back again and again. The quasi-needs, tribalism, acceptance, >> standing are >>>>> always there. It is how they shape us that is critical. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Michael >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> >>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto: >>>>> xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole >>>>> >>>>> Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 8:31 PM >>>>> >>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>> >>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> In following the perezhivanie thread I encountered the note I >> re-membered. >>>>> And interestingly mis-remembered. A translation into my focus on >>>>> mediational means. He places the starting point of the process of >>>>> transformative action at the emergence of quasi-needs (from Kurt >> Lewin). >>>>> That seems correct to me. The new mediational means emerge under >>>>> environmental presses. Ever functionalist ego need a goal(!). (The >> problem >>>>> with functionalism) In David's words, >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Perhaps the place we should look for "exaptations" that can save both >> our >>>>> personalities and our environment is not in our evolved needs, but in >> yet >>>>> to be designed quasi-needs. Artificial organs, after all, always >> suggest >>>>> new and ever more artificial functions, like chess and language. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> This point seems worth keeping in mind as we look at where this group >> of >>>>> critical scholars who work within the Learning Sciences disciplinary >>>>> framework would like to lead us. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> mike >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>> >> > From lsmolucha@hotmail.com Sun Jan 22 19:32:49 2017 From: lsmolucha@hotmail.com (Larry Smolucha) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2017 03:32:49 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism In-Reply-To: References: <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C71964@CIO-KRC-D1MBX04.osuad.osu.edu> <1485073527094.7145@iped.uio.no> <5E5B95EA-374F-48EB-B308-BCE49DA52760@gmail.com> <1485113892233.91870@iped.uio.no> , Message-ID: Message from Francine Smolucha: The key to an analysis of the Trump movement is understanding the fundamental IRONIES that have rocked American politics. The workers revolution has resulted in the workers/unions deserting the Left, the socialists, the Democratic Party. Trump is a Capitalist regardless of whether he actually has a Republican ideology. The workers' movement has been hijacked by a capitalist. The other great IRONY is that Trump wants to make Russia a U.S. ally (again). The Left, the socialists, the Democratic Party are the ones demonizing Russia - what a reversal! Since CHAT derives from Russian psychology (Leontiev and Vygotsky) and the backlash against Trump is also a backlash against all things Russian - this puts CHAT in a particularly awkward position. How can a cultural historical psychology that originated in Russia become the leader in the anti-Trump discourse? or lead an anti-Trump educational movement? You are even extolling a Russian concept PEREZHIVANIE. I think the XMCA needs to examine its own perezhivanie at this time. ________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of mike cole Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 3:01 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Cc: Mariane Hedegaard; Reijo Miettinen; Seth Chaiklin Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism Helena et al -- An important emphasis in the article for me was on the fact that although the article focused on the American nationalist movement that has just pulled of an alt-right coup, similar movements are poised to take hold in a lot of places in Europe to join the many already entrenched unsavory governments in other parts of the world. The CRADLE center in Helsinki is under very concerted attack and the right wing government appears, from this distance, to be making great progress on destroying its legacy. The same process has been in Denmark for some time, also with apparent success. What do our international colleagues who have already felt the hot breath of right wing nationalism have to offer in terms of strategies of resistence? Back to "what is to be done," that sombre question from an earlier era. The answer last time did not produce what it promised. mike mike On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 12:22 PM, Helena Worthen wrote: > Thank you, Alfredo - I gave it a read. > > Sure, of course they?re right. But I am very disappointed. > > I was hoping that the following was only item #1 in a long list of "what > the 2016 election made apparent": > > The 2016 election has made apparent the need for scholarship that > explicitly defends and furthers the rights and well-being of people of > color, immigrants, Muslims, women, people who are differently abled, LGBTQ > communities, and the earth. These are stances that have been limited, at > least explicitly, in the Learning Sciences. > > But the call for inclusion was not just #1, it seems to be the whole > thing. In other words, it?s all about identity ?plus the earth, of course. > While inclusion is necessary, it?s not even a start. Yes, research, > teaching, publishing, promotion, conferences ? everything associated with > teaching and learning has to include everyone as equals (see Andy?s book) > in one way or another ? but then what? What are they (we) supposed to do? > Where does the pretty language touch the ground? > > I was listening to a broadcast of the Women?s March in DC on Saturday > morning, and Kamala Harris, who was the California State Attorney General > and is now a junior Senator from CA, was addressing the rally. She said, > ?People always ask me to talk about women?s issues. I say, ?Oh, I?m SO glad > you?re interested in economics!! Let?s talk about economics.? And she ran > through a whole set of parallel back-and-forths, always pulling identity > questions back to wages, jobs, earning, supporting your family, etc etc. > > Much as we need to wipe away any barriers to the Learning Sciences (and > the professions and institutions dedicated to them) due to identity, until > the Learning Sciences start taking a look at the place where most people > spend most of their lives ? not school, I mean ? but work, they will be > engaging in a soft conversation at the edge of the real issue. It?s a > pleasant conversation but it doesn?t put a hand on the levers that > translate skill and knowledge into rent and groceries. > > H > > > Helena Worthen > helenaworthen@gmail.com > Berkeley, CA 94707 > Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com > > > > > On Jan 22, 2017, at 11:38 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > wrote: > > > > Here it is, > > > > http://cognitionandinstruction.com/engagements-the-learning- > sciences-in-a-new-era-of-u-s-nationalism/ > > > > Alfredo > > ________________________________________ > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of Helena Worthen > > Sent: 22 January 2017 20:24 > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. > Nationalism > > > > Someone please re-send the link to this article? I think I?m going to > want to read it and respond to Mike?s question. > > > > Thanks ? H > > > > > > Helena Worthen > > helenaworthen@gmail.com > > Berkeley, CA 94707 > > Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com > > > > > > > >> On Jan 22, 2017, at 12:25 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > wrote: > >> > >> Mike, > >> > >> thanks a lot for sharing this article. You and Michael, who have and > know more history, have spoken in terms of reminiscences. I have lived and > know less, and the article feels like fresh air. During my PhD, I begun to > increasingly feel that I had to due something to act and respond to the > increasing ecological and humanitarian globe crises. But how could I do > anything if I had children and a PhD to finalise?? What could I do that > would also be doing my job as researcher in a department of education? It > was very difficult to find anything, partly because almost every academic > quest would focus on learning, but so little on social development. How > many scientific articles are dedicated to socio-political questions in the > most cited educational journals? I felt very powerless. > >> > >> To be able to address these questions within my expertise, is a > challenge partly because contrary to Dewey's hope, educational research has > only marginally focused on these questions, and yet they may be exactly the > question that matter to education. What are we educating for? Indeed, what > is education for? I think we face a serious problem when someone (like > myself), being an educational researchers/scholar, still has to scratch her > head wondering < development?>> Vygotsky would be shocked! > >> > >> Alfredo > >> > >> > >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of mike cole > >> Sent: 19 January 2017 04:51 > >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. > Nationalism > >> > >> Yes Michael, > >> > >> It feels like the world of the later 1930's about the time I was born as > >> that period came down to me through the prism of a family of "premature > >> anti fascists." > >> > >> For a great re-creation of those times see the highly ambivalent film by > >> Frank Capra, "meet John Doe." It has American big capital interconnected > >> with fascism combined with populist collectivism in a manner that > points at > >> the media (as then experienced) as the bad guys in disguise. Happy > Ending, > >> Beethoven Ode to Joy and all. > >> > >> It's come round again, nastier this time. > >> > >> Mike > >> On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 6:20 PM Glassman, Michael > >> wrote: > >> > >>> Mike > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> It was so interesting to read this note after reading the Cognition and > >>> Instruction essay. All the way through it I kept thinking we have been > >>> here before. It reminded me of the scholars, especially those who had > >>> escaped from Germany, trying to make sense of what had happened to > their > >>> society during World War II. The foremost in my mind was Lewin. > Except I > >>> wonder if he would say the process of transformative action starts not > with > >>> emergence of quasi-needs, but our willingness and abilities to step > back > >>> from our quasi-needs and the ways that they drive us, often to > >>> dysfunctional behaviors that it ultimately destructive to both our > society > >>> and to us as individuals. How hard this is to do, we have to keep > going > >>> back again and again. The quasi-needs, tribalism, acceptance, > standing are > >>> always there. It is how they shape us that is critical. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> Michael > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> -----Original Message----- > >>> > >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto: > >>> xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole > >>> > >>> Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 8:31 PM > >>> > >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > >>> > >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> In following the perezhivanie thread I encountered the note I > re-membered. > >>> > >>> And interestingly mis-remembered. A translation into my focus on > >>> mediational means. He places the starting point of the process of > >>> transformative action at the emergence of quasi-needs (from Kurt > Lewin). > >>> > >>> That seems correct to me. The new mediational means emerge under > >>> environmental presses. Ever functionalist ego need a goal(!). (The > problem > >>> with functionalism) In David's words, > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> Perhaps the place we should look for "exaptations" that can save both > our > >>> personalities and our environment is not in our evolved needs, but in > yet > >>> to be designed quasi-needs. Artificial organs, after all, always > suggest > >>> new and ever more artificial functions, like chess and language. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> This point seems worth keeping in mind as we look at where this group > of > >>> critical scholars who work within the Learning Sciences disciplinary > >>> framework would like to lead us. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> mike > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > > > > > > From ablunden@mira.net Sun Jan 22 19:37:00 2017 From: ablunden@mira.net (Andy Blunden) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2017 14:37:00 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism In-Reply-To: References: <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C71964@CIO-KRC-D1MBX04.osuad.osu.edu> <1485073527094.7145@iped.uio.no> <5E5B95EA-374F-48EB-B308-BCE49DA52760@gmail.com> <1485113892233.91870@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <2c9faf42-cb69-9860-4b9f-ea0f6f0ca307@mira.net> "Irony" - good word to introduce here Francine. ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making On 23/01/2017 2:32 PM, Larry Smolucha wrote: > Message from Francine Smolucha: > > > The key to an analysis of the Trump movement is understanding the > > fundamental IRONIES that have rocked American politics. > > > The workers revolution has resulted in the > > workers/unions deserting the Left, the socialists, the Democratic Party. > > Trump is a Capitalist regardless of whether he actually has a Republican ideology. > > The workers' movement has been hijacked by a capitalist. > > > The other great IRONY is that Trump wants to make Russia a U.S. ally (again). > > The Left, the socialists, the Democratic Party are the ones demonizing Russia - > > what a reversal! > > > Since CHAT derives from Russian psychology (Leontiev and Vygotsky) and the backlash against Trump is also a backlash against all things Russian - this puts CHAT in a particularly awkward position. How can a cultural historical psychology that originated in Russia become the leader in the anti-Trump discourse? or lead an anti-Trump educational movement? You are even extolling a Russian concept PEREZHIVANIE. > > > I think the XMCA needs to examine its own perezhivanie at this time. > > > > > ________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of mike cole > Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 3:01 PM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Cc: Mariane Hedegaard; Reijo Miettinen; Seth Chaiklin > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism > > Helena et al -- > > An important emphasis in the article for me was on the fact that although > the article focused on the American nationalist movement that has just > pulled of an alt-right coup, similar movements are poised to take hold in a > lot of places in Europe to join the many already entrenched unsavory > governments in other parts of the world. > > The CRADLE center in Helsinki is under very concerted attack and the right > wing government appears, from this distance, to be making great progress on > destroying its legacy. The same process has been in Denmark for some time, > also with apparent success. > > What do our international colleagues who have already felt the hot breath > of right wing nationalism have to offer in terms of strategies of > resistence? > > Back to "what is to be done," that sombre question from an earlier era. The > answer last time did not produce what it promised. > > mike > > mike > > On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 12:22 PM, Helena Worthen > wrote: > >> Thank you, Alfredo - I gave it a read. >> >> Sure, of course they?re right. But I am very disappointed. >> >> I was hoping that the following was only item #1 in a long list of "what >> the 2016 election made apparent": >> >> The 2016 election has made apparent the need for scholarship that >> explicitly defends and furthers the rights and well-being of people of >> color, immigrants, Muslims, women, people who are differently abled, LGBTQ >> communities, and the earth. These are stances that have been limited, at >> least explicitly, in the Learning Sciences. >> >> But the call for inclusion was not just #1, it seems to be the whole >> thing. In other words, it?s all about identity ?plus the earth, of course. >> While inclusion is necessary, it?s not even a start. Yes, research, >> teaching, publishing, promotion, conferences ? everything associated with >> teaching and learning has to include everyone as equals (see Andy?s book) >> in one way or another ? but then what? What are they (we) supposed to do? >> Where does the pretty language touch the ground? >> >> I was listening to a broadcast of the Women?s March in DC on Saturday >> morning, and Kamala Harris, who was the California State Attorney General >> and is now a junior Senator from CA, was addressing the rally. She said, >> ?People always ask me to talk about women?s issues. I say, ?Oh, I?m SO glad >> you?re interested in economics!! Let?s talk about economics.? And she ran >> through a whole set of parallel back-and-forths, always pulling identity >> questions back to wages, jobs, earning, supporting your family, etc etc. >> >> Much as we need to wipe away any barriers to the Learning Sciences (and >> the professions and institutions dedicated to them) due to identity, until >> the Learning Sciences start taking a look at the place where most people >> spend most of their lives ? not school, I mean ? but work, they will be >> engaging in a soft conversation at the edge of the real issue. It?s a >> pleasant conversation but it doesn?t put a hand on the levers that >> translate skill and knowledge into rent and groceries. >> >> H >> >> >> Helena Worthen >> helenaworthen@gmail.com >> Berkeley, CA 94707 >> Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com >> >> >> >>> On Jan 22, 2017, at 11:38 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >> wrote: >>> Here it is, >>> >>> http://cognitionandinstruction.com/engagements-the-learning- >> sciences-in-a-new-era-of-u-s-nationalism/ >>> Alfredo >>> ________________________________________ >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> on behalf of Helena Worthen >>> Sent: 22 January 2017 20:24 >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >> Nationalism >>> Someone please re-send the link to this article? I think I?m going to >> want to read it and respond to Mike?s question. >>> Thanks ? H >>> >>> >>> Helena Worthen >>> helenaworthen@gmail.com >>> Berkeley, CA 94707 >>> Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com >>> >>> >>> >>>> On Jan 22, 2017, at 12:25 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >> wrote: >>>> Mike, >>>> >>>> thanks a lot for sharing this article. You and Michael, who have and >> know more history, have spoken in terms of reminiscences. I have lived and >> know less, and the article feels like fresh air. During my PhD, I begun to >> increasingly feel that I had to due something to act and respond to the >> increasing ecological and humanitarian globe crises. But how could I do >> anything if I had children and a PhD to finalise?? What could I do that >> would also be doing my job as researcher in a department of education? It >> was very difficult to find anything, partly because almost every academic >> quest would focus on learning, but so little on social development. How >> many scientific articles are dedicated to socio-political questions in the >> most cited educational journals? I felt very powerless. >>>> To be able to address these questions within my expertise, is a >> challenge partly because contrary to Dewey's hope, educational research has >> only marginally focused on these questions, and yet they may be exactly the >> question that matter to education. What are we educating for? Indeed, what >> is education for? I think we face a serious problem when someone (like >> myself), being an educational researchers/scholar, still has to scratch her >> head wondering <> development?>> Vygotsky would be shocked! >>>> Alfredo >>>> >>>> >>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> on behalf of mike cole >>>> Sent: 19 January 2017 04:51 >>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >> Nationalism >>>> Yes Michael, >>>> >>>> It feels like the world of the later 1930's about the time I was born as >>>> that period came down to me through the prism of a family of "premature >>>> anti fascists." >>>> >>>> For a great re-creation of those times see the highly ambivalent film by >>>> Frank Capra, "meet John Doe." It has American big capital interconnected >>>> with fascism combined with populist collectivism in a manner that >> points at >>>> the media (as then experienced) as the bad guys in disguise. Happy >> Ending, >>>> Beethoven Ode to Joy and all. >>>> >>>> It's come round again, nastier this time. >>>> >>>> Mike >>>> On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 6:20 PM Glassman, Michael >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Mike >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> It was so interesting to read this note after reading the Cognition and >>>>> Instruction essay. All the way through it I kept thinking we have been >>>>> here before. It reminded me of the scholars, especially those who had >>>>> escaped from Germany, trying to make sense of what had happened to >> their >>>>> society during World War II. The foremost in my mind was Lewin. >> Except I >>>>> wonder if he would say the process of transformative action starts not >> with >>>>> emergence of quasi-needs, but our willingness and abilities to step >> back >>>>> from our quasi-needs and the ways that they drive us, often to >>>>> dysfunctional behaviors that it ultimately destructive to both our >> society >>>>> and to us as individuals. How hard this is to do, we have to keep >> going >>>>> back again and again. The quasi-needs, tribalism, acceptance, >> standing are >>>>> always there. It is how they shape us that is critical. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Michael >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> >>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto: >>>>> xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole >>>>> >>>>> Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 8:31 PM >>>>> >>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>> >>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> In following the perezhivanie thread I encountered the note I >> re-membered. >>>>> And interestingly mis-remembered. A translation into my focus on >>>>> mediational means. He places the starting point of the process of >>>>> transformative action at the emergence of quasi-needs (from Kurt >> Lewin). >>>>> That seems correct to me. The new mediational means emerge under >>>>> environmental presses. Ever functionalist ego need a goal(!). (The >> problem >>>>> with functionalism) In David's words, >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Perhaps the place we should look for "exaptations" that can save both >> our >>>>> personalities and our environment is not in our evolved needs, but in >> yet >>>>> to be designed quasi-needs. Artificial organs, after all, always >> suggest >>>>> new and ever more artificial functions, like chess and language. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> This point seems worth keeping in mind as we look at where this group >> of >>>>> critical scholars who work within the Learning Sciences disciplinary >>>>> framework would like to lead us. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> mike >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>> >> > From dkellogg60@gmail.com Sun Jan 22 21:52:29 2017 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2017 16:52:29 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: References: <1485031482970.89461@iped.uio.no> <58840b10.4319620a.49c0c.033a@mx.google.com> <0A8D9897-86CD-4674-A823-FB75571AE830@gmail.com> <6F36B192-D012-4CE8-A68F-9DABFBC15BFA@gmail.com> <1485070853888.71427@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: Vygotsky argued for a "semantic" rather than a "cognitive" view of human consciousness. What's the difference? Halliday says that it is largely a matter of in which direction you proceed. The semantic view takes language and works "inwards", from the syntagm of speech to the paradigm of thinking. Things said acquire meaning when we compare them, not with objects, or even objects of thought, but with other things not said. This was Vygotsky in Chapter Seven of Thinking and Speech. The consciousness model starts with knowledge and works "outwards", from the ostensible structure of thought to the structure of speaking. This means that perizhivanie isn't a form of knowledge but a form of meaning. It's the definition Halliday offers for "experience": "the reality that we construe for ourselves by means of language". So for example one way to construe Trump's inaugural (see attached) is to compare what he said with what he could have said and did not say. I think that the most revealing part of the speech is actually the most frequent Theme of all: "we". Here's a rather coarse analysis of "Theme", "Subject" and "Actor" in the speech to bear this out! David Kellogg Macquarie University On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 6:47 AM, Helena Worthen wrote: > One more thought, before plowing ahead into this thickening conversation: > > The Destiny of a Man can be seen as an attempt (1959) to tell "The > Russian/Soviet Story" in a way that brought as many as possible of the > clashing contradictions into one narrative that makes it possible for the > people who might watch it go forward. We can look around at examples of > comparable attempts to tell ?The American story.? The nature of the story > will correspond to the time in history when it ?worked? as the right story > for the time. The Destiny of a Man ?worked? in 1959, when the generation > that had suffered in the Great Patriotic War was still healing but a > turning point (Kruschev?s speech) had been reached. It interpreted the > perezvanhie of the war for the generation that had survived it. It > distorted some things (what often happened to ex-prisoners of war, for > example) and confirmed others (the gas chambers). It wasn?t history; it was > art. > > I notice that Vygotsky says that perezvanhie is a unit that joins the > internal emotional experience and the external situation. I am tempted to > play with the Engestrom ?unit of analysis? here but all refrain. > > So what works of art can we point out that would serve comparable > purposes, related to their moment in time? > > How about Uncle Tom?s Cabin? The images of African Americans are > cartoonish to modern eyes, but the book itself made the Black experience > accessible to the readers of 1852. It widened the circle of perezvhanie - > the environment - for white readers who were no doubt troubled but > uncertain (social situation of development?) as they sensed the tremors > that would flare up into the Civil War 10 years later. > > Note that the work of art that achieves this purpose (creates the right > story for the time) is created in the moment when uncertainty, fear, etc > are dominant ? when it is needed, in other words - not when 100 years have > gone by (or 60, as in the case of The Destiny of a Man) and we know, or > think we know, what happened next. When its time is past, it becomes a > ?classic.? Example: Steinbeck: The Grapes of Wrath. > > So what can we point to that achieves this purpose for us today? > > > Helena Worthen > helenaworthen@gmail.com > Berkeley, CA 94707 > Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com > > > > > On Jan 21, 2017, at 11:40 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > wrote: > > > > Thank you all for following up on the Trump's speech suggestion. > > Helena, the way you have re-phrased my proposal is exactly they way I > had hoped it to be heard. I think Andy, Helena, Sue, Greg and Larry have > offered empirical materials for and analyses of the type we would be > producing if we were to follow the proposal. Thanks Greg for the reference, > which seems right to the point, and Sue for the glimpse to people's best > protest signs (they are good empirical materials for sure). Thanks Andy, > too, offering your body and soul to scientific progress and undergoing the > inaugural speech again. The way you describe it is very close to how I > thought and felt yesterday. > > My family and friends today joined the march here in Victoria, and, like > Helena mentions, we all commented on how well it felt. There was a very > cheerful, friendly atmosphere, and lots of affection. I too felt better > today. > > > > In case we wanted to go forward with this project, I have created a > google doc in which I am collecting the resources, empirical cases, and > analyses that we have begun producing. I have also added additional links > (like one to the "Bikers for Trump" site, and the full transcript of the > inaugural speech plus a link from the Washington Post. > > > > The document should be accessible to everyone who follow this link: > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Nmn77hKa8XhDJ043ZfVuTUtT7NxDA > ibuzdv0KJDGqCo/edit?usp=sharing > > I guess the easiest way is that I curate it, populating it with content > shared in xmca, but everyone is able and welcome to edit. > > Alfredo > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________ > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of Helena Worthen > > Sent: 22 January 2017 06:54 > > To: ablunden@mira.net; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie > > > > OK, got it. > > > > H > > > > Helena Worthen > > helenaworthen@gmail.com > > Berkeley, CA 94707 > > Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com > > > > > > > >> On Jan 21, 2017, at 9:29 PM, Andy Blunden wrote: > >> > >> No, Helena, the *environment* is the same, but each are in a different > *social situation of development*, thus the different perezhivanie. > >> > >> Andy > >> > >> ------------------------------------------------------------ > >> Andy Blunden > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy > >> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > >> On 22/01/2017 3:48 PM, Helena Worthen wrote: > >>> ... The social situation ? like the alcoholic mother in the case with > the three children each with a different perezvhanie - is the same for both > people who are listening to the speech, but the people (like the children) > respond differently. > >>> > >>> > >> > > > > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Trump Inaugural Analysis.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 170792 bytes Desc: not available Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20170123/290a8fa8/attachment.bin From mcole@ucsd.edu Sun Jan 22 22:36:03 2017 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2017 22:36:03 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism In-Reply-To: References: <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C71964@CIO-KRC-D1MBX04.osuad.osu.edu> <1485073527094.7145@iped.uio.no> <5E5B95EA-374F-48EB-B308-BCE49DA52760@gmail.com> <1485113892233.91870@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: There are big problems reading one paragraph and neglecting to read the rest, Andy. You negelected this one, among others in your rush to irony. *From a liberal perspective, the anti-immigrant and anti-poor rhetoric in Trump?s campaign appears to be an about-face from eight progressive years under the last administration. But these political turns are not so straightforward. In recent years for example, the Obama administration?s deportation of over 2.5 million undocumented children and families (Iaconangelo, 2016), from Central America and Mexico in particular, displayed our nation?s refusal to understand immigration in light of a troubling legacy of U.S. military and political-economic intervention in these countries. Economic policies that favor the wealthy have led to drastic inequalities over the past few decades where a mere 20 Americans have more financial assets than the bottom half of the country?157 million people?combined (Collins & Hoxie, 2015). The classism of incarceration was unmasked as the Department of Justice failed to prosecute the Wall Street architects of the Great Recession (Cohan, 2015), but federal prisons were expanded to accommodate disproportionately low-income, non-violent offenders (Rabuy & Kopf, 2015).* How about nurturing such discussion instead of dismissing it out of hand that way? You have a better set of ideas, put them out there on this thread. That is what this thread/xmca are for. It is not for reaching snap judgments and squelching discussion. mike On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 6:39 PM, Andy Blunden wrote: > One paragraph from the article on Learning Sciences and US Nationalism: > > Our scholarship has the potential to be a form of > transformative resistance against the most > significant political threats to our democracy today > by explicitly defending and furthering the rights > and well-being of people of color, immigrants, > Muslims, women, people who are differently abled, > LGBTQ communities, and the earth. > > So I take this to mean that the authors think that the fact that > inequality has reached a point where 2 individuals own as much wealth as > the poorest 50% of the world's population and 26 individuals own half of > the world's wealth is a non-issue. That the de-industrialisation of US > cities is a matter of no importance. To use one of the catchphrases of the > election, they are "doubling down" on the claim that inequality is a matter > of cultural prejudice and if only we were all much more careful in our use > of language and showed respect for cultural differences, then we can safely > leave the world in the hands of Walmart and Exxon. > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Andy Blunden > http://home.mira.net/~andy > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > On 23/01/2017 8:01 AM, mike cole wrote: > >> Helena et al -- >> >> An important emphasis in the article for me was on the fact that although >> the article focused on the American nationalist movement that has just >> pulled of an alt-right coup, similar movements are poised to take hold in >> a >> lot of places in Europe to join the many already entrenched unsavory >> governments in other parts of the world. >> >> The CRADLE center in Helsinki is under very concerted attack and the right >> wing government appears, from this distance, to be making great progress >> on >> destroying its legacy. The same process has been in Denmark for some time, >> also with apparent success. >> >> What do our international colleagues who have already felt the hot breath >> of right wing nationalism have to offer in terms of strategies of >> resistence? >> >> Back to "what is to be done," that sombre question from an earlier era. >> The >> answer last time did not produce what it promised. >> >> mike >> >> mike >> >> On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 12:22 PM, Helena Worthen > > >> wrote: >> >> Thank you, Alfredo - I gave it a read. >>> >>> Sure, of course they?re right. But I am very disappointed. >>> >>> I was hoping that the following was only item #1 in a long list of "what >>> the 2016 election made apparent": >>> >>> The 2016 election has made apparent the need for scholarship that >>> explicitly defends and furthers the rights and well-being of people of >>> color, immigrants, Muslims, women, people who are differently abled, >>> LGBTQ >>> communities, and the earth. These are stances that have been limited, at >>> least explicitly, in the Learning Sciences. >>> >>> But the call for inclusion was not just #1, it seems to be the whole >>> thing. In other words, it?s all about identity ?plus the earth, of >>> course. >>> While inclusion is necessary, it?s not even a start. Yes, research, >>> teaching, publishing, promotion, conferences ? everything associated with >>> teaching and learning has to include everyone as equals (see Andy?s book) >>> in one way or another ? but then what? What are they (we) supposed to do? >>> Where does the pretty language touch the ground? >>> >>> I was listening to a broadcast of the Women?s March in DC on Saturday >>> morning, and Kamala Harris, who was the California State Attorney General >>> and is now a junior Senator from CA, was addressing the rally. She said, >>> ?People always ask me to talk about women?s issues. I say, ?Oh, I?m SO >>> glad >>> you?re interested in economics!! Let?s talk about economics.? And she >>> ran >>> through a whole set of parallel back-and-forths, always pulling identity >>> questions back to wages, jobs, earning, supporting your family, etc etc. >>> >>> Much as we need to wipe away any barriers to the Learning Sciences (and >>> the professions and institutions dedicated to them) due to identity, >>> until >>> the Learning Sciences start taking a look at the place where most people >>> spend most of their lives ? not school, I mean ? but work, they will be >>> engaging in a soft conversation at the edge of the real issue. It?s a >>> pleasant conversation but it doesn?t put a hand on the levers that >>> translate skill and knowledge into rent and groceries. >>> >>> H >>> >>> >>> Helena Worthen >>> helenaworthen@gmail.com >>> Berkeley, CA 94707 >>> Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com >>> >>> >>> >>> On Jan 22, 2017, at 11:38 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >>>> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Here it is, >>>> >>>> http://cognitionandinstruction.com/engagements-the-learning- >>>> >>> sciences-in-a-new-era-of-u-s-nationalism/ >>> >>>> Alfredo >>>> ________________________________________ >>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>> >>> on behalf of Helena Worthen >>> >>>> Sent: 22 January 2017 20:24 >>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >>>> >>> Nationalism >>> >>>> Someone please re-send the link to this article? I think I?m going to >>>> >>> want to read it and respond to Mike?s question. >>> >>>> Thanks ? H >>>> >>>> >>>> Helena Worthen >>>> helenaworthen@gmail.com >>>> Berkeley, CA 94707 >>>> Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Jan 22, 2017, at 12:25 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >>>>> >>>> wrote: >>> >>>> Mike, >>>>> >>>>> thanks a lot for sharing this article. You and Michael, who have and >>>>> >>>> know more history, have spoken in terms of reminiscences. I have lived >>> and >>> know less, and the article feels like fresh air. During my PhD, I begun >>> to >>> increasingly feel that I had to due something to act and respond to the >>> increasing ecological and humanitarian globe crises. But how could I do >>> anything if I had children and a PhD to finalise?? What could I do that >>> would also be doing my job as researcher in a department of education? It >>> was very difficult to find anything, partly because almost every academic >>> quest would focus on learning, but so little on social development. How >>> many scientific articles are dedicated to socio-political questions in >>> the >>> most cited educational journals? I felt very powerless. >>> >>>> To be able to address these questions within my expertise, is a >>>>> >>>> challenge partly because contrary to Dewey's hope, educational research >>> has >>> only marginally focused on these questions, and yet they may be exactly >>> the >>> question that matter to education. What are we educating for? Indeed, >>> what >>> is education for? I think we face a serious problem when someone (like >>> myself), being an educational researchers/scholar, still has to scratch >>> her >>> head wondering <>> development?>> Vygotsky would be shocked! >>> >>>> Alfredo >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>> > >>>>> >>>> on behalf of mike cole >>> >>>> Sent: 19 January 2017 04:51 >>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >>>>> >>>> Nationalism >>> >>>> Yes Michael, >>>>> >>>>> It feels like the world of the later 1930's about the time I was born >>>>> as >>>>> that period came down to me through the prism of a family of "premature >>>>> anti fascists." >>>>> >>>>> For a great re-creation of those times see the highly ambivalent film >>>>> by >>>>> Frank Capra, "meet John Doe." It has American big capital >>>>> interconnected >>>>> with fascism combined with populist collectivism in a manner that >>>>> >>>> points at >>> >>>> the media (as then experienced) as the bad guys in disguise. Happy >>>>> >>>> Ending, >>> >>>> Beethoven Ode to Joy and all. >>>>> >>>>> It's come round again, nastier this time. >>>>> >>>>> Mike >>>>> On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 6:20 PM Glassman, Michael >>>> > >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Mike >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> It was so interesting to read this note after reading the Cognition >>>>>> and >>>>>> Instruction essay. All the way through it I kept thinking we have >>>>>> been >>>>>> here before. It reminded me of the scholars, especially those who had >>>>>> escaped from Germany, trying to make sense of what had happened to >>>>>> >>>>> their >>> >>>> society during World War II. The foremost in my mind was Lewin. >>>>>> >>>>> Except I >>> >>>> wonder if he would say the process of transformative action starts not >>>>>> >>>>> with >>> >>>> emergence of quasi-needs, but our willingness and abilities to step >>>>>> >>>>> back >>> >>>> from our quasi-needs and the ways that they drive us, often to >>>>>> dysfunctional behaviors that it ultimately destructive to both our >>>>>> >>>>> society >>> >>>> and to us as individuals. How hard this is to do, we have to keep >>>>>> >>>>> going >>> >>>> back again and again. The quasi-needs, tribalism, acceptance, >>>>>> >>>>> standing are >>> >>>> always there. It is how they shape us that is critical. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Michael >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>> >>>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto: >>>>>> xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole >>>>>> >>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 8:31 PM >>>>>> >>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>>> >>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> In following the perezhivanie thread I encountered the note I >>>>>> >>>>> re-membered. >>> >>>> And interestingly mis-remembered. A translation into my focus on >>>>>> mediational means. He places the starting point of the process of >>>>>> transformative action at the emergence of quasi-needs (from Kurt >>>>>> >>>>> Lewin). >>> >>>> That seems correct to me. The new mediational means emerge under >>>>>> environmental presses. Ever functionalist ego need a goal(!). (The >>>>>> >>>>> problem >>> >>>> with functionalism) In David's words, >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Perhaps the place we should look for "exaptations" that can save both >>>>>> >>>>> our >>> >>>> personalities and our environment is not in our evolved needs, but in >>>>>> >>>>> yet >>> >>>> to be designed quasi-needs. Artificial organs, after all, always >>>>>> >>>>> suggest >>> >>>> new and ever more artificial functions, like chess and language. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> This point seems worth keeping in mind as we look at where this group >>>>>> >>>>> of >>> >>>> critical scholars who work within the Learning Sciences disciplinary >>>>>> framework would like to lead us. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> mike >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>> >> > From ablunden@mira.net Sun Jan 22 23:26:36 2017 From: ablunden@mira.net (Andy Blunden) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2017 18:26:36 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism In-Reply-To: References: <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C71964@CIO-KRC-D1MBX04.osuad.osu.edu> <1485073527094.7145@iped.uio.no> <5E5B95EA-374F-48EB-B308-BCE49DA52760@gmail.com> <1485113892233.91870@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: Well, you say "curt" and "rush" and ask for my "better set of ideas," Mike, but I have been sweating for months trying to figure out a way of raising this issue without stimulating this kind of reaction. I obviously haven't found it yet. I thought xmca was about the safest forum I knew to raise difficult questions. I'll keep my mouth shut, because I don't have a "better set of ideas." I see a problem, but I don't see the solution, and I don't see clarity emerging from here. Andy ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making On 23/01/2017 5:36 PM, mike cole wrote: > There are big problems reading one paragraph and > neglecting to read the rest, > Andy. You negelected this one, among others in your rush > to irony. > > /From a liberal perspective, the anti-immigrant and > anti-poor rhetoric in Trump?s campaign appears to be an > about-face from eight progressive years under the last > administration. But these political turns are not so > straightforward. In recent years for example, the Obama > administration?s deportation of over 2.5 million > undocumented children and families (Iaconangelo, 2016), > from Central America and Mexico in particular, displayed > our nation?s refusal to understand immigration in light of > a troubling legacy of U.S. military and political-economic > intervention in these countries. Economic policies that > favor the wealthy have led to drastic inequalities over > the past few decades where a mere 20 Americans have more > financial assets than the bottom half of the country?157 > million people?combined (Collins & Hoxie, 2015). The > classism of incarceration was unmasked as the Department > of Justice failed to prosecute the Wall Street architects > of the Great Recession (Cohan, 2015), but federal prisons > were expanded to accommodate disproportionately > low-income, non-violent offenders (Rabuy & Kopf, 2015)./ > > How about nurturing such discussion instead of dismissing > it out of hand that way? You have a better set of ideas, > put them out there on this thread. That is what this > thread/xmca are for. It is not for reaching snap judgments > and squelching discussion. > > mike > > > > > On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 6:39 PM, Andy Blunden > > wrote: > > One paragraph from the article on Learning Sciences > and US Nationalism: > > Our scholarship has the potential to be a form of > transformative resistance against the most > significant political threats to our democracy > today > by explicitly defending and furthering the rights > and well-being of people of color, immigrants, > Muslims, women, people who are differently abled, > LGBTQ communities, and the earth. > > So I take this to mean that the authors think that the > fact that inequality has reached a point where 2 > individuals own as much wealth as the poorest 50% of > the world's population and 26 individuals own half of > the world's wealth is a non-issue. That the > de-industrialisation of US cities is a matter of no > importance. To use one of the catchphrases of the > election, they are "doubling down" on the claim that > inequality is a matter of cultural prejudice and if > only we were all much more careful in our use of > language and showed respect for cultural differences, > then we can safely leave the world in the hands of > Walmart and Exxon. > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Andy Blunden > http://home.mira.net/~andy > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > > On 23/01/2017 8:01 AM, mike cole wrote: > > Helena et al -- > > An important emphasis in the article for me was on > the fact that although > the article focused on the American nationalist > movement that has just > pulled of an alt-right coup, similar movements are > poised to take hold in a > lot of places in Europe to join the many already > entrenched unsavory > governments in other parts of the world. > > The CRADLE center in Helsinki is under very > concerted attack and the right > wing government appears, from this distance, to be > making great progress on > destroying its legacy. The same process has been > in Denmark for some time, > also with apparent success. > > What do our international colleagues who have > already felt the hot breath > of right wing nationalism have to offer in terms > of strategies of > resistence? > > Back to "what is to be done," that sombre question > from an earlier era. The > answer last time did not produce what it promised. > > mike > > mike > > On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 12:22 PM, Helena Worthen > > > wrote: > > Thank you, Alfredo - I gave it a read. > > Sure, of course they?re right. But I am very > disappointed. > > I was hoping that the following was only item > #1 in a long list of "what > the 2016 election made apparent": > > The 2016 election has made apparent the need > for scholarship that > explicitly defends and furthers the rights and > well-being of people of > color, immigrants, Muslims, women, people who > are differently abled, LGBTQ > communities, and the earth. These are stances > that have been limited, at > least explicitly, in the Learning Sciences. > > But the call for inclusion was not just #1, it > seems to be the whole > thing. In other words, it?s all about > identity ?plus the earth, of course. > While inclusion is necessary, it?s not even a > start. Yes, research, > teaching, publishing, promotion, conferences ? > everything associated with > teaching and learning has to include everyone > as equals (see Andy?s book) > in one way or another ? but then what? What > are they (we) supposed to do? > Where does the pretty language touch the ground? > > I was listening to a broadcast of the Women?s > March in DC on Saturday > morning, and Kamala Harris, who was the > California State Attorney General > and is now a junior Senator from CA, was > addressing the rally. She said, > ?People always ask me to talk about women?s > issues. I say, ?Oh, I?m SO glad > you?re interested in economics!! Let?s talk > about economics.? And she ran > through a whole set of parallel > back-and-forths, always pulling identity > questions back to wages, jobs, earning, > supporting your family, etc etc. > > Much as we need to wipe away any barriers to > the Learning Sciences (and > the professions and institutions dedicated to > them) due to identity, until > the Learning Sciences start taking a look at > the place where most people > spend most of their lives ? not school, I mean > ? but work, they will be > engaging in a soft conversation at the edge of > the real issue. It?s a > pleasant conversation but it doesn?t put a > hand on the levers that > translate skill and knowledge into rent and > groceries. > > H > > > Helena Worthen > helenaworthen@gmail.com > > Berkeley, CA 94707 > Blog about US and Viet Nam: > helenaworthen.wordpress.com > > > > > On Jan 22, 2017, at 11:38 AM, Alfredo > Jornet Gil > > > wrote: > > Here it is, > > http://cognitionandinstruction.com/engagements-the-learning- > > > sciences-in-a-new-era-of-u-s-nationalism/ > > Alfredo > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > on behalf of Helena Worthen > > > > Sent: 22 January 2017 20:24 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning > Sciences in the era of U.S. > > Nationalism > > Someone please re-send the link to this > article? I think I?m going to > > want to read it and respond to Mike?s question. > > Thanks ? H > > > Helena Worthen > helenaworthen@gmail.com > > Berkeley, CA 94707 > Blog about US and Viet Nam: > helenaworthen.wordpress.com > > > > > On Jan 22, 2017, at 12:25 AM, Alfredo > Jornet Gil > > > wrote: > > Mike, > > thanks a lot for sharing this article. > You and Michael, who have and > > know more history, have spoken in terms of > reminiscences. I have lived and > know less, and the article feels like fresh > air. During my PhD, I begun to > increasingly feel that I had to due something > to act and respond to the > increasing ecological and humanitarian globe > crises. But how could I do > anything if I had children and a PhD to > finalise?? What could I do that > would also be doing my job as researcher in a > department of education? It > was very difficult to find anything, partly > because almost every academic > quest would focus on learning, but so little > on social development. How > many scientific articles are dedicated to > socio-political questions in the > most cited educational journals? I felt very > powerless. > > To be able to address these questions > within my expertise, is a > > challenge partly because contrary to Dewey's > hope, educational research has > only marginally focused on these questions, > and yet they may be exactly the > question that matter to education. What are we > educating for? Indeed, what > is education for? I think we face a serious > problem when someone (like > myself), being an educational > researchers/scholar, still has to scratch her > head wondering < matter to social change and > development?>> Vygotsky would be shocked! > > Alfredo > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > on behalf of mike cole > > > Sent: 19 January 2017 04:51 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning > Sciences in the era of U.S. > > Nationalism > > Yes Michael, > > It feels like the world of the later > 1930's about the time I was born as > that period came down to me through > the prism of a family of "premature > anti fascists." > > For a great re-creation of those times > see the highly ambivalent film by > Frank Capra, "meet John Doe." It has > American big capital interconnected > with fascism combined with populist > collectivism in a manner that > > points at > > the media (as then experienced) as the > bad guys in disguise. Happy > > Ending, > > Beethoven Ode to Joy and all. > > It's come round again, nastier this time. > > Mike > On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 6:20 PM > Glassman, Michael > > wrote: > > Mike > > > > It was so interesting to read this > note after reading the Cognition and > Instruction essay. All the way > through it I kept thinking we have > been > here before. It reminded me of > the scholars, especially those who had > escaped from Germany, trying to > make sense of what had happened to > > their > > society during World War II. The > foremost in my mind was Lewin. > > Except I > > wonder if he would say the process > of transformative action starts not > > with > > emergence of quasi-needs, but our > willingness and abilities to step > > back > > from our quasi-needs and the ways > that they drive us, often to > dysfunctional behaviors that it > ultimately destructive to both our > > society > > and to us as individuals. How > hard this is to do, we have to keep > > going > > back again and again. The > quasi-needs, tribalism, acceptance, > > standing are > > always there. It is how they > shape us that is critical. > > > > Michael > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: > xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > [mailto: > xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > ] > On Behalf Of mike cole > > Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 > 8:31 PM > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, > Activity > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning > Sciences in the era of U.S. > Nationalism > > > > In following the perezhivanie > thread I encountered the note I > > re-membered. > > And interestingly mis-remembered. > A translation into my focus on > mediational means. He places the > starting point of the process of > transformative action at the > emergence of quasi-needs (from Kurt > > Lewin). > > That seems correct to me. The new > mediational means emerge under > environmental presses. Ever > functionalist ego need a goal(!). (The > > problem > > with functionalism) In David's words, > > > > Perhaps the place we should look > for "exaptations" that can save both > > our > > personalities and our environment > is not in our evolved needs, but in > > yet > > to be designed quasi-needs. > Artificial organs, after all, always > > suggest > > new and ever more artificial > functions, like chess and language. > > > > This point seems worth keeping in > mind as we look at where this group > > of > > critical scholars who work within > the Learning Sciences disciplinary > framework would like to lead us. > > > > mike > > > > > > > > > From Peg.Griffin@att.net Mon Jan 23 02:51:28 2017 From: Peg.Griffin@att.net (Peg Griffin) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2017 05:51:28 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism In-Reply-To: References: <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C71964@CIO-KRC-D1MBX04.osuad.osu.edu> <1485073527094.7145@iped.uio.no> <5E5B95EA-374F-48EB-B308-BCE49DA52760@gmail.com> <1485113892233.91870@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <002f01d27566$a7b49770$f71dc650$@att.net> For what it's worth, Andy, I see a good portion of folks-- in and out of academia -- who join you in currently sweating through ways to think/act/speak given the urgency of income equality. Just as a sample of the concern are the following two approaches to marshal and display relevant information; they are somewhat at odds and one appeared about a year ago, one about six months ago, each expecting quite different readers. http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/09/obamas-war-on-inequality/501620/ http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/02/26/during-obamas-presidency-wealth-inequality-has-increased-and-poverty-levels-are-higher/ I see the recent election and nominees to the federal government cabinet having a brute force impact on each and every culturally different group in the US -- Exxon differently than Walmart but both widely noted. In the past few years Walmart workers have been developing a strong publicized organizing force. Exxon? Not so much organized workers but some environmental forces and American Indian forces are helping with thinking and acting there. "Tu, Yo, Todos. Somos America," We are America -- not Americans but America -- and income equality is battering us and leaving many of us at the sweating point in our struggles, whatever our cultural differences. Peg Cultural differences and -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 2:27 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism Well, you say "curt" and "rush" and ask for my "better set of ideas," Mike, but I have been sweating for months trying to figure out a way of raising this issue without stimulating this kind of reaction. I obviously haven't found it yet. I thought xmca was about the safest forum I knew to raise difficult questions. I'll keep my mouth shut, because I don't have a "better set of ideas." I see a problem, but I don't see the solution, and I don't see clarity emerging from here. Andy ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making On 23/01/2017 5:36 PM, mike cole wrote: > There are big problems reading one paragraph and neglecting to read > the rest, Andy. You negelected this one, among others in your rush to > irony. > > /From a liberal perspective, the anti-immigrant and anti-poor rhetoric > in Trump?s campaign appears to be an about-face from eight progressive > years under the last administration. But these political turns are not > so straightforward. In recent years for example, the Obama > administration?s deportation of over 2.5 million undocumented children > and families (Iaconangelo, 2016), from Central America and Mexico in > particular, displayed our nation?s refusal to understand immigration > in light of a troubling legacy of U.S. military and political-economic > intervention in these countries. Economic policies that favor the > wealthy have led to drastic inequalities over the past few decades > where a mere 20 Americans have more financial assets than the bottom > half of the country?157 million people?combined (Collins & Hoxie, > 2015). The classism of incarceration was unmasked as the Department of > Justice failed to prosecute the Wall Street architects of the Great > Recession (Cohan, 2015), but federal prisons were expanded to > accommodate disproportionately low-income, non-violent offenders > (Rabuy & Kopf, 2015)./ > > How about nurturing such discussion instead of dismissing it out of > hand that way? You have a better set of ideas, put them out there on > this thread. That is what this thread/xmca are for. It is not for > reaching snap judgments and squelching discussion. > > mike > > > > > On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 6:39 PM, Andy Blunden > wrote: > > One paragraph from the article on Learning Sciences > and US Nationalism: > > Our scholarship has the potential to be a form of > transformative resistance against the most > significant political threats to our democracy > today > by explicitly defending and furthering the rights > and well-being of people of color, immigrants, > Muslims, women, people who are differently abled, > LGBTQ communities, and the earth. > > So I take this to mean that the authors think that the > fact that inequality has reached a point where 2 > individuals own as much wealth as the poorest 50% of > the world's population and 26 individuals own half of > the world's wealth is a non-issue. That the > de-industrialisation of US cities is a matter of no > importance. To use one of the catchphrases of the > election, they are "doubling down" on the claim that > inequality is a matter of cultural prejudice and if > only we were all much more careful in our use of > language and showed respect for cultural differences, > then we can safely leave the world in the hands of > Walmart and Exxon. > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Andy Blunden > http://home.mira.net/~andy > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > > > > On 23/01/2017 8:01 AM, mike cole wrote: > > Helena et al -- > > An important emphasis in the article for me was on > the fact that although > the article focused on the American nationalist > movement that has just > pulled of an alt-right coup, similar movements are > poised to take hold in a > lot of places in Europe to join the many already > entrenched unsavory > governments in other parts of the world. > > The CRADLE center in Helsinki is under very > concerted attack and the right > wing government appears, from this distance, to be > making great progress on > destroying its legacy. The same process has been > in Denmark for some time, > also with apparent success. > > What do our international colleagues who have > already felt the hot breath > of right wing nationalism have to offer in terms > of strategies of > resistence? > > Back to "what is to be done," that sombre question > from an earlier era. The > answer last time did not produce what it promised. > > mike > > mike > > On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 12:22 PM, Helena Worthen > > > wrote: > > Thank you, Alfredo - I gave it a read. > > Sure, of course they?re right. But I am very > disappointed. > > I was hoping that the following was only item > #1 in a long list of "what > the 2016 election made apparent": > > The 2016 election has made apparent the need > for scholarship that > explicitly defends and furthers the rights and > well-being of people of > color, immigrants, Muslims, women, people who > are differently abled, LGBTQ > communities, and the earth. These are stances > that have been limited, at > least explicitly, in the Learning Sciences. > > But the call for inclusion was not just #1, it > seems to be the whole > thing. In other words, it?s all about > identity ?plus the earth, of course. > While inclusion is necessary, it?s not even a > start. Yes, research, > teaching, publishing, promotion, conferences ? > everything associated with > teaching and learning has to include everyone > as equals (see Andy?s book) > in one way or another ? but then what? What > are they (we) supposed to do? > Where does the pretty language touch the ground? > > I was listening to a broadcast of the Women?s > March in DC on Saturday > morning, and Kamala Harris, who was the > California State Attorney General > and is now a junior Senator from CA, was > addressing the rally. She said, > ?People always ask me to talk about women?s > issues. I say, ?Oh, I?m SO glad > you?re interested in economics!! Let?s talk > about economics.? And she ran > through a whole set of parallel > back-and-forths, always pulling identity > questions back to wages, jobs, earning, > supporting your family, etc etc. > > Much as we need to wipe away any barriers to > the Learning Sciences (and > the professions and institutions dedicated to > them) due to identity, until > the Learning Sciences start taking a look at > the place where most people > spend most of their lives ? not school, I mean > ? but work, they will be > engaging in a soft conversation at the edge of > the real issue. It?s a > pleasant conversation but it doesn?t put a > hand on the levers that > translate skill and knowledge into rent and > groceries. > > H > > > Helena Worthen > helenaworthen@gmail.com > > Berkeley, CA 94707 > Blog about US and Viet Nam: > helenaworthen.wordpress.com > > > > > On Jan 22, 2017, at 11:38 AM, Alfredo > Jornet Gil > > > wrote: > > Here it is, > > http://cognitionandinstruction.com/engagements-the-learning- > > > > sciences-in-a-new-era-of-u-s-nationalism/ > > Alfredo > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > on behalf of Helena Worthen > > > > Sent: 22 January 2017 20:24 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning > Sciences in the era of U.S. > > Nationalism > > Someone please re-send the link to this > article? I think I?m going to > > want to read it and respond to Mike?s question. > > Thanks ? H > > > Helena Worthen > helenaworthen@gmail.com > > Berkeley, CA 94707 > Blog about US and Viet Nam: > helenaworthen.wordpress.com > > > > > On Jan 22, 2017, at 12:25 AM, Alfredo > Jornet Gil > > > wrote: > > Mike, > > thanks a lot for sharing this article. > You and Michael, who have and > > know more history, have spoken in terms of > reminiscences. I have lived and > know less, and the article feels like fresh > air. During my PhD, I begun to > increasingly feel that I had to due something > to act and respond to the > increasing ecological and humanitarian globe > crises. But how could I do > anything if I had children and a PhD to > finalise?? What could I do that > would also be doing my job as researcher in a > department of education? It > was very difficult to find anything, partly > because almost every academic > quest would focus on learning, but so little > on social development. How > many scientific articles are dedicated to > socio-political questions in the > most cited educational journals? I felt very > powerless. > > To be able to address these questions > within my expertise, is a > > challenge partly because contrary to Dewey's > hope, educational research has > only marginally focused on these questions, > and yet they may be exactly the > question that matter to education. What are we > educating for? Indeed, what > is education for? I think we face a serious > problem when someone (like > myself), being an educational > researchers/scholar, still has to scratch her > head wondering < matter to social change and > development?>> Vygotsky would be shocked! > > Alfredo > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > on behalf of mike cole > > > Sent: 19 January 2017 04:51 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning > Sciences in the era of U.S. > > Nationalism > > Yes Michael, > > It feels like the world of the later > 1930's about the time I was born as > that period came down to me through > the prism of a family of "premature > anti fascists." > > For a great re-creation of those times > see the highly ambivalent film by > Frank Capra, "meet John Doe." It has > American big capital interconnected > with fascism combined with populist > collectivism in a manner that > > points at > > the media (as then experienced) as the > bad guys in disguise. Happy > > Ending, > > Beethoven Ode to Joy and all. > > It's come round again, nastier this time. > > Mike > On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 6:20 PM > Glassman, Michael > > wrote: > > Mike > > > > It was so interesting to read this > note after reading the Cognition and > Instruction essay. All the way > through it I kept thinking we have > been > here before. It reminded me of > the scholars, especially those who had > escaped from Germany, trying to > make sense of what had happened to > > their > > society during World War II. The > foremost in my mind was Lewin. > > Except I > > wonder if he would say the process > of transformative action starts not > > with > > emergence of quasi-needs, but our > willingness and abilities to step > > back > > from our quasi-needs and the ways > that they drive us, often to > dysfunctional behaviors that it > ultimately destructive to both our > > society > > and to us as individuals. How > hard this is to do, we have to keep > > going > > back again and again. The > quasi-needs, tribalism, acceptance, > > standing are > > always there. It is how they > shape us that is critical. > > > > Michael > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: > xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > [mailto: > xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > ] > On Behalf Of mike cole > > Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 > 8:31 PM > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, > Activity > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning > Sciences in the era of U.S. > Nationalism > > > > In following the perezhivanie > thread I encountered the note I > > re-membered. > > And interestingly mis-remembered. > A translation into my focus on > mediational means. He places the > starting point of the process of > transformative action at the > emergence of quasi-needs (from Kurt > > Lewin). > > That seems correct to me. The new > mediational means emerge under > environmental presses. Ever > functionalist ego need a goal(!). (The > > problem > > with functionalism) In David's words, > > > > Perhaps the place we should look > for "exaptations" that can save both > > our > > personalities and our environment > is not in our evolved needs, but in > > yet > > to be designed quasi-needs. > Artificial organs, after all, always > > suggest > > new and ever more artificial > functions, like chess and language. > > > > This point seems worth keeping in > mind as we look at where this group > > of > > critical scholars who work within > the Learning Sciences disciplinary > framework would like to lead us. > > > > mike > > > > > > > > > From mcole@ucsd.edu Mon Jan 23 06:47:46 2017 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2017 06:47:46 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism In-Reply-To: References: <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C71964@CIO-KRC-D1MBX04.osuad.osu.edu> <1485073527094.7145@iped.uio.no> <5E5B95EA-374F-48EB-B308-BCE49DA52760@gmail.com> <1485113892233.91870@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: Seeking clarity in these circumstances is the goal, Andy. Not a given condition.Humanity has not found the solution to solution to nationalist populism so far. By all means participate. But not by picking out part of a paragraph of a colleagues work and condeming it to the garbage pile without reading it. Squelching discussion is the antithesis of what a collective effort to solve our extraordinarily difficult problems we face. Everyone's considered views are welcome. That includes you of course. But hip shooting take downs of others' contributions is destructive. The problems you point to as central are central. So the authors of the paper your wrote. Now lets see if any serious discussion can be had, or we can close this thread. mike On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 11:26 PM, Andy Blunden wrote: > Well, you say "curt" and "rush" and ask for my "better set of ideas," > Mike, but I have been sweating for months trying to figure out a way of > raising this issue without stimulating this kind of reaction. I obviously > haven't found it yet. I thought xmca was about the safest forum I knew to > raise difficult questions. I'll keep my mouth shut, because I don't have a > "better set of ideas." I see a problem, but I don't see the solution, and I > don't see clarity emerging from here. > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Andy Blunden > http://home.mira.net/~andy > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > On 23/01/2017 5:36 PM, mike cole wrote: > >> There are big problems reading one paragraph and neglecting to read the >> rest, >> Andy. You negelected this one, among others in your rush to irony. >> >> /From a liberal perspective, the anti-immigrant and anti-poor rhetoric in >> Trump?s campaign appears to be an about-face from eight progressive years >> under the last administration. But these political turns are not so >> straightforward. In recent years for example, the Obama administration?s >> deportation of over 2.5 million undocumented children and families >> (Iaconangelo, 2016), from Central America and Mexico in particular, >> displayed our nation?s refusal to understand immigration in light of a >> troubling legacy of U.S. military and political-economic intervention in >> these countries. Economic policies that favor the wealthy have led to >> drastic inequalities over the past few decades where a mere 20 Americans >> have more financial assets than the bottom half of the country?157 million >> people?combined (Collins & Hoxie, 2015). The classism of incarceration was >> unmasked as the Department of Justice failed to prosecute the Wall Street >> architects of the Great Recession (Cohan, 2015), but federal prisons were >> expanded to accommodate disproportionately low-income, non-violent >> offenders (Rabuy & Kopf, 2015)./ >> >> How about nurturing such discussion instead of dismissing it out of hand >> that way? You have a better set of ideas, put them out there on this >> thread. That is what this thread/xmca are for. It is not for reaching snap >> judgments and squelching discussion. >> >> mike >> >> >> >> >> On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 6:39 PM, Andy Blunden > ablunden@mira.net>> wrote: >> >> One paragraph from the article on Learning Sciences >> and US Nationalism: >> >> Our scholarship has the potential to be a form of >> transformative resistance against the most >> significant political threats to our democracy >> today >> by explicitly defending and furthering the rights >> and well-being of people of color, immigrants, >> Muslims, women, people who are differently abled, >> LGBTQ communities, and the earth. >> >> So I take this to mean that the authors think that the >> fact that inequality has reached a point where 2 >> individuals own as much wealth as the poorest 50% of >> the world's population and 26 individuals own half of >> the world's wealth is a non-issue. That the >> de-industrialisation of US cities is a matter of no >> importance. To use one of the catchphrases of the >> election, they are "doubling down" on the claim that >> inequality is a matter of cultural prejudice and if >> only we were all much more careful in our use of >> language and showed respect for cultural differences, >> then we can safely leave the world in the hands of >> Walmart and Exxon. >> >> Andy >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------ >> Andy Blunden >> http://home.mira.net/~andy >> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making >> > decision-making> >> >> On 23/01/2017 8:01 AM, mike cole wrote: >> >> Helena et al -- >> >> An important emphasis in the article for me was on >> the fact that although >> the article focused on the American nationalist >> movement that has just >> pulled of an alt-right coup, similar movements are >> poised to take hold in a >> lot of places in Europe to join the many already >> entrenched unsavory >> governments in other parts of the world. >> >> The CRADLE center in Helsinki is under very >> concerted attack and the right >> wing government appears, from this distance, to be >> making great progress on >> destroying its legacy. The same process has been >> in Denmark for some time, >> also with apparent success. >> >> What do our international colleagues who have >> already felt the hot breath >> of right wing nationalism have to offer in terms >> of strategies of >> resistence? >> >> Back to "what is to be done," that sombre question >> from an earlier era. The >> answer last time did not produce what it promised. >> >> mike >> >> mike >> >> On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 12:22 PM, Helena Worthen >> > > >> wrote: >> >> Thank you, Alfredo - I gave it a read. >> >> Sure, of course they?re right. But I am very >> disappointed. >> >> I was hoping that the following was only item >> #1 in a long list of "what >> the 2016 election made apparent": >> >> The 2016 election has made apparent the need >> for scholarship that >> explicitly defends and furthers the rights and >> well-being of people of >> color, immigrants, Muslims, women, people who >> are differently abled, LGBTQ >> communities, and the earth. These are stances >> that have been limited, at >> least explicitly, in the Learning Sciences. >> >> But the call for inclusion was not just #1, it >> seems to be the whole >> thing. In other words, it?s all about >> identity ?plus the earth, of course. >> While inclusion is necessary, it?s not even a >> start. Yes, research, >> teaching, publishing, promotion, conferences ? >> everything associated with >> teaching and learning has to include everyone >> as equals (see Andy?s book) >> in one way or another ? but then what? What >> are they (we) supposed to do? >> Where does the pretty language touch the ground? >> >> I was listening to a broadcast of the Women?s >> March in DC on Saturday >> morning, and Kamala Harris, who was the >> California State Attorney General >> and is now a junior Senator from CA, was >> addressing the rally. She said, >> ?People always ask me to talk about women?s >> issues. I say, ?Oh, I?m SO glad >> you?re interested in economics!! Let?s talk >> about economics.? And she ran >> through a whole set of parallel >> back-and-forths, always pulling identity >> questions back to wages, jobs, earning, >> supporting your family, etc etc. >> >> Much as we need to wipe away any barriers to >> the Learning Sciences (and >> the professions and institutions dedicated to >> them) due to identity, until >> the Learning Sciences start taking a look at >> the place where most people >> spend most of their lives ? not school, I mean >> ? but work, they will be >> engaging in a soft conversation at the edge of >> the real issue. It?s a >> pleasant conversation but it doesn?t put a >> hand on the levers that >> translate skill and knowledge into rent and >> groceries. >> >> H >> >> >> Helena Worthen >> helenaworthen@gmail.com >> >> Berkeley, CA 94707 >> Blog about US and Viet Nam: >> helenaworthen.wordpress.com >> >> >> >> >> On Jan 22, 2017, at 11:38 AM, Alfredo >> Jornet Gil > > >> >> wrote: >> >> Here it is, >> >> http://cognitionandinstruction >> .com/engagements-the-learning- >> > learning-> >> >> sciences-in-a-new-era-of-u-s-nationalism/ >> >> Alfredo >> ________________________________________ >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> >> > > >> >> on behalf of Helena Worthen >> > > >> >> Sent: 22 January 2017 20:24 >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning >> Sciences in the era of U.S. >> >> Nationalism >> >> Someone please re-send the link to this >> article? I think I?m going to >> >> want to read it and respond to Mike?s question. >> >> Thanks ? H >> >> >> Helena Worthen >> helenaworthen@gmail.com >> >> Berkeley, CA 94707 >> Blog about US and Viet Nam: >> helenaworthen.wordpress.com >> >> >> >> >> On Jan 22, 2017, at 12:25 AM, Alfredo >> Jornet Gil > > >> >> wrote: >> >> Mike, >> >> thanks a lot for sharing this article. >> You and Michael, who have and >> >> know more history, have spoken in terms of >> reminiscences. I have lived and >> know less, and the article feels like fresh >> air. During my PhD, I begun to >> increasingly feel that I had to due something >> to act and respond to the >> increasing ecological and humanitarian globe >> crises. But how could I do >> anything if I had children and a PhD to >> finalise?? What could I do that >> would also be doing my job as researcher in a >> department of education? It >> was very difficult to find anything, partly >> because almost every academic >> quest would focus on learning, but so little >> on social development. How >> many scientific articles are dedicated to >> socio-political questions in the >> most cited educational journals? I felt very >> powerless. >> >> To be able to address these questions >> within my expertise, is a >> >> challenge partly because contrary to Dewey's >> hope, educational research has >> only marginally focused on these questions, >> and yet they may be exactly the >> question that matter to education. What are we >> educating for? Indeed, what >> is education for? I think we face a serious >> problem when someone (like >> myself), being an educational >> researchers/scholar, still has to scratch her >> head wondering <> matter to social change and >> development?>> Vygotsky would be shocked! >> >> Alfredo >> >> >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> >> > > >> >> on behalf of mike cole > > >> >> Sent: 19 January 2017 04:51 >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning >> Sciences in the era of U.S. >> >> Nationalism >> >> Yes Michael, >> >> It feels like the world of the later >> 1930's about the time I was born as >> that period came down to me through >> the prism of a family of "premature >> anti fascists." >> >> For a great re-creation of those times >> see the highly ambivalent film by >> Frank Capra, "meet John Doe." It has >> American big capital interconnected >> with fascism combined with populist >> collectivism in a manner that >> >> points at >> >> the media (as then experienced) as the >> bad guys in disguise. Happy >> >> Ending, >> >> Beethoven Ode to Joy and all. >> >> It's come round again, nastier this time. >> >> Mike >> On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 6:20 PM >> Glassman, Michael > > >> wrote: >> >> Mike >> >> >> >> It was so interesting to read this >> note after reading the Cognition and >> Instruction essay. All the way >> through it I kept thinking we have >> been >> here before. It reminded me of >> the scholars, especially those who had >> escaped from Germany, trying to >> make sense of what had happened to >> >> their >> >> society during World War II. The >> foremost in my mind was Lewin. >> >> Except I >> >> wonder if he would say the process >> of transformative action starts not >> >> with >> >> emergence of quasi-needs, but our >> willingness and abilities to step >> >> back >> >> from our quasi-needs and the ways >> that they drive us, often to >> dysfunctional behaviors that it >> ultimately destructive to both our >> >> society >> >> and to us as individuals. How >> hard this is to do, we have to keep >> >> going >> >> back again and again. The >> quasi-needs, tribalism, acceptance, >> >> standing are >> >> always there. It is how they >> shape us that is critical. >> >> >> >> Michael >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >> From: >> xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> >> [mailto: >> xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> ] >> On Behalf Of mike cole >> >> Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 >> 8:31 PM >> >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, >> Activity > > >> >> Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning >> Sciences in the era of U.S. >> Nationalism >> >> >> >> In following the perezhivanie >> thread I encountered the note I >> >> re-membered. >> >> And interestingly mis-remembered. >> A translation into my focus on >> mediational means. He places the >> starting point of the process of >> transformative action at the >> emergence of quasi-needs (from Kurt >> >> Lewin). >> >> That seems correct to me. The new >> mediational means emerge under >> environmental presses. Ever >> functionalist ego need a goal(!). (The >> >> problem >> >> with functionalism) In David's words, >> >> >> >> Perhaps the place we should look >> for "exaptations" that can save both >> >> our >> >> personalities and our environment >> is not in our evolved needs, but in >> >> yet >> >> to be designed quasi-needs. >> Artificial organs, after all, always >> >> suggest >> >> new and ever more artificial >> functions, like chess and language. >> >> >> >> This point seems worth keeping in >> mind as we look at where this group >> >> of >> >> critical scholars who work within >> the Learning Sciences disciplinary >> framework would like to lead us. >> >> >> >> mike >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > From lpscholar2@gmail.com Mon Jan 23 07:35:37 2017 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2017 07:35:37 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism In-Reply-To: References: <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C71964@CIO-KRC-D1MBX04.osuad.osu.edu> <1485073527094.7145@iped.uio.no> <5E5B95EA-374F-48EB-B308-BCE49DA52760@gmail.com> <1485113892233.91870@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <588622f4.49ca620a.823fa.2905@mx.google.com> Andy, I am listening on this safe site for you to express what you have been sweating for months to raise without generating a reaction. Every time i hear that half the people in the world have less wealth than the richest 5 or 25 individuals, i am profoundly troubled at this fact. I want clarity on what generated this fact. I also read Martin Packer?s book review that was offering clarity on the notion of ?intentionality?. It seems that your intention-in-action and Mike?s intention-in-action and the learning sciences article as intention-in-action ALL share an unfolding intentionality addressing social injustice. Andy, raise what you are sweating to raise. The folks sweating in the learning sciences share your concern. Where there are overlaps and where there are differences in each approach will unfold among ?us?. The irony in Trump?s inauguration is that Billionaires are now in charge of the cabinet that will take care of the forgotten people. Unbelievable twilight zone. Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: mike cole Sent: January 23, 2017 6:50 AM To: Andy Blunden; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism Seeking clarity in these circumstances is the goal, Andy. Not a given condition.Humanity has not found the solution to solution to nationalist populism so far. By all means participate. But not by picking out part of a paragraph of a colleagues work and condeming it to the garbage pile without reading it. Squelching discussion is the antithesis of what a collective effort to solve our extraordinarily difficult problems we face. Everyone's considered views are welcome. That includes you of course. But hip shooting take downs of others' contributions is destructive. The problems you point to as central are central. So the authors of the paper your wrote. Now lets see if any serious discussion can be had, or we can close this thread. mike On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 11:26 PM, Andy Blunden wrote: > Well, you say "curt" and "rush" and ask for my "better set of ideas," > Mike, but I have been sweating for months trying to figure out a way of > raising this issue without stimulating this kind of reaction. I obviously > haven't found it yet. I thought xmca was about the safest forum I knew to > raise difficult questions. I'll keep my mouth shut, because I don't have a > "better set of ideas." I see a problem, but I don't see the solution, and I > don't see clarity emerging from here. > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Andy Blunden > http://home.mira.net/~andy > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > On 23/01/2017 5:36 PM, mike cole wrote: > >> There are big problems reading one paragraph and neglecting to read the >> rest, >> Andy. You negelected this one, among others in your rush to irony. >> >> /From a liberal perspective, the anti-immigrant and anti-poor rhetoric in >> Trump?s campaign appears to be an about-face from eight progressive years >> under the last administration. But these political turns are not so >> straightforward. In recent years for example, the Obama administration?s >> deportation of over 2.5 million undocumented children and families >> (Iaconangelo, 2016), from Central America and Mexico in particular, >> displayed our nation?s refusal to understand immigration in light of a >> troubling legacy of U.S. military and political-economic intervention in >> these countries. Economic policies that favor the wealthy have led to >> drastic inequalities over the past few decades where a mere 20 Americans >> have more financial assets than the bottom half of the country?157 million >> people?combined (Collins & Hoxie, 2015). The classism of incarceration was >> unmasked as the Department of Justice failed to prosecute the Wall Street >> architects of the Great Recession (Cohan, 2015), but federal prisons were >> expanded to accommodate disproportionately low-income, non-violent >> offenders (Rabuy & Kopf, 2015)./ >> >> How about nurturing such discussion instead of dismissing it out of hand >> that way? You have a better set of ideas, put them out there on this >> thread. That is what this thread/xmca are for. It is not for reaching snap >> judgments and squelching discussion. >> >> mike >> >> >> >> >> On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 6:39 PM, Andy Blunden > ablunden@mira.net>> wrote: >> >> One paragraph from the article on Learning Sciences >> and US Nationalism: >> >> Our scholarship has the potential to be a form of >> transformative resistance against the most >> significant political threats to our democracy >> today >> by explicitly defending and furthering the rights >> and well-being of people of color, immigrants, >> Muslims, women, people who are differently abled, >> LGBTQ communities, and the earth. >> >> So I take this to mean that the authors think that the >> fact that inequality has reached a point where 2 >> individuals own as much wealth as the poorest 50% of >> the world's population and 26 individuals own half of >> the world's wealth is a non-issue. That the >> de-industrialisation of US cities is a matter of no >> importance. To use one of the catchphrases of the >> election, they are "doubling down" on the claim that >> inequality is a matter of cultural prejudice and if >> only we were all much more careful in our use of >> language and showed respect for cultural differences, >> then we can safely leave the world in the hands of >> Walmart and Exxon. >> >> Andy >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------ >> Andy Blunden >> http://home.mira.net/~andy >> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making >> > decision-making> >> >> On 23/01/2017 8:01 AM, mike cole wrote: >> >> Helena et al -- >> >> An important emphasis in the article for me was on >> the fact that although >> the article focused on the American nationalist >> movement that has just >> pulled of an alt-right coup, similar movements are >> poised to take hold in a >> lot of places in Europe to join the many already >> entrenched unsavory >> governments in other parts of the world. >> >> The CRADLE center in Helsinki is under very >> concerted attack and the right >> wing government appears, from this distance, to be >> making great progress on >> destroying its legacy. The same process has been >> in Denmark for some time, >> also with apparent success. >> >> What do our international colleagues who have >> already felt the hot breath >> of right wing nationalism have to offer in terms >> of strategies of >> resistence? >> >> Back to "what is to be done," that sombre question >> from an earlier era. The >> answer last time did not produce what it promised. >> >> mike >> >> mike >> >> On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 12:22 PM, Helena Worthen >> > > >> wrote: >> >> Thank you, Alfredo - I gave it a read. >> >> Sure, of course they?re right. But I am very >> disappointed. >> >> I was hoping that the following was only item >> #1 in a long list of "what >> the 2016 election made apparent": >> >> The 2016 election has made apparent the need >> for scholarship that >> explicitly defends and furthers the rights and >> well-being of people of >> color, immigrants, Muslims, women, people who >> are differently abled, LGBTQ >> communities, and the earth. These are stances >> that have been limited, at >> least explicitly, in the Learning Sciences. >> >> But the call for inclusion was not just #1, it >> seems to be the whole >> thing. In other words, it?s all about >> identity ?plus the earth, of course. >> While inclusion is necessary, it?s not even a >> start. Yes, research, >> teaching, publishing, promotion, conferences ? >> everything associated with >> teaching and learning has to include everyone >> as equals (see Andy?s book) >> in one way or another ? but then what? What >> are they (we) supposed to do? >> Where does the pretty language touch the ground? >> >> I was listening to a broadcast of the Women?s >> March in DC on Saturday >> morning, and Kamala Harris, who was the >> California State Attorney General >> and is now a junior Senator from CA, was >> addressing the rally. She said, >> ?People always ask me to talk about women?s >> issues. I say, ?Oh, I?m SO glad >> you?re interested in economics!! Let?s talk >> about economics.? And she ran >> through a whole set of parallel >> back-and-forths, always pulling identity >> questions back to wages, jobs, earning, >> supporting your family, etc etc. >> >> Much as we need to wipe away any barriers to >> the Learning Sciences (and >> the professions and institutions dedicated to >> them) due to identity, until >> the Learning Sciences start taking a look at >> the place where most people >> spend most of their lives ? not school, I mean >> ? but work, they will be >> engaging in a soft conversation at the edge of >> the real issue. It?s a >> pleasant conversation but it doesn?t put a >> hand on the levers that >> translate skill and knowledge into rent and >> groceries. >> >> H >> >> >> Helena Worthen >> helenaworthen@gmail.com >> >> Berkeley, CA 94707 >> Blog about US and Viet Nam: >> helenaworthen.wordpress.com >> >> >> >> >> On Jan 22, 2017, at 11:38 AM, Alfredo >> Jornet Gil > > >> >> wrote: >> >> Here it is, >> >> http://cognitionandinstruction >> .com/engagements-the-learning- >> > learning-> >> >> sciences-in-a-new-era-of-u-s-nationalism/ >> >> Alfredo >> ________________________________________ >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> >> > > >> >> on behalf of Helena Worthen >> > > >> >> Sent: 22 January 2017 20:24 >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning >> Sciences in the era of U.S. >> >> Nationalism >> >> Someone please re-send the link to this >> article? I think I?m going to >> >> want to read it and respond to Mike?s question. >> >> Thanks ? H >> >> >> Helena Worthen >> helenaworthen@gmail.com >> >> Berkeley, CA 94707 >> Blog about US and Viet Nam: >> helenaworthen.wordpress.com >> >> >> >> >> On Jan 22, 2017, at 12:25 AM, Alfredo >> Jornet Gil > > >> >> wrote: >> >> Mike, >> >> thanks a lot for sharing this article. >> You and Michael, who have and >> >> know more history, have spoken in terms of >> reminiscences. I have lived and >> know less, and the article feels like fresh >> air. During my PhD, I begun to >> increasingly feel that I had to due something >> to act and respond to the >> increasing ecological and humanitarian globe >> crises. But how could I do >> anything if I had children and a PhD to >> finalise?? What could I do that >> would also be doing my job as researcher in a >> department of education? It >> was very difficult to find anything, partly >> because almost every academic >> quest would focus on learning, but so little >> on social development. How >> many scientific articles are dedicated to >> socio-political questions in the >> most cited educational journals? I felt very >> powerless. >> >> To be able to address these questions >> within my expertise, is a >> >> challenge partly because contrary to Dewey's >> hope, educational research has >> only marginally focused on these questions, >> and yet they may be exactly the >> question that matter to education. What are we >> educating for? Indeed, what >> is education for? I think we face a serious >> problem when someone (like >> myself), being an educational >> researchers/scholar, still has to scratch her >> head wondering <> matter to social change and >> development?>> Vygotsky would be shocked! >> >> Alfredo >> >> >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> >> > > >> >> on behalf of mike cole > > >> >> Sent: 19 January 2017 04:51 >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning >> Sciences in the era of U.S. >> >> Nationalism >> >> Yes Michael, >> >> It feels like the world of the later >> 1930's about the time I was born as >> that period came down to me through >> the prism of a family of "premature >> anti fascists." >> >> For a great re-creation of those times >> see the highly ambivalent film by >> Frank Capra, "meet John Doe." It has >> American big capital interconnected >> with fascism combined with populist >> collectivism in a manner that >> >> points at >> >> the media (as then experienced) as the >> bad guys in disguise. Happy >> >> Ending, >> >> Beethoven Ode to Joy and all. >> >> It's come round again, nastier this time. >> >> Mike >> On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 6:20 PM >> Glassman, Michael > > >> wrote: >> >> Mike >> >> >> >> It was so interesting to read this >> note after reading the Cognition and >> Instruction essay. All the way >> through it I kept thinking we have >> been >> here before. It reminded me of >> the scholars, especially those who had >> escaped from Germany, trying to >> make sense of what had happened to >> >> their >> >> society during World War II. The >> foremost in my mind was Lewin. >> >> Except I >> >> wonder if he would say the process >> of transformative action starts not >> >> with >> >> emergence of quasi-needs, but our >> willingness and abilities to step >> >> back >> >> from our quasi-needs and the ways >> that they drive us, often to >> dysfunctional behaviors that it >> ultimately destructive to both our >> >> society >> >> and to us as individuals. How >> hard this is to do, we have to keep >> >> going >> >> back again and again. The >> quasi-needs, tribalism, acceptance, >> >> standing are >> >> always there. It is how they >> shape us that is critical. >> >> >> >> Michael >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >> From: >> xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> >> [mailto: >> xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> ] >> On Behalf Of mike cole >> >> Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 >> 8:31 PM >> >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, >> Activity > > >> >> Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning >> Sciences in the era of U.S. >> Nationalism >> >> >> >> In following the perezhivanie >> thread I encountered the note I >> >> re-membered. >> >> And interestingly mis-remembered. >> A translation into my focus on >> mediational means. He places the >> starting point of the process of >> transformative action at the >> emergence of quasi-needs (from Kurt >> >> Lewin). >> >> That seems correct to me. The new >> mediational means emerge under >> environmental presses. Ever >> functionalist ego need a goal(!). (The >> >> problem >> >> with functionalism) In David's words, >> >> >> >> Perhaps the place we should look >> for "exaptations" that can save both >> >> our >> >> personalities and our environment >> is not in our evolved needs, but in >> >> yet >> >> to be designed quasi-needs. >> Artificial organs, after all, always >> >> suggest >> >> new and ever more artificial >> functions, like chess and language. >> >> >> >> This point seems worth keeping in >> mind as we look at where this group >> >> of >> >> critical scholars who work within >> the Learning Sciences disciplinary >> framework would like to lead us. >> >> >> >> mike >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > From babson@gse.upenn.edu Mon Jan 23 09:04:28 2017 From: babson@gse.upenn.edu (Andrew Babson) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2017 12:04:28 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: James Lawson and perezhivanie In-Reply-To: <628ebbd3-8b51-8e15-47d0-9164e8352c36@mira.net> References: <628ebbd3-8b51-8e15-47d0-9164e8352c36@mira.net> Message-ID: Andy, thank you for the timely post, especially as we move forward in the shadow of authoritarianism here in the USA. Lawson's example of choosing non-violent protest, following Gandhi, is helpful. Consider the effectiveness of millions of people last weekend peacefully taking to the streets with few if any arrests (side note: we all went as a family here in Philly, it was great). Contrast the Black Bloc member's sucker punch of neo-nazi Richard Spencer: people are cheering it, but those same people probably realize it's not a scalable strategy. Different tours de force, different effects, the gender connotations of which are interesting. *P **erezhivanie *is a new term to me, which I link here to the XMCA blog for those other also unfamiliar with it. It seems like a pretty clear gloss of a term I do know well, *Erlebnis, *"experience" (I dislike the gloss of that Dilthey-an term as "lived" experience...but that's for another discussion). It's fascinating to learn about Lawson's vocational decision-making process, and to consider the possible effects of violent and non-violent dissent. But perhaps you could clarify for us Andy why you thought Lawson's story was an example of *perezhivanie*? Where's the point of analytical traction? If it means more than "experience", how can we apply that broader meaning here? It seems like he had a Pauline metanoia/conversion experience. Is that what you mean? Andrew ------------------------------------------------ Andrew Babson, Ph.D. Lecturer Graduate School of Education University of Pennsylvania On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 4:40 AM, Andy Blunden wrote: James Lawson is the Methodist preacher who trained the young members of the SNCC in non-violent action and wrote their constitution. I paste below and attach an excerpt from my book "The Origins of Collective Decision Making" which narrates Lawson's life up until April 1960. Perezhivanie was not the topic under discussion so it is not mentioned in the text, but xmca-ers should be able to see it, an example of perezhivanie: ------------------------------------------------------------ James Lawson was born in 1928, in Uniontown, Pennsylvania. His father, James Snr., was the grandson of an escaped slave, and a Minister for the African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church in New England. Via the Free African Society(FAS) the Methodists had recruited freed slaves in Philadelphiain 1787, but as a result of a racist incident, some left to found the African Methodist Episcopal Church(AMEC). Nonetheless, many African Americans stayed with the United Methodist Church. The AMEC split started in Philadelphia and the AMEC Zion Church was a split that came out of New York. It was to AMEC Zion, James Lawson was born. However, Lawson returned to The United Methodist Church, created by a 1939 merger of several branches of the Methodist Church, which set up five regional ?jurisdictions? of Methodists in the US, organized to maintain regionally identity and a sixth, called the ?Central Jurisdiction? which combined the Black annual conferences, thus building segregation into the constitution of the Church.The Methodists went through a long and painful process, carried out in accordance with the Methodist Code of Discipline, which mandates the principle of Majority, to re-integrate the white and Black, but it was not till after 1964 that Black conferences started to merge into white conferences. At the local level, congregations continued much as before. So it was within the Black section of the segregated United Methodist Church, that James Lawson became a Methodist. James Snr. was a militant preacher; he packed a 38 pistol and set up branches of the NAACP wherever he was assigned to preach. After serving at St. James AMEZ Church in Massillon, Ohio, he transferred to the Lexington Annual Conference of the Central Jurisdiction of the United Methodist Church. James Snr. was no pacifist and according to Lawson he ?refused to take any guff from anyone, particularly on the point of race? and ?insisted that he was going to be treated as a man.? Lawson?s mother, Philane May Cover, on the other hand, was decidedly nonviolent. Lawson?s challenge, which was to form his character, was to reconcile his father?s militancy with his mother?s nonviolence. Lawson grew up in Massillon. One day, at the age of 10, Lawson was asked by his mother to run an errand: A little white child in an automobile yelled ?nigger? out the opened window. I walked over ... and, since I was in a hurry running my mother?s errand, I smacked the child and went on my way. When the Lawson kids got called ?nigger? on the streets or at school, we usually fought. I don?t know where we got that from, except that we figured that it was something to fight over. (Lawson, cited in King, 1999) On the return trip home, aware of possible repercussions, Lawson tried to find the parents of the offending child, to talk to them, but the car was gone. Once home, he told his mother of the incident. Lawson?s mother replied, ?Jimmy, what good did that do?? She talked about who I was, the fact of God?s love, that we were a family of love and that such an incident could not hurt me, because of who I was. I don?t remember anyone else being around, but a stillness took over my being at that moment. It was, as I realized much later on, a mystical experience. In a very real way, my life stood still. I realized in that stillness that I had changed forever. One of the phrases my mother used in her conversation with me was that ?there must be a better way?. I determined, from then on, that I would find the better way. (Lawson, cited in King, 1999, pp. 187-188) He first became acquainted with Gandhi?s experiments in nonviolence as a child, thanks to the African-American press which the family discussed around the dinner table, and had read Gandhi?s autobiography as a teenager. At Baldwin Wallace College, a liberal arts Methodistcollege in Berea, Ohio, he studied Thoreau, Gandhi and Tolstoy, and the pacifist theologians Dietrich Bonhoeffer and Reinhold Niebuhr. At age 19, he became a draft resister, refusing service in the Korean War. Executive director of Fellowship Of Reconciliation (FOR), A. J. Muste,frequently visited to lecture at the College: All of us in history classes were required to hear Muste. I was thrilled. He made me realize that I was not alone in my experimentation, that there was a world movement, and a national movement. ... He acquainted me with the Fellowship Of Reconciliation, which I joined on the spot in 1947. That meant that I got exposed to their book list. After hearing a lecture by A. J. Muste, he joined FOR and CORE. Muste was instrumental thereafter in strengthening Lawson?s nonviolent orientation, directing him towards Gandhi and later facilitating his entry into the sit-in and boycott movement beginning in the South. In the late 1940s and early 1950s Lawson had organized sit-ins and protests directed at establishments that discriminated against blacks in Massillon, long before the Montgomery bus-boycott. He was also active with the National Conference of Methodist Youth. Although a member of a segregated Methodist Church, he found plenty of support for his stands against racial discrimination and war from his white colleagues and church fellows. While he was in prison serving thirteen months of a two and a half year term for draft resistance in 1952, he was re-elected as Vice-President of the NCMY. Wesleyan Methodism was central to Lawson?s outlook. Just as John Wesley had sought to cleanse individuals of iniquity, so could society be purged of the social sins of slavery, segregation, poverty, and war.Generations of African American Methodists from Harriet Tubman (AMEZ) and Henry M. Turner (AME) in the nineteenth century, to Rosa Parks (AME) and James Farmer (MEC), were led to social justice activism by this Methodist heritage. Lawson used his prison time to read and think. Writing from prison in 1952 aged 23 years old and yet to enter the seminary, Lawson said he aspired to emulate ?the life of Jesus, St. Francis, George Fox, Gandhi, Buddha... and other great religious persons.? These figures attached little importance to ?theology but (to their) experience with God.?Further, he noted ?religious failures today are in (the arena of) experience and practice, not theology.? When Lawson entered prison, he was a Christian pacifist.He told Mary King however, that his ?first commitment was to work on race,? and conscientious objection came second.By the time of his release, he had advanced to Gandhian nonviolence. He wondered ?why can?t a mass non-violent revolution be staged throughout the South where the segregation pattern is much like the ?untouchables? of India? Such a movement would have to start with one person who had the Christian vision to make such a revolution a reality in his own life.? Gandhian nonviolence became the synthesizing factor for Lawson?s religious thinking: the militancy of his father?s Methodism and the Christian pacifism that he drew from his mother. Muste arranged for Lawson to visit India after his release from prison with a letter of introduction to activists in the Gandhian movement, and he remained in India from May 1953 to 1956, working at Hislop College in Nagpur, reading Indian literature and working with Gandhi?s movement. Lawson?s practice would remain deeply religious; his nonviolence was saturated with the message of Christian love, and blended with principles synthesized from a broad range of religious and secular sources, both Eastern and Western. His aim was the ?mass education and training of people in the use of nonviolent direct action techniques.? Lawson insisted that ?you are fighting a system, not an individual, not a race, or not the people of another country, but a system.? He continued his study of pacifism and Gandhian nonviolence at Oberlin College, Ohio. While still in India, he had read about Martin Luther King and his successful leadership of the Montgomery bus boycott.King?s lecture at Oberlin on February 6, 1957, fortified his long-held intention to work in the South for transformative social change. After King?s lecture to a packed audience, he and Lawson talked together at dinner.Though Lawson was contemplating study for a Ph.D., King told him ?don?t wait, but come south now!? adding that there was no one else like Lawson.Muste arranged for FOR to hire Lawson as southern field secretary to be stationed at Nashville in January 1958. Upon his arrival, he found that Glenn Smiley, national field director of FOR, had arranged for Lawson to run a full schedule of workshops ? including one to take place early that year at the first annual meeting of the SCLC in Columbia, South Carolina. At the SCLC meeting, King made an exuberant introduction of Lawson as FOR?s new regional representative and discussed the organization?s role in Montgomery, telling delegates to be sure to attend Lawson?s workshop on nonviolence. King took his seat in the first pew, waiting for the three-hour session to start: Martin did that at every SCLC meeting as long as he lived. He would ask me to conduct an afternoon workshop, usually two or three hours, and he would arrange for it to be ?at-large? so that everyone could attend, with nothing else to compete. He put it on the schedule himself. A few minutes early, he would show up and sit alone, as an example, in the front row. Back in Nashville, Lawson continued with Monday evening workshops during the autumn of 1959 in which he trained the students who were to be the core of the Nashville sit-in movement. As a result of his involvement with the sit-ins Lawson was expelled from Vanderbilt, but he enrolled with Boston University to finish his degree in theology,while continuing to work with the students. Several professors in the School of Theology resigned over his expulsion. The techniques that the students deployed were drawn from Lawson?s workshops. In 1958 and 1959, Lawson mobilized all that he knew about Christian pacifism, Gandhian nonviolence, and Methodist social ministry and blended them into an unprecedented curriculum that influenced the civil rights movement in Nashville and beyond. Blending Christianity and interreligious sources, he did not present its philosophy and practice as a secular doctrine, but as the essence of religion itself. Core to nonviolence was mirroring God?s love for humankind and exhibiting it through concrete relationships of human solidarity and community. ?Nonviolence,? Lawson taught, is the aggressive, forgiving, patient, long-suffering Christ-like and Christ-commanded love or good-will for all humankind even in the face of tension, fear, hatred, or demonic evil.? Moreover, ?it is the readiness to absorb suffering with forgiveness and courage rather than to inflict suffering on others.? Lawson divided his instruction into four modules: how nonviolence reacts, training for nonviolence, the virtues of nonviolence, and the methods of nonviolence. Practitioners prepared themselves by jettisoning anger, hostility and fear thus ?minimizing the effect of an attack,? valuing love, courage, fearlessness, and forgiveness, and pursuing redemptive suffering which ?releases unknown elements for good.? Preparation included meditation and prayer, study of the scriptures, practicing nonviolence through challenges to segregation in bus transportation and in other public facilities.The practice steps included fact-finding, negotiation, education of the community, and various methods of nonviolent direct action including sit-ins, boycotts, strikes, and civil disobedience. Lawson provided an extensive bibliography including relevant verses from the Bible, the Bhagavad Gita, and from the Chinese philosopher, Mo Ti and the Hebrew prophet, Isaiah. The Nashville sit-ins and those led by students in other southern cities convinced Ella Baker of the SCLC to call a conference in April, 1960, at Shaw University in Raleigh, North Carolina. Out of this meeting emerged the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee.Lawson delivered an opening keynote address that helped to frame SNCC?s nonviolent trajectory.Later, Lawson summarized discussions and consensus that emerged out of the conference, and his synopsis received the approval of everyone there. Lawson?s overall comments said that ?nonviolence as it grows from Judaic-Christian tradition seeks a social order of justice permeated by love.? It was Lawson who delivered the keynote address and framed SNCC?s nonviolent orientation. The whole group, perhaps 120 participants, all in the room, asked me to draft a statement. Eventually, three different drafts emerged. The Nashville group was cohesive. The extant draft was the third, influenced by the Nashville group, after two earlier conversations. (Interview with King, June 2014) Lawson?s synopsis was approved by the Conference. In a private email message Mary King told me: He [James Lawson] was reading from the FOR booklist from a young age, but I don?t think that he was influenced on notions of Consensus by Quakers, because the connection was too abstract. Let me underscore that he says it was for him Methodist origins. (Private email, 15 April 2014) In his interview with Mary King, Lawson confirmed that the origin of Consensus in SNCC was the Nashville Central Committee, confirming what Mary King had told me in April. As to the roots Consensus in Lawson?s own experience, he emphasized that: It was the Methodist youth and student movements with which I had grown up, and this is how they made decisions. They knew the rules of parliamentary procedures, but they wanted to find a common mind. (Interview with King, June 2014) The Methodist Church to this very day still mandates Majority decisions, but this would never have entailed children voting ? in general youngsters in these organizations were simply told what to do. The Black congregations had operated separately for more than a century, so there was some room for Lawson to develop a consensual model of collaboration in working with young people. It is also possible the Black congregations, like other Black Churches in America, drew on other traditions of decision making. -- ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Mon Jan 23 09:08:54 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2017 17:08:54 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: References: <1485031482970.89461@iped.uio.no>, Message-ID: <1485191332785.92884@iped.uio.no> Dear Martin, thanks for the nuances you introduce. Yes, I agree with you, it is totally sensible to hear Trump's words with hope and actually experience (perezhivat) them in such a way as to become moving force towards transformation. I was only approaching the speech from a developmental stages perspective, where, to hear the speech with contempt given the speech's formal structure as a type of generalisation, would mean to hear them within that stage that Andy very appropriately (in my view) called as "magic". Vygotsky (I think) also used this term to refer to a stage in child development. But I do not wish to say that contempt is the only possible quality, and so, as you very nicely remark, hope, enthusiasm, empowerment, all these and their developmental and historical conditions should be considered as possibilities of hearing Trump's speech. Thanks a lot for the resources/links, I am incorporating them to our joint document. Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Martin John Packer Sent: 22 January 2017 16:08 To: xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie Hi Alfredo. I think your proposal is very interesting; that we could explore two different ways of hearing and understanding Trump?s words. But if I understand you correctly, I don?t agree that ?in the first case, there is no hope for change, there is contempt.? I have lived in Michigan and Pennsylvania, and in both states industries that were central to the economic rise of the working class, auto manufacturing and steel foundries, collapsed as a result of globalization. I have seen first hand some of the communities that were almost completely destroyed. I believe that people who experienced these changes do hear Trump?s words with hope for change, and if they have contempt it is for professional politicians who they feel speak but do not act. But perhaps you mean it was a lack of hope that *led* people to Trump: The New Yorker has published several articles by George Packer (no relation) on the appeal that Trump has to the white working class. For example: Martin On Jan 21, 2017, at 3:44 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > wrote: Dear Helena, Andy, all, Unfortunately, I have not been able to find the time to watch the movie Fate of a Man, but I have followed the very interesting analyses and conversations about it. I am opening this thread as connexions between those analyses, perezhivanie, and current tragic social and political situation in the US and elsewhere. This also connects with the article that Mike shared on the position of the Learning Sciences with regard to this situation (how happy I was to see this initiative!). In particular, I wanted to pick up on Helena's very true comment that "the US is going to have to produce some works of scholarship or art, or both, that attempt to explain what is happening now here in the US -- for example, this afternoon, under President Trump." Yesterday, we saw at home Trump's speech. Although we had followed Trump's campaign and its denigrating tenor, it was yesterday, for the first time, that my wife and me got this gut feeling of true tragedy, of a real *drama* as we heard those empty, but to recover the prior article for discussion, hollowed and hollowing words coming out of that mouth. It came upon us that there may be lots of people for whom those words are not hollowed, but actually encouraging, rich, beautiful. How can you hear that as beauty? So, I was wondering, and in following up with our 2016 MCA Issue 4 discussion, whether we could not actually conduct an analysis of the sort Marc offers in his article of the perezhivanie. Just as Vygotsky explains how 3 different children experience the situation of an alcoholic mother differently, could not we perform an analysis ?of that perezhivanie in which a person experiences yesterday's situation as one of encouragement, of freedom and hope. Would that not be a way to try to understand what is going on? This would not be a piece of art, but could be something we could do to try to understand and change this situation. We could then contrast that perezhivanie with the one many of as have, in which the situation is experience as a real TRAGEDY. I think in the first case, there is no hope for change, there is contempt; in the second, hearing those words as hollowed and hollowing require that you live the situation as a doubled situation in which you experienced it from a very different developmental stage. One in which the speech sounds as a case of involution. Should we find the transcribed speech and perform such analysis? Going now to support the Woman's march here in Victoria BC. Alfredo From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Mon Jan 23 09:44:19 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2017 17:44:19 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism In-Reply-To: <588622f4.49ca620a.823fa.2905@mx.google.com> References: <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C71964@CIO-KRC-D1MBX04.osuad.osu.edu> <1485073527094.7145@iped.uio.no> <5E5B95EA-374F-48EB-B308-BCE49DA52760@gmail.com> <1485113892233.91870@iped.uio.no> , <588622f4.49ca620a.823fa.2905@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <1485193458597.42789@iped.uio.no> Andy, Mike, I think in this moment of history, and being as privileged as we are to be able to use SO MANY economical and material resources to participate in a forum like this, where we all are striving for change, and most of all, for achieving a more human society (and of course, finding what that means is part of the quest), we cannot afford shutting down anyone. It is against shutting down the we are striving right now. I am doing my part trying to collect everyone's voices under a document that hopefully might look coherent some time. So, as Mike says, by all means participate, Andy and anyone else. I too, as did Helena and Andy, felt the text fell short in digging into what the actual problem is; but again, those authors have already written much more to raise awareness than most learning scientists I know have . We need BOTH critiquing and praising. Francine had brought the notion of Irony, and Michael G. was bringing up Bateson's Double Bind. Both notions are such that they need both praising and critique, of taking in and giving out. Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com Sent: 23 January 2017 16:35 To: mike cole; Andy Blunden; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism Andy, I am listening on this safe site for you to express what you have been sweating for months to raise without generating a reaction. Every time i hear that half the people in the world have less wealth than the richest 5 or 25 individuals, i am profoundly troubled at this fact. I want clarity on what generated this fact. I also read Martin Packer?s book review that was offering clarity on the notion of ?intentionality?. It seems that your intention-in-action and Mike?s intention-in-action and the learning sciences article as intention-in-action ALL share an unfolding intentionality addressing social injustice. Andy, raise what you are sweating to raise. The folks sweating in the learning sciences share your concern. Where there are overlaps and where there are differences in each approach will unfold among ?us?. The irony in Trump?s inauguration is that Billionaires are now in charge of the cabinet that will take care of the forgotten people. Unbelievable twilight zone. Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: mike cole Sent: January 23, 2017 6:50 AM To: Andy Blunden; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism Seeking clarity in these circumstances is the goal, Andy. Not a given condition.Humanity has not found the solution to solution to nationalist populism so far. By all means participate. But not by picking out part of a paragraph of a colleagues work and condeming it to the garbage pile without reading it. Squelching discussion is the antithesis of what a collective effort to solve our extraordinarily difficult problems we face. Everyone's considered views are welcome. That includes you of course. But hip shooting take downs of others' contributions is destructive. The problems you point to as central are central. So the authors of the paper your wrote. Now lets see if any serious discussion can be had, or we can close this thread. mike On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 11:26 PM, Andy Blunden wrote: > Well, you say "curt" and "rush" and ask for my "better set of ideas," > Mike, but I have been sweating for months trying to figure out a way of > raising this issue without stimulating this kind of reaction. I obviously > haven't found it yet. I thought xmca was about the safest forum I knew to > raise difficult questions. I'll keep my mouth shut, because I don't have a > "better set of ideas." I see a problem, but I don't see the solution, and I > don't see clarity emerging from here. > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Andy Blunden > http://home.mira.net/~andy > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > On 23/01/2017 5:36 PM, mike cole wrote: > >> There are big problems reading one paragraph and neglecting to read the >> rest, >> Andy. You negelected this one, among others in your rush to irony. >> >> /From a liberal perspective, the anti-immigrant and anti-poor rhetoric in >> Trump?s campaign appears to be an about-face from eight progressive years >> under the last administration. But these political turns are not so >> straightforward. In recent years for example, the Obama administration?s >> deportation of over 2.5 million undocumented children and families >> (Iaconangelo, 2016), from Central America and Mexico in particular, >> displayed our nation?s refusal to understand immigration in light of a >> troubling legacy of U.S. military and political-economic intervention in >> these countries. Economic policies that favor the wealthy have led to >> drastic inequalities over the past few decades where a mere 20 Americans >> have more financial assets than the bottom half of the country?157 million >> people?combined (Collins & Hoxie, 2015). The classism of incarceration was >> unmasked as the Department of Justice failed to prosecute the Wall Street >> architects of the Great Recession (Cohan, 2015), but federal prisons were >> expanded to accommodate disproportionately low-income, non-violent >> offenders (Rabuy & Kopf, 2015)./ >> >> How about nurturing such discussion instead of dismissing it out of hand >> that way? You have a better set of ideas, put them out there on this >> thread. That is what this thread/xmca are for. It is not for reaching snap >> judgments and squelching discussion. >> >> mike >> >> >> >> >> On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 6:39 PM, Andy Blunden > ablunden@mira.net>> wrote: >> >> One paragraph from the article on Learning Sciences >> and US Nationalism: >> >> Our scholarship has the potential to be a form of >> transformative resistance against the most >> significant political threats to our democracy >> today >> by explicitly defending and furthering the rights >> and well-being of people of color, immigrants, >> Muslims, women, people who are differently abled, >> LGBTQ communities, and the earth. >> >> So I take this to mean that the authors think that the >> fact that inequality has reached a point where 2 >> individuals own as much wealth as the poorest 50% of >> the world's population and 26 individuals own half of >> the world's wealth is a non-issue. That the >> de-industrialisation of US cities is a matter of no >> importance. To use one of the catchphrases of the >> election, they are "doubling down" on the claim that >> inequality is a matter of cultural prejudice and if >> only we were all much more careful in our use of >> language and showed respect for cultural differences, >> then we can safely leave the world in the hands of >> Walmart and Exxon. >> >> Andy >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------ >> Andy Blunden >> http://home.mira.net/~andy >> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making >> > decision-making> >> >> On 23/01/2017 8:01 AM, mike cole wrote: >> >> Helena et al -- >> >> An important emphasis in the article for me was on >> the fact that although >> the article focused on the American nationalist >> movement that has just >> pulled of an alt-right coup, similar movements are >> poised to take hold in a >> lot of places in Europe to join the many already >> entrenched unsavory >> governments in other parts of the world. >> >> The CRADLE center in Helsinki is under very >> concerted attack and the right >> wing government appears, from this distance, to be >> making great progress on >> destroying its legacy. The same process has been >> in Denmark for some time, >> also with apparent success. >> >> What do our international colleagues who have >> already felt the hot breath >> of right wing nationalism have to offer in terms >> of strategies of >> resistence? >> >> Back to "what is to be done," that sombre question >> from an earlier era. The >> answer last time did not produce what it promised. >> >> mike >> >> mike >> >> On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 12:22 PM, Helena Worthen >> > > >> wrote: >> >> Thank you, Alfredo - I gave it a read. >> >> Sure, of course they?re right. But I am very >> disappointed. >> >> I was hoping that the following was only item >> #1 in a long list of "what >> the 2016 election made apparent": >> >> The 2016 election has made apparent the need >> for scholarship that >> explicitly defends and furthers the rights and >> well-being of people of >> color, immigrants, Muslims, women, people who >> are differently abled, LGBTQ >> communities, and the earth. These are stances >> that have been limited, at >> least explicitly, in the Learning Sciences. >> >> But the call for inclusion was not just #1, it >> seems to be the whole >> thing. In other words, it?s all about >> identity ?plus the earth, of course. >> While inclusion is necessary, it?s not even a >> start. Yes, research, >> teaching, publishing, promotion, conferences ? >> everything associated with >> teaching and learning has to include everyone >> as equals (see Andy?s book) >> in one way or another ? but then what? What >> are they (we) supposed to do? >> Where does the pretty language touch the ground? >> >> I was listening to a broadcast of the Women?s >> March in DC on Saturday >> morning, and Kamala Harris, who was the >> California State Attorney General >> and is now a junior Senator from CA, was >> addressing the rally. She said, >> ?People always ask me to talk about women?s >> issues. I say, ?Oh, I?m SO glad >> you?re interested in economics!! Let?s talk >> about economics.? And she ran >> through a whole set of parallel >> back-and-forths, always pulling identity >> questions back to wages, jobs, earning, >> supporting your family, etc etc. >> >> Much as we need to wipe away any barriers to >> the Learning Sciences (and >> the professions and institutions dedicated to >> them) due to identity, until >> the Learning Sciences start taking a look at >> the place where most people >> spend most of their lives ? not school, I mean >> ? but work, they will be >> engaging in a soft conversation at the edge of >> the real issue. It?s a >> pleasant conversation but it doesn?t put a >> hand on the levers that >> translate skill and knowledge into rent and >> groceries. >> >> H >> >> >> Helena Worthen >> helenaworthen@gmail.com >> >> Berkeley, CA 94707 >> Blog about US and Viet Nam: >> helenaworthen.wordpress.com >> >> >> >> >> On Jan 22, 2017, at 11:38 AM, Alfredo >> Jornet Gil > > >> >> wrote: >> >> Here it is, >> >> http://cognitionandinstruction >> .com/engagements-the-learning- >> > learning-> >> >> sciences-in-a-new-era-of-u-s-nationalism/ >> >> Alfredo >> ________________________________________ >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> >> > > >> >> on behalf of Helena Worthen >> > > >> >> Sent: 22 January 2017 20:24 >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning >> Sciences in the era of U.S. >> >> Nationalism >> >> Someone please re-send the link to this >> article? I think I?m going to >> >> want to read it and respond to Mike?s question. >> >> Thanks ? H >> >> >> Helena Worthen >> helenaworthen@gmail.com >> >> Berkeley, CA 94707 >> Blog about US and Viet Nam: >> helenaworthen.wordpress.com >> >> >> >> >> On Jan 22, 2017, at 12:25 AM, Alfredo >> Jornet Gil > > >> >> wrote: >> >> Mike, >> >> thanks a lot for sharing this article. >> You and Michael, who have and >> >> know more history, have spoken in terms of >> reminiscences. I have lived and >> know less, and the article feels like fresh >> air. During my PhD, I begun to >> increasingly feel that I had to due something >> to act and respond to the >> increasing ecological and humanitarian globe >> crises. But how could I do >> anything if I had children and a PhD to >> finalise?? What could I do that >> would also be doing my job as researcher in a >> department of education? It >> was very difficult to find anything, partly >> because almost every academic >> quest would focus on learning, but so little >> on social development. How >> many scientific articles are dedicated to >> socio-political questions in the >> most cited educational journals? I felt very >> powerless. >> >> To be able to address these questions >> within my expertise, is a >> >> challenge partly because contrary to Dewey's >> hope, educational research has >> only marginally focused on these questions, >> and yet they may be exactly the >> question that matter to education. What are we >> educating for? Indeed, what >> is education for? I think we face a serious >> problem when someone (like >> myself), being an educational >> researchers/scholar, still has to scratch her >> head wondering <> matter to social change and >> development?>> Vygotsky would be shocked! >> >> Alfredo >> >> >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> >> > > >> >> on behalf of mike cole > > >> >> Sent: 19 January 2017 04:51 >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning >> Sciences in the era of U.S. >> >> Nationalism >> >> Yes Michael, >> >> It feels like the world of the later >> 1930's about the time I was born as >> that period came down to me through >> the prism of a family of "premature >> anti fascists." >> >> For a great re-creation of those times >> see the highly ambivalent film by >> Frank Capra, "meet John Doe." It has >> American big capital interconnected >> with fascism combined with populist >> collectivism in a manner that >> >> points at >> >> the media (as then experienced) as the >> bad guys in disguise. Happy >> >> Ending, >> >> Beethoven Ode to Joy and all. >> >> It's come round again, nastier this time. >> >> Mike >> On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 6:20 PM >> Glassman, Michael > > >> wrote: >> >> Mike >> >> >> >> It was so interesting to read this >> note after reading the Cognition and >> Instruction essay. All the way >> through it I kept thinking we have >> been >> here before. It reminded me of >> the scholars, especially those who had >> escaped from Germany, trying to >> make sense of what had happened to >> >> their >> >> society during World War II. The >> foremost in my mind was Lewin. >> >> Except I >> >> wonder if he would say the process >> of transformative action starts not >> >> with >> >> emergence of quasi-needs, but our >> willingness and abilities to step >> >> back >> >> from our quasi-needs and the ways >> that they drive us, often to >> dysfunctional behaviors that it >> ultimately destructive to both our >> >> society >> >> and to us as individuals. How >> hard this is to do, we have to keep >> >> going >> >> back again and again. The >> quasi-needs, tribalism, acceptance, >> >> standing are >> >> always there. It is how they >> shape us that is critical. >> >> >> >> Michael >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >> From: >> xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> >> [mailto: >> xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> ] >> On Behalf Of mike cole >> >> Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 >> 8:31 PM >> >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, >> Activity > > >> >> Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning >> Sciences in the era of U.S. >> Nationalism >> >> >> >> In following the perezhivanie >> thread I encountered the note I >> >> re-membered. >> >> And interestingly mis-remembered. >> A translation into my focus on >> mediational means. He places the >> starting point of the process of >> transformative action at the >> emergence of quasi-needs (from Kurt >> >> Lewin). >> >> That seems correct to me. The new >> mediational means emerge under >> environmental presses. Ever >> functionalist ego need a goal(!). (The >> >> problem >> >> with functionalism) In David's words, >> >> >> >> Perhaps the place we should look >> for "exaptations" that can save both >> >> our >> >> personalities and our environment >> is not in our evolved needs, but in >> >> yet >> >> to be designed quasi-needs. >> Artificial organs, after all, always >> >> suggest >> >> new and ever more artificial >> functions, like chess and language. >> >> >> >> This point seems worth keeping in >> mind as we look at where this group >> >> of >> >> critical scholars who work within >> the Learning Sciences disciplinary >> framework would like to lead us. >> >> >> >> mike >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > From helenaworthen@gmail.com Mon Jan 23 09:55:00 2017 From: helenaworthen@gmail.com (Helena Worthen) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2017 09:55:00 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism In-Reply-To: References: <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C71964@CIO-KRC-D1MBX04.osuad.osu.edu> <1485073527094.7145@iped.uio.no> <5E5B95EA-374F-48EB-B308-BCE49DA52760@gmail.com> <1485113892233.91870@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <7BD412C4-D775-4D3A-9992-68ACACFB188C@gmail.com> Well, yes. Good question: How? I take it Francine is not asking this ironically: she really wants us to figure out how. The challenge is to answer the question. I don?t think any of us have a quick answer, but it certainly is a question that is within our collective knowledge to address. H Helena Worthen helenaworthen@gmail.com Berkeley, CA 94707 Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com > On Jan 22, 2017, at 7:32 PM, Larry Smolucha wrote: > > Message from Francine Smolucha: > > > The key to an analysis of the Trump movement is understanding the > > fundamental IRONIES that have rocked American politics. > > > The workers revolution has resulted in the > > workers/unions deserting the Left, the socialists, the Democratic Party. > > Trump is a Capitalist regardless of whether he actually has a Republican ideology. > > The workers' movement has been hijacked by a capitalist. > > > The other great IRONY is that Trump wants to make Russia a U.S. ally (again). > > The Left, the socialists, the Democratic Party are the ones demonizing Russia - > > what a reversal! > > > Since CHAT derives from Russian psychology (Leontiev and Vygotsky) and the backlash against Trump is also a backlash against all things Russian - this puts CHAT in a particularly awkward position. How can a cultural historical psychology that originated in Russia become the leader in the anti-Trump discourse? or lead an anti-Trump educational movement? You are even extolling a Russian concept PEREZHIVANIE. > > > I think the XMCA needs to examine its own perezhivanie at this time. > > > > > ________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of mike cole > Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 3:01 PM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Cc: Mariane Hedegaard; Reijo Miettinen; Seth Chaiklin > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism > > Helena et al -- > > An important emphasis in the article for me was on the fact that although > the article focused on the American nationalist movement that has just > pulled of an alt-right coup, similar movements are poised to take hold in a > lot of places in Europe to join the many already entrenched unsavory > governments in other parts of the world. > > The CRADLE center in Helsinki is under very concerted attack and the right > wing government appears, from this distance, to be making great progress on > destroying its legacy. The same process has been in Denmark for some time, > also with apparent success. > > What do our international colleagues who have already felt the hot breath > of right wing nationalism have to offer in terms of strategies of > resistence? > > Back to "what is to be done," that sombre question from an earlier era. The > answer last time did not produce what it promised. > > mike > > mike > > On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 12:22 PM, Helena Worthen > wrote: > >> Thank you, Alfredo - I gave it a read. >> >> Sure, of course they?re right. But I am very disappointed. >> >> I was hoping that the following was only item #1 in a long list of "what >> the 2016 election made apparent": >> >> The 2016 election has made apparent the need for scholarship that >> explicitly defends and furthers the rights and well-being of people of >> color, immigrants, Muslims, women, people who are differently abled, LGBTQ >> communities, and the earth. These are stances that have been limited, at >> least explicitly, in the Learning Sciences. >> >> But the call for inclusion was not just #1, it seems to be the whole >> thing. In other words, it?s all about identity ?plus the earth, of course. >> While inclusion is necessary, it?s not even a start. Yes, research, >> teaching, publishing, promotion, conferences ? everything associated with >> teaching and learning has to include everyone as equals (see Andy?s book) >> in one way or another ? but then what? What are they (we) supposed to do? >> Where does the pretty language touch the ground? >> >> I was listening to a broadcast of the Women?s March in DC on Saturday >> morning, and Kamala Harris, who was the California State Attorney General >> and is now a junior Senator from CA, was addressing the rally. She said, >> ?People always ask me to talk about women?s issues. I say, ?Oh, I?m SO glad >> you?re interested in economics!! Let?s talk about economics.? And she ran >> through a whole set of parallel back-and-forths, always pulling identity >> questions back to wages, jobs, earning, supporting your family, etc etc. >> >> Much as we need to wipe away any barriers to the Learning Sciences (and >> the professions and institutions dedicated to them) due to identity, until >> the Learning Sciences start taking a look at the place where most people >> spend most of their lives ? not school, I mean ? but work, they will be >> engaging in a soft conversation at the edge of the real issue. It?s a >> pleasant conversation but it doesn?t put a hand on the levers that >> translate skill and knowledge into rent and groceries. >> >> H >> >> >> Helena Worthen >> helenaworthen@gmail.com >> Berkeley, CA 94707 >> Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com >> >> >> >>> On Jan 22, 2017, at 11:38 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >> wrote: >>> >>> Here it is, >>> >>> http://cognitionandinstruction.com/engagements-the-learning- >> sciences-in-a-new-era-of-u-s-nationalism/ >>> >>> Alfredo >>> ________________________________________ >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> on behalf of Helena Worthen >>> Sent: 22 January 2017 20:24 >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >> Nationalism >>> >>> Someone please re-send the link to this article? I think I?m going to >> want to read it and respond to Mike?s question. >>> >>> Thanks ? H >>> >>> >>> Helena Worthen >>> helenaworthen@gmail.com >>> Berkeley, CA 94707 >>> Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com >>> >>> >>> >>>> On Jan 22, 2017, at 12:25 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >> wrote: >>>> >>>> Mike, >>>> >>>> thanks a lot for sharing this article. You and Michael, who have and >> know more history, have spoken in terms of reminiscences. I have lived and >> know less, and the article feels like fresh air. During my PhD, I begun to >> increasingly feel that I had to due something to act and respond to the >> increasing ecological and humanitarian globe crises. But how could I do >> anything if I had children and a PhD to finalise?? What could I do that >> would also be doing my job as researcher in a department of education? It >> was very difficult to find anything, partly because almost every academic >> quest would focus on learning, but so little on social development. How >> many scientific articles are dedicated to socio-political questions in the >> most cited educational journals? I felt very powerless. >>>> >>>> To be able to address these questions within my expertise, is a >> challenge partly because contrary to Dewey's hope, educational research has >> only marginally focused on these questions, and yet they may be exactly the >> question that matter to education. What are we educating for? Indeed, what >> is education for? I think we face a serious problem when someone (like >> myself), being an educational researchers/scholar, still has to scratch her >> head wondering <> development?>> Vygotsky would be shocked! >>>> >>>> Alfredo >>>> >>>> >>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> on behalf of mike cole >>>> Sent: 19 January 2017 04:51 >>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >> Nationalism >>>> >>>> Yes Michael, >>>> >>>> It feels like the world of the later 1930's about the time I was born as >>>> that period came down to me through the prism of a family of "premature >>>> anti fascists." >>>> >>>> For a great re-creation of those times see the highly ambivalent film by >>>> Frank Capra, "meet John Doe." It has American big capital interconnected >>>> with fascism combined with populist collectivism in a manner that >> points at >>>> the media (as then experienced) as the bad guys in disguise. Happy >> Ending, >>>> Beethoven Ode to Joy and all. >>>> >>>> It's come round again, nastier this time. >>>> >>>> Mike >>>> On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 6:20 PM Glassman, Michael >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Mike >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> It was so interesting to read this note after reading the Cognition and >>>>> Instruction essay. All the way through it I kept thinking we have been >>>>> here before. It reminded me of the scholars, especially those who had >>>>> escaped from Germany, trying to make sense of what had happened to >> their >>>>> society during World War II. The foremost in my mind was Lewin. >> Except I >>>>> wonder if he would say the process of transformative action starts not >> with >>>>> emergence of quasi-needs, but our willingness and abilities to step >> back >>>>> from our quasi-needs and the ways that they drive us, often to >>>>> dysfunctional behaviors that it ultimately destructive to both our >> society >>>>> and to us as individuals. How hard this is to do, we have to keep >> going >>>>> back again and again. The quasi-needs, tribalism, acceptance, >> standing are >>>>> always there. It is how they shape us that is critical. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Michael >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> >>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto: >>>>> xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole >>>>> >>>>> Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 8:31 PM >>>>> >>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>> >>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> In following the perezhivanie thread I encountered the note I >> re-membered. >>>>> >>>>> And interestingly mis-remembered. A translation into my focus on >>>>> mediational means. He places the starting point of the process of >>>>> transformative action at the emergence of quasi-needs (from Kurt >> Lewin). >>>>> >>>>> That seems correct to me. The new mediational means emerge under >>>>> environmental presses. Ever functionalist ego need a goal(!). (The >> problem >>>>> with functionalism) In David's words, >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Perhaps the place we should look for "exaptations" that can save both >> our >>>>> personalities and our environment is not in our evolved needs, but in >> yet >>>>> to be designed quasi-needs. Artificial organs, after all, always >> suggest >>>>> new and ever more artificial functions, like chess and language. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> This point seems worth keeping in mind as we look at where this group >> of >>>>> critical scholars who work within the Learning Sciences disciplinary >>>>> framework would like to lead us. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> mike >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>> >>> >> >> From Peg.Griffin@att.net Mon Jan 23 10:23:26 2017 From: Peg.Griffin@att.net (Peg Griffin) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2017 13:23:26 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: <1485191332785.92884@iped.uio.no> References: <1485031482970.89461@iped.uio.no>, <1485191332785.92884@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <008301d275a5$cb210c40$616324c0$@att.net> Robert Borosage's take on the speech: https://ourfuture.org/20170123/trumps-perverse-populism?utm_source=progressi ve_breakfast&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=pbreak -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Alfredo Jornet Gil Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 12:09 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie Dear Martin, thanks for the nuances you introduce. Yes, I agree with you, it is totally sensible to hear Trump's words with hope and actually experience (perezhivat) them in such a way as to become moving force towards transformation. I was only approaching the speech from a developmental stages perspective, where, to hear the speech with contempt given the speech's formal structure as a type of generalisation, would mean to hear them within that stage that Andy very appropriately (in my view) called as "magic". Vygotsky (I think) also used this term to refer to a stage in child development. But I do not wish to say that contempt is the only possible quality, and so, as you very nicely remark, hope, enthusiasm, empowerment, all these and their developmental and historical conditions should be considered as possibilities of hearing Trump's speech. Thanks a lot for the resources/links, I am incorporating them to our joint document. Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Martin John Packer Sent: 22 January 2017 16:08 To: xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie Hi Alfredo. I think your proposal is very interesting; that we could explore two different ways of hearing and understanding Trump's words. But if I understand you correctly, I don't agree that "in the first case, there is no hope for change, there is contempt." I have lived in Michigan and Pennsylvania, and in both states industries that were central to the economic rise of the working class, auto manufacturing and steel foundries, collapsed as a result of globalization. I have seen first hand some of the communities that were almost completely destroyed. I believe that people who experienced these changes do hear Trump's words with hope for change, and if they have contempt it is for professional politicians who they feel speak but do not act. But perhaps you mean it was a lack of hope that *led* people to Trump: The New Yorker has published several articles by George Packer (no relation) on the appeal that Trump has to the white working class. For example: Martin On Jan 21, 2017, at 3:44 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > wrote: Dear Helena, Andy, all, Unfortunately, I have not been able to find the time to watch the movie Fate of a Man, but I have followed the very interesting analyses and conversations about it. I am opening this thread as connexions between those analyses, perezhivanie, and current tragic social and political situation in the US and elsewhere. This also connects with the article that Mike shared on the position of the Learning Sciences with regard to this situation (how happy I was to see this initiative!). In particular, I wanted to pick up on Helena's very true comment that "the US is going to have to produce some works of scholarship or art, or both, that attempt to explain what is happening now here in the US -- for example, this afternoon, under President Trump." Yesterday, we saw at home Trump's speech. Although we had followed Trump's campaign and its denigrating tenor, it was yesterday, for the first time, that my wife and me got this gut feeling of true tragedy, of a real *drama* as we heard those empty, but to recover the prior article for discussion, hollowed and hollowing words coming out of that mouth. It came upon us that there may be lots of people for whom those words are not hollowed, but actually encouraging, rich, beautiful. How can you hear that as beauty? So, I was wondering, and in following up with our 2016 MCA Issue 4 discussion, whether we could not actually conduct an analysis of the sort Marc offers in his article of the perezhivanie. Just as Vygotsky explains how 3 different children experience the situation of an alcoholic mother differently, could not we perform an analysis ?of that perezhivanie in which a person experiences yesterday's situation as one of encouragement, of freedom and hope. Would that not be a way to try to understand what is going on? This would not be a piece of art, but could be something we could do to try to understand and change this situation. We could then contrast that perezhivanie with the one many of as have, in which the situation is experience as a real TRAGEDY. I think in the first case, there is no hope for change, there is contempt; in the second, hearing those words as hollowed and hollowing require that you live the situation as a doubled situation in which you experienced it from a very different developmental stage. One in which the speech sounds as a case of involution. Should we find the transcribed speech and perform such analysis? Going now to support the Woman's march here in Victoria BC. Alfredo From helenaworthen@gmail.com Mon Jan 23 10:39:39 2017 From: helenaworthen@gmail.com (Helena Worthen) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2017 10:39:39 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism In-Reply-To: References: <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C71964@CIO-KRC-D1MBX04.osuad.osu.edu> <1485073527094.7145@iped.uio.no> <5E5B95EA-374F-48EB-B308-BCE49DA52760@gmail.com> <1485113892233.91870@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <6537B659-03FD-41CC-AA2A-9052D5F4C81E@gmail.com> I read the paragraph Mike cites as part of the statement of the problem, not part of the plan to move forward. I read: ?We are a grossly unequal society both in terms of economics and justice; therefore we need to learn about our various unequal selves.? I want the ?therefore we need to learn about? part to center around economics and justice because those are things you can do something about. I will check the article again and see if I misunderstood how it fits in. Note that Bernie?s campaign focused on economics (way more than Trump). But his campaign fell behind on the issues of racism. As the months passed he reached more and more of the African American community, but never got far enough. That?s how hard it is. These are bound together ? economics, justice, our profoundly racist society. It?s not just a problem in our discussion. We?re reflecting what?s actually out there. Helena Helena Worthen helenaworthen@gmail.com Berkeley, CA 94707 Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com > On Jan 22, 2017, at 10:36 PM, mike cole wrote: > > There are big problems reading one paragraph and neglecting to read the > rest, > Andy. You negelected this one, among others in your rush to irony. > > *From a liberal perspective, the anti-immigrant and anti-poor rhetoric in > Trump?s campaign appears to be an about-face from eight progressive years > under the last administration. But these political turns are not so > straightforward. In recent years for example, the Obama administration?s > deportation of over 2.5 million undocumented children and families > (Iaconangelo, 2016), from Central America and Mexico in particular, > displayed our nation?s refusal to understand immigration in light of a > troubling legacy of U.S. military and political-economic intervention in > these countries. Economic policies that favor the wealthy have led to > drastic inequalities over the past few decades where a mere 20 Americans > have more financial assets than the bottom half of the country?157 million > people?combined (Collins & Hoxie, 2015). The classism of incarceration was > unmasked as the Department of Justice failed to prosecute the Wall Street > architects of the Great Recession (Cohan, 2015), but federal prisons were > expanded to accommodate disproportionately low-income, non-violent > offenders (Rabuy & Kopf, 2015).* > > How about nurturing such discussion instead of dismissing it out of hand > that way? You have a better set of ideas, put them out there on this > thread. That is what this thread/xmca are for. It is not for reaching snap > judgments and squelching discussion. > > mike > > > > > On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 6:39 PM, Andy Blunden wrote: > >> One paragraph from the article on Learning Sciences and US Nationalism: >> >> Our scholarship has the potential to be a form of >> transformative resistance against the most >> significant political threats to our democracy today >> by explicitly defending and furthering the rights >> and well-being of people of color, immigrants, >> Muslims, women, people who are differently abled, >> LGBTQ communities, and the earth. >> >> So I take this to mean that the authors think that the fact that >> inequality has reached a point where 2 individuals own as much wealth as >> the poorest 50% of the world's population and 26 individuals own half of >> the world's wealth is a non-issue. That the de-industrialisation of US >> cities is a matter of no importance. To use one of the catchphrases of the >> election, they are "doubling down" on the claim that inequality is a matter >> of cultural prejudice and if only we were all much more careful in our use >> of language and showed respect for cultural differences, then we can safely >> leave the world in the hands of Walmart and Exxon. >> >> Andy >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------ >> Andy Blunden >> http://home.mira.net/~andy >> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making >> On 23/01/2017 8:01 AM, mike cole wrote: >> >>> Helena et al -- >>> >>> An important emphasis in the article for me was on the fact that although >>> the article focused on the American nationalist movement that has just >>> pulled of an alt-right coup, similar movements are poised to take hold in >>> a >>> lot of places in Europe to join the many already entrenched unsavory >>> governments in other parts of the world. >>> >>> The CRADLE center in Helsinki is under very concerted attack and the right >>> wing government appears, from this distance, to be making great progress >>> on >>> destroying its legacy. The same process has been in Denmark for some time, >>> also with apparent success. >>> >>> What do our international colleagues who have already felt the hot breath >>> of right wing nationalism have to offer in terms of strategies of >>> resistence? >>> >>> Back to "what is to be done," that sombre question from an earlier era. >>> The >>> answer last time did not produce what it promised. >>> >>> mike >>> >>> mike >>> >>> On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 12:22 PM, Helena Worthen >>> >>> wrote: >>> >>> Thank you, Alfredo - I gave it a read. >>>> >>>> Sure, of course they?re right. But I am very disappointed. >>>> >>>> I was hoping that the following was only item #1 in a long list of "what >>>> the 2016 election made apparent": >>>> >>>> The 2016 election has made apparent the need for scholarship that >>>> explicitly defends and furthers the rights and well-being of people of >>>> color, immigrants, Muslims, women, people who are differently abled, >>>> LGBTQ >>>> communities, and the earth. These are stances that have been limited, at >>>> least explicitly, in the Learning Sciences. >>>> >>>> But the call for inclusion was not just #1, it seems to be the whole >>>> thing. In other words, it?s all about identity ?plus the earth, of >>>> course. >>>> While inclusion is necessary, it?s not even a start. Yes, research, >>>> teaching, publishing, promotion, conferences ? everything associated with >>>> teaching and learning has to include everyone as equals (see Andy?s book) >>>> in one way or another ? but then what? What are they (we) supposed to do? >>>> Where does the pretty language touch the ground? >>>> >>>> I was listening to a broadcast of the Women?s March in DC on Saturday >>>> morning, and Kamala Harris, who was the California State Attorney General >>>> and is now a junior Senator from CA, was addressing the rally. She said, >>>> ?People always ask me to talk about women?s issues. I say, ?Oh, I?m SO >>>> glad >>>> you?re interested in economics!! Let?s talk about economics.? And she >>>> ran >>>> through a whole set of parallel back-and-forths, always pulling identity >>>> questions back to wages, jobs, earning, supporting your family, etc etc. >>>> >>>> Much as we need to wipe away any barriers to the Learning Sciences (and >>>> the professions and institutions dedicated to them) due to identity, >>>> until >>>> the Learning Sciences start taking a look at the place where most people >>>> spend most of their lives ? not school, I mean ? but work, they will be >>>> engaging in a soft conversation at the edge of the real issue. It?s a >>>> pleasant conversation but it doesn?t put a hand on the levers that >>>> translate skill and knowledge into rent and groceries. >>>> >>>> H >>>> >>>> >>>> Helena Worthen >>>> helenaworthen@gmail.com >>>> Berkeley, CA 94707 >>>> Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Jan 22, 2017, at 11:38 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >>>>> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Here it is, >>>>> >>>>> http://cognitionandinstruction.com/engagements-the-learning- >>>>> >>>> sciences-in-a-new-era-of-u-s-nationalism/ >>>> >>>>> Alfredo >>>>> ________________________________________ >>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>> >>>> on behalf of Helena Worthen >>>> >>>>> Sent: 22 January 2017 20:24 >>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >>>>> >>>> Nationalism >>>> >>>>> Someone please re-send the link to this article? I think I?m going to >>>>> >>>> want to read it and respond to Mike?s question. >>>> >>>>> Thanks ? H >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Helena Worthen >>>>> helenaworthen@gmail.com >>>>> Berkeley, CA 94707 >>>>> Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Jan 22, 2017, at 12:25 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >>>>>> >>>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Mike, >>>>>> >>>>>> thanks a lot for sharing this article. You and Michael, who have and >>>>>> >>>>> know more history, have spoken in terms of reminiscences. I have lived >>>> and >>>> know less, and the article feels like fresh air. During my PhD, I begun >>>> to >>>> increasingly feel that I had to due something to act and respond to the >>>> increasing ecological and humanitarian globe crises. But how could I do >>>> anything if I had children and a PhD to finalise?? What could I do that >>>> would also be doing my job as researcher in a department of education? It >>>> was very difficult to find anything, partly because almost every academic >>>> quest would focus on learning, but so little on social development. How >>>> many scientific articles are dedicated to socio-political questions in >>>> the >>>> most cited educational journals? I felt very powerless. >>>> >>>>> To be able to address these questions within my expertise, is a >>>>>> >>>>> challenge partly because contrary to Dewey's hope, educational research >>>> has >>>> only marginally focused on these questions, and yet they may be exactly >>>> the >>>> question that matter to education. What are we educating for? Indeed, >>>> what >>>> is education for? I think we face a serious problem when someone (like >>>> myself), being an educational researchers/scholar, still has to scratch >>>> her >>>> head wondering <>>> development?>> Vygotsky would be shocked! >>>> >>>>> Alfredo >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> on behalf of mike cole >>>> >>>>> Sent: 19 January 2017 04:51 >>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >>>>>> >>>>> Nationalism >>>> >>>>> Yes Michael, >>>>>> >>>>>> It feels like the world of the later 1930's about the time I was born >>>>>> as >>>>>> that period came down to me through the prism of a family of "premature >>>>>> anti fascists." >>>>>> >>>>>> For a great re-creation of those times see the highly ambivalent film >>>>>> by >>>>>> Frank Capra, "meet John Doe." It has American big capital >>>>>> interconnected >>>>>> with fascism combined with populist collectivism in a manner that >>>>>> >>>>> points at >>>> >>>>> the media (as then experienced) as the bad guys in disguise. Happy >>>>>> >>>>> Ending, >>>> >>>>> Beethoven Ode to Joy and all. >>>>>> >>>>>> It's come round again, nastier this time. >>>>>> >>>>>> Mike >>>>>> On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 6:20 PM Glassman, Michael >>>>>> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Mike >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It was so interesting to read this note after reading the Cognition >>>>>>> and >>>>>>> Instruction essay. All the way through it I kept thinking we have >>>>>>> been >>>>>>> here before. It reminded me of the scholars, especially those who had >>>>>>> escaped from Germany, trying to make sense of what had happened to >>>>>>> >>>>>> their >>>> >>>>> society during World War II. The foremost in my mind was Lewin. >>>>>>> >>>>>> Except I >>>> >>>>> wonder if he would say the process of transformative action starts not >>>>>>> >>>>>> with >>>> >>>>> emergence of quasi-needs, but our willingness and abilities to step >>>>>>> >>>>>> back >>>> >>>>> from our quasi-needs and the ways that they drive us, often to >>>>>>> dysfunctional behaviors that it ultimately destructive to both our >>>>>>> >>>>>> society >>>> >>>>> and to us as individuals. How hard this is to do, we have to keep >>>>>>> >>>>>> going >>>> >>>>> back again and again. The quasi-needs, tribalism, acceptance, >>>>>>> >>>>>> standing are >>>> >>>>> always there. It is how they shape us that is critical. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Michael >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto: >>>>>>> xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 8:31 PM >>>>>>> >>>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> In following the perezhivanie thread I encountered the note I >>>>>>> >>>>>> re-membered. >>>> >>>>> And interestingly mis-remembered. A translation into my focus on >>>>>>> mediational means. He places the starting point of the process of >>>>>>> transformative action at the emergence of quasi-needs (from Kurt >>>>>>> >>>>>> Lewin). >>>> >>>>> That seems correct to me. The new mediational means emerge under >>>>>>> environmental presses. Ever functionalist ego need a goal(!). (The >>>>>>> >>>>>> problem >>>> >>>>> with functionalism) In David's words, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Perhaps the place we should look for "exaptations" that can save both >>>>>>> >>>>>> our >>>> >>>>> personalities and our environment is not in our evolved needs, but in >>>>>>> >>>>>> yet >>>> >>>>> to be designed quasi-needs. Artificial organs, after all, always >>>>>>> >>>>>> suggest >>>> >>>>> new and ever more artificial functions, like chess and language. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This point seems worth keeping in mind as we look at where this group >>>>>>> >>>>>> of >>>> >>>>> critical scholars who work within the Learning Sciences disciplinary >>>>>>> framework would like to lead us. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> mike >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Mon Jan 23 10:47:23 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2017 18:47:23 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: References: <1485031482970.89461@iped.uio.no> <58840b10.4319620a.49c0c.033a@mx.google.com> <0A8D9897-86CD-4674-A823-FB75571AE830@gmail.com> <6F36B192-D012-4CE8-A68F-9DABFBC15BFA@gmail.com> <1485070853888.71427@iped.uio.no> , Message-ID: <1485197242591.67324@iped.uio.no> Thanks a lot everyone for the outstanding contributions! I have been incorporating the resources and analyses that have been offered to the google docs. If you see something missing, go ahead and add it or make me aware and I'll add it. I started the thread thinking that a perhaps doable way to move test whether our discussions on perezhivanie could be useful was to have a specific empirical situation, and a set of experiences thereof. The setting of course is not rigorous, or at least is absolutely messy, but perhaps that's the way it should be and certainly that is all what we've got. We seem to have no other choice than stretching out far beyond the speech itself, to perhaps comeback and make sense of it. David very generously offers a way of analysis of the speech that aims at being consistent with the notion of perezhivanie. That is to the core of what we were aiming for in the thread. But, of course, the matter is never that simple, and by no means should be limited to that and so all other contributions seem totally relevant and necessary to me. Martin points us to a book and its review in which it is reminded that we can't explain social actions (e.g., the speaking|hearing of an inaugural speech) from the perspective of intentional (speaking, hearing) agents. In an off-line comment on this thread, Michael R. was pointing me to some of his work on auto-ethnography (I added the link also in the google document) where one of Eminem's rap songs is analysed as social possibility. Our analyses should as well be offering a diversity of hearings of trump as social possibilities that exist because they are real, historical possibilities. This all brings me also to Sue's, Helena's and others' remarks on the importance of including artistic expressions, and I think the term expression, or/and performance is key too. Trump is performing too, and like Eminem, is just performing a form of human consciousness. When I wonder about the perezhivanie of speaking/hearing Trump, I wonder about what form of consciousness is it that manifests when I hear this voice as *encouraging*, *lying*, etc... I add to the growing stock two more forms of expression: One that made me laugh a lot, from the Netherlands, where responding to Trump's assertion America First, Trump's language is adopted to ask him back, "may the Netherlands be second?" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j-xxis7hDOE The second is a reaction after by UK news presenter just a couple of days after Trump won back in November: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GLG9g7BcjKs Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of David Kellogg Sent: 23 January 2017 06:52 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie Vygotsky argued for a "semantic" rather than a "cognitive" view of human consciousness. What's the difference? Halliday says that it is largely a matter of in which direction you proceed. The semantic view takes language and works "inwards", from the syntagm of speech to the paradigm of thinking. Things said acquire meaning when we compare them, not with objects, or even objects of thought, but with other things not said. This was Vygotsky in Chapter Seven of Thinking and Speech. The consciousness model starts with knowledge and works "outwards", from the ostensible structure of thought to the structure of speaking. This means that perizhivanie isn't a form of knowledge but a form of meaning. It's the definition Halliday offers for "experience": "the reality that we construe for ourselves by means of language". So for example one way to construe Trump's inaugural (see attached) is to compare what he said with what he could have said and did not say. I think that the most revealing part of the speech is actually the most frequent Theme of all: "we". Here's a rather coarse analysis of "Theme", "Subject" and "Actor" in the speech to bear this out! David Kellogg Macquarie University On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 6:47 AM, Helena Worthen wrote: > One more thought, before plowing ahead into this thickening conversation: > > The Destiny of a Man can be seen as an attempt (1959) to tell "The > Russian/Soviet Story" in a way that brought as many as possible of the > clashing contradictions into one narrative that makes it possible for the > people who might watch it go forward. We can look around at examples of > comparable attempts to tell ?The American story.? The nature of the story > will correspond to the time in history when it ?worked? as the right story > for the time. The Destiny of a Man ?worked? in 1959, when the generation > that had suffered in the Great Patriotic War was still healing but a > turning point (Kruschev?s speech) had been reached. It interpreted the > perezvanhie of the war for the generation that had survived it. It > distorted some things (what often happened to ex-prisoners of war, for > example) and confirmed others (the gas chambers). It wasn?t history; it was > art. > > I notice that Vygotsky says that perezvanhie is a unit that joins the > internal emotional experience and the external situation. I am tempted to > play with the Engestrom ?unit of analysis? here but all refrain. > > So what works of art can we point out that would serve comparable > purposes, related to their moment in time? > > How about Uncle Tom?s Cabin? The images of African Americans are > cartoonish to modern eyes, but the book itself made the Black experience > accessible to the readers of 1852. It widened the circle of perezvhanie - > the environment - for white readers who were no doubt troubled but > uncertain (social situation of development?) as they sensed the tremors > that would flare up into the Civil War 10 years later. > > Note that the work of art that achieves this purpose (creates the right > story for the time) is created in the moment when uncertainty, fear, etc > are dominant ? when it is needed, in other words - not when 100 years have > gone by (or 60, as in the case of The Destiny of a Man) and we know, or > think we know, what happened next. When its time is past, it becomes a > ?classic.? Example: Steinbeck: The Grapes of Wrath. > > So what can we point to that achieves this purpose for us today? > > > Helena Worthen > helenaworthen@gmail.com > Berkeley, CA 94707 > Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com > > > > > On Jan 21, 2017, at 11:40 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > wrote: > > > > Thank you all for following up on the Trump's speech suggestion. > > Helena, the way you have re-phrased my proposal is exactly they way I > had hoped it to be heard. I think Andy, Helena, Sue, Greg and Larry have > offered empirical materials for and analyses of the type we would be > producing if we were to follow the proposal. Thanks Greg for the reference, > which seems right to the point, and Sue for the glimpse to people's best > protest signs (they are good empirical materials for sure). Thanks Andy, > too, offering your body and soul to scientific progress and undergoing the > inaugural speech again. The way you describe it is very close to how I > thought and felt yesterday. > > My family and friends today joined the march here in Victoria, and, like > Helena mentions, we all commented on how well it felt. There was a very > cheerful, friendly atmosphere, and lots of affection. I too felt better > today. > > > > In case we wanted to go forward with this project, I have created a > google doc in which I am collecting the resources, empirical cases, and > analyses that we have begun producing. I have also added additional links > (like one to the "Bikers for Trump" site, and the full transcript of the > inaugural speech plus a link from the Washington Post. > > > > The document should be accessible to everyone who follow this link: > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Nmn77hKa8XhDJ043ZfVuTUtT7NxDA > ibuzdv0KJDGqCo/edit?usp=sharing > > I guess the easiest way is that I curate it, populating it with content > shared in xmca, but everyone is able and welcome to edit. > > Alfredo > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________ > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of Helena Worthen > > Sent: 22 January 2017 06:54 > > To: ablunden@mira.net; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie > > > > OK, got it. > > > > H > > > > Helena Worthen > > helenaworthen@gmail.com > > Berkeley, CA 94707 > > Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com > > > > > > > >> On Jan 21, 2017, at 9:29 PM, Andy Blunden wrote: > >> > >> No, Helena, the *environment* is the same, but each are in a different > *social situation of development*, thus the different perezhivanie. > >> > >> Andy > >> > >> ------------------------------------------------------------ > >> Andy Blunden > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy > >> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > >> On 22/01/2017 3:48 PM, Helena Worthen wrote: > >>> ... The social situation ? like the alcoholic mother in the case with > the three children each with a different perezvhanie - is the same for both > people who are listening to the speech, but the people (like the children) > respond differently. > >>> > >>> > >> > > > > From julian.williams@manchester.ac.uk Mon Jan 23 10:49:04 2017 From: julian.williams@manchester.ac.uk (Julian Williams) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2017 18:49:04 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism In-Reply-To: <7BD412C4-D775-4D3A-9992-68ACACFB188C@gmail.com> References: <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C71964@CIO-KRC-D1MBX04.osuad.osu.edu> <1485073527094.7145@iped.uio.no> <5E5B95EA-374F-48EB-B308-BCE49DA52760@gmail.com> <1485113892233.91870@iped.uio.no> <7BD412C4-D775-4D3A-9992-68ACACFB188C@gmail.com> Message-ID: Dear Helena and all The victories of the right in the US and Europe surely cannot be explained only by cultural identity issues, and not only by the disaffection of the workers with their traditional (-ly hopeless social democratic) parties, though these are important elements of the situation that are making the far right a possible option for capital. Surely we have to look at the global failure of capitalism: the reasons are essentially economic. Our rulers seem ever more desperate to manage a rate of profit that will satisfy capital and it seems a small portion of them are prepared to back the far right as an option on the political field if necessary. Not yet a significant minority of the Davos class, because they still need to be convinced that the traditional order cannot be made to work, but the Murdoch's and the UKIP/ Tory petit bourgeois backbone are nearly there already: Trump himself is pretty much there, as is Le Pen et al, .. Within this context, and more if/when another 2008 crash hits, the fascist strategy will grow more attractive as the rightist parties attract more disaffected workers, non-workers and petit bourgeois. All the cultural-ideological elements of fascism and nationalism are there in the Uk and France/Netherlands etc just as bad as in Trumpland. (Hey Trump didn't even get the majority vote - on any democratic conception he has no right to have been declared a winner?. Unless we can declare 'Remain' a victory because its 48% vote is represented in our parliament by a majority of the representatives?) What can 'we' do? Only to keep trying to clarify it, keep telling it as it is and might be. What part a conceptualisation of perezhivanie has in this I don't know - but it might be worth re-reading 'The struggle against fascism in Germany' again (not being ironic). The lesson then/there was to block with Social Democracy and labour unions/parties while explaining its failures, helping their support to move left as well as showing there is an alternative to the alternative (here we have Corbyn and momentum; the US have Bernie and ?). But maybe this strategy is not enough? What else? I think there are important interventions also in the cultural fields and so identity is an issue for capital. I wrote a bit about this from Bourdieu's perspective? what progressives in every field have in common is that they resist the dominant powers in their cultural field - whose cultural capital in his analysis is a transposition of the dominant economic, capitalist class. That?s what LGBT, underprivileged groups, national/ethnic minorities, etc everywhere have in common, if we can be helped to see it? like that film of the gay rights activists from London who marched to South Wales to support the miners strike? and the miners who in returned joined a gay rights march in London? what was that called? Julian. On 23/01/2017 17:55, "xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Helena Worthen" wrote: >Well, yes. Good question: How? I take it Francine is not asking this >ironically: she really wants us to figure out how. > >The challenge is to answer the question. > >I don?t think any of us have a quick answer, but it certainly is a >question that is within our collective knowledge to address. > >H > >Helena Worthen >helenaworthen@gmail.com >Berkeley, CA 94707 >Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com > > > >> On Jan 22, 2017, at 7:32 PM, Larry Smolucha >>wrote: >> >> Message from Francine Smolucha: >> >> >> The key to an analysis of the Trump movement is understanding the >> >> fundamental IRONIES that have rocked American politics. >> >> >> The workers revolution has resulted in the >> >> workers/unions deserting the Left, the socialists, the Democratic Party. >> >> Trump is a Capitalist regardless of whether he actually has a >>Republican ideology. >> >> The workers' movement has been hijacked by a capitalist. >> >> >> The other great IRONY is that Trump wants to make Russia a U.S. ally >>(again). >> >> The Left, the socialists, the Democratic Party are the ones demonizing >>Russia - >> >> what a reversal! >> >> >> Since CHAT derives from Russian psychology (Leontiev and Vygotsky) and >>the backlash against Trump is also a backlash against all things Russian >>- this puts CHAT in a particularly awkward position. How can a cultural >>historical psychology that originated in Russia become the leader in the >>anti-Trump discourse? or lead an anti-Trump educational movement? You >>are even extolling a Russian concept PEREZHIVANIE. >> >> >> I think the XMCA needs to examine its own perezhivanie at this time. >> >> >> >> >> ________________________________ >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>on behalf of mike cole >> Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 3:01 PM >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> Cc: Mariane Hedegaard; Reijo Miettinen; Seth Chaiklin >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >>Nationalism >> >> Helena et al -- >> >> An important emphasis in the article for me was on the fact that >>although >> the article focused on the American nationalist movement that has just >> pulled of an alt-right coup, similar movements are poised to take hold >>in a >> lot of places in Europe to join the many already entrenched unsavory >> governments in other parts of the world. >> >> The CRADLE center in Helsinki is under very concerted attack and the >>right >> wing government appears, from this distance, to be making great >>progress on >> destroying its legacy. The same process has been in Denmark for some >>time, >> also with apparent success. >> >> What do our international colleagues who have already felt the hot >>breath >> of right wing nationalism have to offer in terms of strategies of >> resistence? >> >> Back to "what is to be done," that sombre question from an earlier era. >>The >> answer last time did not produce what it promised. >> >> mike >> >> mike >> >> On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 12:22 PM, Helena Worthen >> >> wrote: >> >>> Thank you, Alfredo - I gave it a read. >>> >>> Sure, of course they?re right. But I am very disappointed. >>> >>> I was hoping that the following was only item #1 in a long list of >>>"what >>> the 2016 election made apparent": >>> >>> The 2016 election has made apparent the need for scholarship that >>> explicitly defends and furthers the rights and well-being of people of >>> color, immigrants, Muslims, women, people who are differently abled, >>>LGBTQ >>> communities, and the earth. These are stances that have been limited, >>>at >>> least explicitly, in the Learning Sciences. >>> >>> But the call for inclusion was not just #1, it seems to be the whole >>> thing. In other words, it?s all about identity ?plus the earth, of >>>course. >>> While inclusion is necessary, it?s not even a start. Yes, research, >>> teaching, publishing, promotion, conferences ? everything associated >>>with >>> teaching and learning has to include everyone as equals (see Andy?s >>>book) >>> in one way or another ? but then what? What are they (we) supposed to >>>do? >>> Where does the pretty language touch the ground? >>> >>> I was listening to a broadcast of the Women?s March in DC on Saturday >>> morning, and Kamala Harris, who was the California State Attorney >>>General >>> and is now a junior Senator from CA, was addressing the rally. She >>>said, >>> ?People always ask me to talk about women?s issues. I say, ?Oh, I?m SO >>>glad >>> you?re interested in economics!! Let?s talk about economics.? And she >>>ran >>> through a whole set of parallel back-and-forths, always pulling >>>identity >>> questions back to wages, jobs, earning, supporting your family, etc >>>etc. >>> >>> Much as we need to wipe away any barriers to the Learning Sciences (and >>> the professions and institutions dedicated to them) due to identity, >>>until >>> the Learning Sciences start taking a look at the place where most >>>people >>> spend most of their lives ? not school, I mean ? but work, they will be >>> engaging in a soft conversation at the edge of the real issue. It?s a >>> pleasant conversation but it doesn?t put a hand on the levers that >>> translate skill and knowledge into rent and groceries. >>> >>> H >>> >>> >>> Helena Worthen >>> helenaworthen@gmail.com >>> Berkeley, CA 94707 >>> Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com >>> >>> >>> >>>> On Jan 22, 2017, at 11:38 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Here it is, >>>> >>>> http://cognitionandinstruction.com/engagements-the-learning- >>> sciences-in-a-new-era-of-u-s-nationalism/ >>>> >>>> Alfredo >>>> ________________________________________ >>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>> >>> on behalf of Helena Worthen >>>> Sent: 22 January 2017 20:24 >>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >>> Nationalism >>>> >>>> Someone please re-send the link to this article? I think I?m going to >>> want to read it and respond to Mike?s question. >>>> >>>> Thanks ? H >>>> >>>> >>>> Helena Worthen >>>> helenaworthen@gmail.com >>>> Berkeley, CA 94707 >>>> Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> On Jan 22, 2017, at 12:25 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >>>>> >>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Mike, >>>>> >>>>> thanks a lot for sharing this article. You and Michael, who have and >>> know more history, have spoken in terms of reminiscences. I have lived >>>and >>> know less, and the article feels like fresh air. During my PhD, I >>>begun to >>> increasingly feel that I had to due something to act and respond to the >>> increasing ecological and humanitarian globe crises. But how could I do >>> anything if I had children and a PhD to finalise?? What could I do that >>> would also be doing my job as researcher in a department of education? >>>It >>> was very difficult to find anything, partly because almost every >>>academic >>> quest would focus on learning, but so little on social development. How >>> many scientific articles are dedicated to socio-political questions in >>>the >>> most cited educational journals? I felt very powerless. >>>>> >>>>> To be able to address these questions within my expertise, is a >>> challenge partly because contrary to Dewey's hope, educational >>>research has >>> only marginally focused on these questions, and yet they may be >>>exactly the >>> question that matter to education. What are we educating for? Indeed, >>>what >>> is education for? I think we face a serious problem when someone (like >>> myself), being an educational researchers/scholar, still has to >>>scratch her >>> head wondering <>>and >>> development?>> Vygotsky would be shocked! >>>>> >>>>> Alfredo >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>> >>> on behalf of mike cole >>>>> Sent: 19 January 2017 04:51 >>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >>> Nationalism >>>>> >>>>> Yes Michael, >>>>> >>>>> It feels like the world of the later 1930's about the time I was >>>>>born as >>>>> that period came down to me through the prism of a family of >>>>>"premature >>>>> anti fascists." >>>>> >>>>> For a great re-creation of those times see the highly ambivalent >>>>>film by >>>>> Frank Capra, "meet John Doe." It has American big capital >>>>>interconnected >>>>> with fascism combined with populist collectivism in a manner that >>> points at >>>>> the media (as then experienced) as the bad guys in disguise. Happy >>> Ending, >>>>> Beethoven Ode to Joy and all. >>>>> >>>>> It's come round again, nastier this time. >>>>> >>>>> Mike >>>>> On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 6:20 PM Glassman, Michael >>>>> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Mike >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> It was so interesting to read this note after reading the Cognition >>>>>>and >>>>>> Instruction essay. All the way through it I kept thinking we have >>>>>>been >>>>>> here before. It reminded me of the scholars, especially those who >>>>>>had >>>>>> escaped from Germany, trying to make sense of what had happened to >>> their >>>>>> society during World War II. The foremost in my mind was Lewin. >>> Except I >>>>>> wonder if he would say the process of transformative action starts >>>>>>not >>> with >>>>>> emergence of quasi-needs, but our willingness and abilities to step >>> back >>>>>> from our quasi-needs and the ways that they drive us, often to >>>>>> dysfunctional behaviors that it ultimately destructive to both our >>> society >>>>>> and to us as individuals. How hard this is to do, we have to keep >>> going >>>>>> back again and again. The quasi-needs, tribalism, acceptance, >>> standing are >>>>>> always there. It is how they shape us that is critical. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Michael >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>> >>>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto: >>>>>> xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole >>>>>> >>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 8:31 PM >>>>>> >>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>>> >>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >>>>>>Nationalism >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> In following the perezhivanie thread I encountered the note I >>> re-membered. >>>>>> >>>>>> And interestingly mis-remembered. A translation into my focus on >>>>>> mediational means. He places the starting point of the process of >>>>>> transformative action at the emergence of quasi-needs (from Kurt >>> Lewin). >>>>>> >>>>>> That seems correct to me. The new mediational means emerge under >>>>>> environmental presses. Ever functionalist ego need a goal(!). (The >>> problem >>>>>> with functionalism) In David's words, >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Perhaps the place we should look for "exaptations" that can save >>>>>>both >>> our >>>>>> personalities and our environment is not in our evolved needs, but >>>>>>in >>> yet >>>>>> to be designed quasi-needs. Artificial organs, after all, always >>> suggest >>>>>> new and ever more artificial functions, like chess and language. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> This point seems worth keeping in mind as we look at where this >>>>>>group >>> of >>>>>> critical scholars who work within the Learning Sciences disciplinary >>>>>> framework would like to lead us. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> mike >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> > > From dkellogg60@gmail.com Mon Jan 23 11:51:35 2017 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2017 04:51:35 +0900 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: <1485197242591.67324@iped.uio.no> References: <1485031482970.89461@iped.uio.no> <58840b10.4319620a.49c0c.033a@mx.google.com> <0A8D9897-86CD-4674-A823-FB75571AE830@gmail.com> <6F36B192-D012-4CE8-A68F-9DABFBC15BFA@gmail.com> <1485070853888.71427@iped.uio.no> <1485197242591.67324@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: Dear Alfredo: Thanks for trying to make sense of that. Analyzing a Trump speech has a very strange effect on the analyst: incoherence seems somehow perfectly cohesive until it doesn't (e.g. "we" seems somehow to include "you", until it doesn't). Here's what I was trying to say. "Perizhivanie" has to have an "external" aspect we can study, as well as the other things that people have been talking about which are rather hard to study. Of course, dividing any complex, integral whole like "perizhivanie" into "external" and "internal" is oxymoronic. But "analysis into units" is oxymoronic too, and an oxymoron is not the same thing as a contradiction in terms. If we really believe that "external" perizhivanie is indivisible from internal perizhivanie, then studying the former, and above all studying how the former becomes the latter, might tell us what we want to know about the latter. That is, after all, Vygotsky's method in using "egocentric speech" to study inner speech. "Perizhivanie" is not entirely reducible to the reality we construe for ourselves by means of language, but the part we can study is. We cannot know what is in Trump's heart; at this point, ordinary blood and muscle seems the most likely hypothesis. But we don't need to; what people need to know is right there in his words so long as we know how to winkle it out. There's a problem, though; the same problem as trying to study "perizhivanie" from a work of art like "Fate of a Man". Any "perizhivanie" is meta-stable: that is, it remains what it is by changing in entirety. I think that the meta-stability of perizhivanie is the single most difficult feature we have to study, as well as the single most important one, the one which makes it a workable unit of analysis for the personality: it is meta-stability which allows Vygotsky to describe both the infant feeling the drinking of milk as it happens and the adolescent trying to make sense of an abusive mother as "perizhivanie", and it is inattention to the facts of meta-stability that most dogged Vygotsky studies in our first century (including, but not limited to, the identification of crisis-ridden development with linear forms of learning). Both Trump's speech and "Fate of a Man" are artificially stabilized: they are not moments of perizhivanie, but specimens of taxidermy. One of Vygotsky's great insights in the pedological lectures is that although children's bodies seem, from the outside, to merely grow like flowering plants, their minds are really much more like caterpillars, cocoons, and then butterflies: they undergo metamorphosis. I have a modest corpus of "weekend stories" from first, third and sixth grade Korean children, and even though the topics are largely the same (as Vygotsky says, the external environment does not change that much) the language is utterly different: the conjunction which means "and then" in first grade means "as a result" in sixth, and the bare nouns in first grade are all laden with embedded clauses saturated with appraisal and evaluation in sixth. Above all, the world of material processes now has a sky of mental processes hovering overhead. David Kellogg Macquarie University On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 3:47 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > Thanks a lot everyone for the outstanding contributions! I have been > incorporating the resources and analyses that have been offered to the > google docs. If you see something missing, go ahead and add it or make me > aware and I'll add it. > > I started the thread thinking that a perhaps doable way to move test > whether our discussions on perezhivanie could be useful was to have a > specific empirical situation, and a set of experiences thereof. The setting > of course is not rigorous, or at least is absolutely messy, but perhaps > that's the way it should be and certainly that is all what we've got. We > seem to have no other choice than stretching out far beyond the speech > itself, to perhaps comeback and make sense of it. > > David very generously offers a way of analysis of the speech that aims at > being consistent with the notion of perezhivanie. That is to the core of > what we were aiming for in the thread. But, of course, the matter is never > that simple, and by no means should be limited to that and so all other > contributions seem totally relevant and necessary to me. Martin points us > to a book and its review in which it is reminded that we can't explain > social actions (e.g., the speaking|hearing of an inaugural speech) from the > perspective of intentional (speaking, hearing) agents. In an off-line > comment on this thread, Michael R. was pointing me to some of his work on > auto-ethnography (I added the link also in the google document) where one > of Eminem's rap songs is analysed as social possibility. Our analyses > should as well be offering a diversity of hearings of trump as social > possibilities that exist because they are real, historical possibilities. > > This all brings me also to Sue's, Helena's and others' remarks on the > importance of including artistic expressions, and I think the term > expression, or/and performance is key too. Trump is performing too, and > like Eminem, is just performing a form of human consciousness. When I > wonder about the perezhivanie of speaking/hearing Trump, I wonder about > what form of consciousness is it that manifests when I hear this voice as > *encouraging*, *lying*, etc... > > I add to the growing stock two more forms of expression: One that made me > laugh a lot, from the Netherlands, where responding to Trump's assertion > America First, Trump's language is adopted to ask him back, "may the > Netherlands be second?" > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j-xxis7hDOE > > The second is a reaction after by UK news presenter just a couple of days > after Trump won back in November: > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GLG9g7BcjKs > > Alfredo > > > > > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of David Kellogg > Sent: 23 January 2017 06:52 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie > > Vygotsky argued for a "semantic" rather than a "cognitive" view of human > consciousness. What's the difference? > > Halliday says that it is largely a matter of in which direction you > proceed. The semantic view takes language and works "inwards", from the > syntagm of speech to the paradigm of thinking. Things said acquire meaning > when we compare them, not with objects, or even objects of thought, but > with other things not said. This was Vygotsky in Chapter Seven of Thinking > and Speech. The consciousness model starts with knowledge and works > "outwards", from the ostensible structure of thought to the structure of > speaking. This means that perizhivanie isn't a form of knowledge but a form > of meaning. It's the definition Halliday offers for "experience": "the > reality that we construe for ourselves by means of language". > > So for example one way to construe Trump's inaugural (see attached) is to > compare what he said with what he could have said and did not say. I think > that the most revealing part of the speech is actually the most frequent > Theme of all: "we". > > Here's a rather coarse analysis of "Theme", "Subject" and "Actor" in the > speech to bear this out! > > David Kellogg > Macquarie University > > > On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 6:47 AM, Helena Worthen > wrote: > > > One more thought, before plowing ahead into this thickening conversation: > > > > The Destiny of a Man can be seen as an attempt (1959) to tell "The > > Russian/Soviet Story" in a way that brought as many as possible of the > > clashing contradictions into one narrative that makes it possible for the > > people who might watch it go forward. We can look around at examples of > > comparable attempts to tell ?The American story.? The nature of the > story > > will correspond to the time in history when it ?worked? as the right > story > > for the time. The Destiny of a Man ?worked? in 1959, when the generation > > that had suffered in the Great Patriotic War was still healing but a > > turning point (Kruschev?s speech) had been reached. It interpreted the > > perezvanhie of the war for the generation that had survived it. It > > distorted some things (what often happened to ex-prisoners of war, for > > example) and confirmed others (the gas chambers). It wasn?t history; it > was > > art. > > > > I notice that Vygotsky says that perezvanhie is a unit that joins the > > internal emotional experience and the external situation. I am tempted to > > play with the Engestrom ?unit of analysis? here but all refrain. > > > > So what works of art can we point out that would serve comparable > > purposes, related to their moment in time? > > > > How about Uncle Tom?s Cabin? The images of African Americans are > > cartoonish to modern eyes, but the book itself made the Black experience > > accessible to the readers of 1852. It widened the circle of perezvhanie - > > the environment - for white readers who were no doubt troubled but > > uncertain (social situation of development?) as they sensed the tremors > > that would flare up into the Civil War 10 years later. > > > > Note that the work of art that achieves this purpose (creates the right > > story for the time) is created in the moment when uncertainty, fear, etc > > are dominant ? when it is needed, in other words - not when 100 years > have > > gone by (or 60, as in the case of The Destiny of a Man) and we know, or > > think we know, what happened next. When its time is past, it becomes a > > ?classic.? Example: Steinbeck: The Grapes of Wrath. > > > > So what can we point to that achieves this purpose for us today? > > > > > > Helena Worthen > > helenaworthen@gmail.com > > Berkeley, CA 94707 > > Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com > > > > > > > > > On Jan 21, 2017, at 11:40 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > > wrote: > > > > > > Thank you all for following up on the Trump's speech suggestion. > > > Helena, the way you have re-phrased my proposal is exactly they way I > > had hoped it to be heard. I think Andy, Helena, Sue, Greg and Larry have > > offered empirical materials for and analyses of the type we would be > > producing if we were to follow the proposal. Thanks Greg for the > reference, > > which seems right to the point, and Sue for the glimpse to people's best > > protest signs (they are good empirical materials for sure). Thanks Andy, > > too, offering your body and soul to scientific progress and undergoing > the > > inaugural speech again. The way you describe it is very close to how I > > thought and felt yesterday. > > > My family and friends today joined the march here in Victoria, and, > like > > Helena mentions, we all commented on how well it felt. There was a very > > cheerful, friendly atmosphere, and lots of affection. I too felt better > > today. > > > > > > In case we wanted to go forward with this project, I have created a > > google doc in which I am collecting the resources, empirical cases, and > > analyses that we have begun producing. I have also added additional links > > (like one to the "Bikers for Trump" site, and the full transcript of the > > inaugural speech plus a link from the Washington Post. > > > > > > The document should be accessible to everyone who follow this link: > > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Nmn77hKa8XhDJ043ZfVuTUtT7NxDA > > ibuzdv0KJDGqCo/edit?usp=sharing > > > I guess the easiest way is that I curate it, populating it with content > > shared in xmca, but everyone is able and welcome to edit. > > > Alfredo > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________ > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > on behalf of Helena Worthen > > > Sent: 22 January 2017 06:54 > > > To: ablunden@mira.net; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie > > > > > > OK, got it. > > > > > > H > > > > > > Helena Worthen > > > helenaworthen@gmail.com > > > Berkeley, CA 94707 > > > Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com > > > > > > > > > > > >> On Jan 21, 2017, at 9:29 PM, Andy Blunden wrote: > > >> > > >> No, Helena, the *environment* is the same, but each are in a different > > *social situation of development*, thus the different perezhivanie. > > >> > > >> Andy > > >> > > >> ------------------------------------------------------------ > > >> Andy Blunden > > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy > > >> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > >> On 22/01/2017 3:48 PM, Helena Worthen wrote: > > >>> ... The social situation ? like the alcoholic mother in the case with > > the three children each with a different perezvhanie - is the same for > both > > people who are listening to the speech, but the people (like the > children) > > respond differently. > > >>> > > >>> > > >> > > > > > > > > From mpacker@uniandes.edu.co Mon Jan 23 12:52:27 2017 From: mpacker@uniandes.edu.co (Martin John Packer) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2017 20:52:27 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: <1485191332785.92884@iped.uio.no> References: <1485031482970.89461@iped.uio.no> <1485191332785.92884@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: Hi Alfredo, I?m not familiar with a specific developmental stage that LSV describes in terms of ?magic.? Perhaps David can help us here. I think it would somewhat problematic to characterize people pro and contra Trump as being at different stages of psychological development, but I doubt that this is what you have in mind. :) Martin > On Jan 23, 2017, at 12:08 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > > Dear Martin, > > thanks for the nuances you introduce. Yes, I agree with you, it is totally sensible to hear Trump's words with hope and actually experience (perezhivat) them in such a way as to become moving force towards transformation. I was only approaching the speech from a developmental stages perspective, where, to hear the speech with contempt given the speech's formal structure as a type of generalisation, would mean to hear them within that stage that Andy very appropriately (in my view) called as "magic". Vygotsky (I think) also used this term to refer to a stage in child development. > > But I do not wish to say that contempt is the only possible quality, and so, as you very nicely remark, hope, enthusiasm, empowerment, all these and their developmental and historical conditions should be considered as possibilities of hearing Trump's speech. > > Thanks a lot for the resources/links, I am incorporating them to our joint document. > Alfredo > > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Martin John Packer > Sent: 22 January 2017 16:08 > To: xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie > > Hi Alfredo. > > I think your proposal is very interesting; that we could explore two different ways of hearing and understanding Trump?s words. But if I understand you correctly, I don?t agree that ?in the first case, there is no hope for change, there is contempt.? I have lived in Michigan and Pennsylvania, and in both states industries that were central to the economic rise of the working class, auto manufacturing and steel foundries, collapsed as a result of globalization. I have seen first hand some of the communities that were almost completely destroyed. I believe that people who experienced these changes do hear Trump?s words with hope for change, and if they have contempt it is for professional politicians who they feel speak but do not act. > > But perhaps you mean it was a lack of hope that *led* people to Trump: > > > > The New Yorker has published several articles by George Packer (no relation) on the appeal that Trump has to the white working class. For example: > > > > Martin > > > > > > On Jan 21, 2017, at 3:44 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > wrote: > > Dear Helena, Andy, all, > > > Unfortunately, I have not been able to find the time to watch the movie Fate of a Man, but I have followed the very interesting analyses and conversations about it. I am opening this thread as connexions between those analyses, perezhivanie, and current tragic social and political situation in the US and elsewhere. This also connects with the article that Mike shared on the position of the Learning Sciences with regard to this situation (how happy I was to see this initiative!). > > > In particular, I wanted to pick up on Helena's very true comment that "the US is going to have to produce some works of scholarship or art, or both, that attempt to explain what is happening now here in the US -- for example, this afternoon, under President Trump." > > > Yesterday, we saw at home Trump's speech. Although we had followed Trump's campaign and its denigrating tenor, it was yesterday, for the first time, that my wife and me got this gut feeling of true tragedy, of a real *drama* as we heard those empty, but to recover the prior article for discussion, hollowed and hollowing words coming out of that mouth. It came upon us that there may be lots of people for whom those words are not hollowed, but actually encouraging, rich, beautiful. How can you hear that as beauty? > > > So, I was wondering, and in following up with our 2016 MCA Issue 4 discussion, whether we could not actually conduct an analysis of the sort Marc offers in his article of the perezhivanie. Just as Vygotsky explains how 3 different children experience the situation of an alcoholic mother differently, could not we perform an analysis ?of that perezhivanie in which a person experiences yesterday's situation as one of encouragement, of freedom and hope. Would that not be a way to try to understand what is going on? This would not be a piece of art, but could be something we could do to try to understand and change this situation. > > We could then contrast that perezhivanie with the one many of as have, in which the situation is experience as a real TRAGEDY. I think in the first case, there is no hope for change, there is contempt; in the second, hearing those words as hollowed and hollowing require that you live the situation as a doubled situation in which you experienced it from a very different developmental stage. One in which the speech sounds as a case of involution. > > Should we find the transcribed speech and perform such analysis? > > > Going now to support the Woman's march here in Victoria BC. > > Alfredo > > > From lpscholar2@gmail.com Mon Jan 23 12:52:02 2017 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2017 12:52:02 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: James Lawson and perezhivanie In-Reply-To: References: <628ebbd3-8b51-8e15-47d0-9164e8352c36@mira.net> Message-ID: <58866d1f.90966b0a.1b7d5.c1c8@mx.google.com> Andrew, Andy, I also want to pursue the example of James Lawson. What struck me was his relationship to both parents as formative. Moving to Trump?s inauguration, what struck me was the bodily gesture he was expressing walking down the hallway just prior to speaking. This body language that i was reading before he spoke a word. I hope some of you watched the Frontline documentary on PBS EXPLORING both Trump?s and Clinton?s early family life. Trump?s father was only interested in ?winners? and to come second was to be a ?loser?. The father sent Trump as a young man to a military academy that would teach his son how to be a ?winner? a lesson that Trump inhabits and is incarnating in his every gesture. His emotional, cognitive, and performative symmetry captured in his facial expression as he walked forward to give his inaugural address. In other words, James Lawson, Donald Trump, and Martin Packer?s book review i see as overlapping themes. When we explore ?expression? and ?intentionality? and ?language? i want to include the family upbringing as formative. Now as an aside, Simmel would say both James and Donald are inhabiting (fictions) that INform their experiences, but that may be a leap too far. Simmel was following the philosopher Vasinger (spelling?) who focused on how we live our lives (as is) or (as though) but to take this turn would be for another thread. Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Andrew Babson Sent: January 23, 2017 9:08 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: James Lawson and perezhivanie Andy, thank you for the timely post, especially as we move forward in the shadow of authoritarianism here in the USA. Lawson's example of choosing non-violent protest, following Gandhi, is helpful. Consider the effectiveness of millions of people last weekend peacefully taking to the streets with few if any arrests (side note: we all went as a family here in Philly, it was great). Contrast the Black Bloc member's sucker punch of neo-nazi Richard Spencer: people are cheering it, but those same people probably realize it's not a scalable strategy. Different tours de force, different effects, the gender connotations of which are interesting. *P **erezhivanie *is a new term to me, which I link here to the XMCA blog for those other also unfamiliar with it. It seems like a pretty clear gloss of a term I do know well, *Erlebnis, *"experience" (I dislike the gloss of that Dilthey-an term as "lived" experience...but that's for another discussion). It's fascinating to learn about Lawson's vocational decision-making process, and to consider the possible effects of violent and non-violent dissent. But perhaps you could clarify for us Andy why you thought Lawson's story was an example of *perezhivanie*? Where's the point of analytical traction? If it means more than "experience", how can we apply that broader meaning here? It seems like he had a Pauline metanoia/conversion experience. Is that what you mean? Andrew ------------------------------------------------ Andrew Babson, Ph.D. Lecturer Graduate School of Education University of Pennsylvania On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 4:40 AM, Andy Blunden wrote: James Lawson is the Methodist preacher who trained the young members of the SNCC in non-violent action and wrote their constitution. I paste below and attach an excerpt from my book "The Origins of Collective Decision Making" which narrates Lawson's life up until April 1960. Perezhivanie was not the topic under discussion so it is not mentioned in the text, but xmca-ers should be able to see it, an example of perezhivanie: ------------------------------------------------------------ James Lawson was born in 1928, in Uniontown, Pennsylvania. His father, James Snr., was the grandson of an escaped slave, and a Minister for the African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church in New England. Via the Free African Society(FAS) the Methodists had recruited freed slaves in Philadelphiain 1787, but as a result of a racist incident, some left to found the African Methodist Episcopal Church(AMEC). Nonetheless, many African Americans stayed with the United Methodist Church. The AMEC split started in Philadelphia and the AMEC Zion Church was a split that came out of New York. It was to AMEC Zion, James Lawson was born. However, Lawson returned to The United Methodist Church, created by a 1939 merger of several branches of the Methodist Church, which set up five regional ?jurisdictions? of Methodists in the US, organized to maintain regionally identity and a sixth, called the ?Central Jurisdiction? which combined the Black annual conferences, thus building segregation into the constitution of the Church.The Methodists went through a long and painful process, carried out in accordance with the Methodist Code of Discipline, which mandates the principle of Majority, to re-integrate the white and Black, but it was not till after 1964 that Black conferences started to merge into white conferences. At the local level, congregations continued much as before. So it was within the Black section of the segregated United Methodist Church, that James Lawson became a Methodist. James Snr. was a militant preacher; he packed a 38 pistol and set up branches of the NAACP wherever he was assigned to preach. After serving at St. James AMEZ Church in Massillon, Ohio, he transferred to the Lexington Annual Conference of the Central Jurisdiction of the United Methodist Church. James Snr. was no pacifist and according to Lawson he ?refused to take any guff from anyone, particularly on the point of race? and ?insisted that he was going to be treated as a man.? Lawson?s mother, Philane May Cover, on the other hand, was decidedly nonviolent. Lawson?s challenge, which was to form his character, was to reconcile his father?s militancy with his mother?s nonviolence. Lawson grew up in Massillon. One day, at the age of 10, Lawson was asked by his mother to run an errand: A little white child in an automobile yelled ?nigger? out the opened window. I walked over ... and, since I was in a hurry running my mother?s errand, I smacked the child and went on my way. When the Lawson kids got called ?nigger? on the streets or at school, we usually fought. I don?t know where we got that from, except that we figured that it was something to fight over. (Lawson, cited in King, 1999) On the return trip home, aware of possible repercussions, Lawson tried to find the parents of the offending child, to talk to them, but the car was gone. Once home, he told his mother of the incident. Lawson?s mother replied, ?Jimmy, what good did that do?? She talked about who I was, the fact of God?s love, that we were a family of love and that such an incident could not hurt me, because of who I was. I don?t remember anyone else being around, but a stillness took over my being at that moment. It was, as I realized much later on, a mystical experience. In a very real way, my life stood still. I realized in that stillness that I had changed forever. One of the phrases my mother used in her conversation with me was that ?there must be a better way?. I determined, from then on, that I would find the better way. (Lawson, cited in King, 1999, pp. 187-188) He first became acquainted with Gandhi?s experiments in nonviolence as a child, thanks to the African-American press which the family discussed around the dinner table, and had read Gandhi?s autobiography as a teenager. At Baldwin Wallace College, a liberal arts Methodistcollege in Berea, Ohio, he studied Thoreau, Gandhi and Tolstoy, and the pacifist theologians Dietrich Bonhoeffer and Reinhold Niebuhr. At age 19, he became a draft resister, refusing service in the Korean War. Executive director of Fellowship Of Reconciliation (FOR), A. J. Muste,frequently visited to lecture at the College: All of us in history classes were required to hear Muste. I was thrilled. He made me realize that I was not alone in my experimentation, that there was a world movement, and a national movement. ... He acquainted me with the Fellowship Of Reconciliation, which I joined on the spot in 1947. That meant that I got exposed to their book list. After hearing a lecture by A. J. Muste, he joined FOR and CORE. Muste was instrumental thereafter in strengthening Lawson?s nonviolent orientation, directing him towards Gandhi and later facilitating his entry into the sit-in and boycott movement beginning in the South. In the late 1940s and early 1950s Lawson had organized sit-ins and protests directed at establishments that discriminated against blacks in Massillon, long before the Montgomery bus-boycott. He was also active with the National Conference of Methodist Youth. Although a member of a segregated Methodist Church, he found plenty of support for his stands against racial discrimination and war from his white colleagues and church fellows. While he was in prison serving thirteen months of a two and a half year term for draft resistance in 1952, he was re-elected as Vice-President of the NCMY. Wesleyan Methodism was central to Lawson?s outlook. Just as John Wesley had sought to cleanse individuals of iniquity, so could society be purged of the social sins of slavery, segregation, poverty, and war.Generations of African American Methodists from Harriet Tubman (AMEZ) and Henry M. Turner (AME) in the nineteenth century, to Rosa Parks (AME) and James Farmer (MEC), were led to social justice activism by this Methodist heritage. Lawson used his prison time to read and think. Writing from prison in 1952 aged 23 years old and yet to enter the seminary, Lawson said he aspired to emulate ?the life of Jesus, St. Francis, George Fox, Gandhi, Buddha... and other great religious persons.? These figures attached little importance to ?theology but (to their) experience with God.?Further, he noted ?religious failures today are in (the arena of) experience and practice, not theology.? When Lawson entered prison, he was a Christian pacifist.He told Mary King however, that his ?first commitment was to work on race,? and conscientious objection came second.By the time of his release, he had advanced to Gandhian nonviolence. He wondered ?why can?t a mass non-violent revolution be staged throughout the South where the segregation pattern is much like the ?untouchables? of India? Such a movement would have to start with one person who had the Christian vision to make such a revolution a reality in his own life.? Gandhian nonviolence became the synthesizing factor for Lawson?s religious thinking: the militancy of his father?s Methodism and the Christian pacifism that he drew from his mother. Muste arranged for Lawson to visit India after his release from prison with a letter of introduction to activists in the Gandhian movement, and he remained in India from May 1953 to 1956, working at Hislop College in Nagpur, reading Indian literature and working with Gandhi?s movement. Lawson?s practice would remain deeply religious; his nonviolence was saturated with the message of Christian love, and blended with principles synthesized from a broad range of religious and secular sources, both Eastern and Western. His aim was the ?mass education and training of people in the use of nonviolent direct action techniques.? Lawson insisted that ?you are fighting a system, not an individual, not a race, or not the people of another country, but a system.? He continued his study of pacifism and Gandhian nonviolence at Oberlin College, Ohio. While still in India, he had read about Martin Luther King and his successful leadership of the Montgomery bus boycott.King?s lecture at Oberlin on February 6, 1957, fortified his long-held intention to work in the South for transformative social change. After King?s lecture to a packed audience, he and Lawson talked together at dinner.Though Lawson was contemplating study for a Ph.D., King told him ?don?t wait, but come south now!? adding that there was no one else like Lawson.Muste arranged for FOR to hire Lawson as southern field secretary to be stationed at Nashville in January 1958. Upon his arrival, he found that Glenn Smiley, national field director of FOR, had arranged for Lawson to run a full schedule of workshops ? including one to take place early that year at the first annual meeting of the SCLC in Columbia, South Carolina. At the SCLC meeting, King made an exuberant introduction of Lawson as FOR?s new regional representative and discussed the organization?s role in Montgomery, telling delegates to be sure to attend Lawson?s workshop on nonviolence. King took his seat in the first pew, waiting for the three-hour session to start: Martin did that at every SCLC meeting as long as he lived. He would ask me to conduct an afternoon workshop, usually two or three hours, and he would arrange for it to be ?at-large? so that everyone could attend, with nothing else to compete. He put it on the schedule himself. A few minutes early, he would show up and sit alone, as an example, in the front row. Back in Nashville, Lawson continued with Monday evening workshops during the autumn of 1959 in which he trained the students who were to be the core of the Nashville sit-in movement. As a result of his involvement with the sit-ins Lawson was expelled from Vanderbilt, but he enrolled with Boston University to finish his degree in theology,while continuing to work with the students. Several professors in the School of Theology resigned over his expulsion. The techniques that the students deployed were drawn from Lawson?s workshops. In 1958 and 1959, Lawson mobilized all that he knew about Christian pacifism, Gandhian nonviolence, and Methodist social ministry and blended them into an unprecedented curriculum that influenced the civil rights movement in Nashville and beyond. Blending Christianity and interreligious sources, he did not present its philosophy and practice as a secular doctrine, but as the essence of religion itself. Core to nonviolence was mirroring God?s love for humankind and exhibiting it through concrete relationships of human solidarity and community. ?Nonviolence,? Lawson taught, is the aggressive, forgiving, patient, long-suffering Christ-like and Christ-commanded love or good-will for all humankind even in the face of tension, fear, hatred, or demonic evil.? Moreover, ?it is the readiness to absorb suffering with forgiveness and courage rather than to inflict suffering on others.? Lawson divided his instruction into four modules: how nonviolence reacts, training for nonviolence, the virtues of nonviolence, and the methods of nonviolence. Practitioners prepared themselves by jettisoning anger, hostility and fear thus ?minimizing the effect of an attack,? valuing love, courage, fearlessness, and forgiveness, and pursuing redemptive suffering which ?releases unknown elements for good.? Preparation included meditation and prayer, study of the scriptures, practicing nonviolence through challenges to segregation in bus transportation and in other public facilities.The practice steps included fact-finding, negotiation, education of the community, and various methods of nonviolent direct action including sit-ins, boycotts, strikes, and civil disobedience. Lawson provided an extensive bibliography including relevant verses from the Bible, the Bhagavad Gita, and from the Chinese philosopher, Mo Ti and the Hebrew prophet, Isaiah. The Nashville sit-ins and those led by students in other southern cities convinced Ella Baker of the SCLC to call a conference in April, 1960, at Shaw University in Raleigh, North Carolina. Out of this meeting emerged the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee.Lawson delivered an opening keynote address that helped to frame SNCC?s nonviolent trajectory.Later, Lawson summarized discussions and consensus that emerged out of the conference, and his synopsis received the approval of everyone there. Lawson?s overall comments said that ?nonviolence as it grows from Judaic-Christian tradition seeks a social order of justice permeated by love.? It was Lawson who delivered the keynote address and framed SNCC?s nonviolent orientation. The whole group, perhaps 120 participants, all in the room, asked me to draft a statement. Eventually, three different drafts emerged. The Nashville group was cohesive. The extant draft was the third, influenced by the Nashville group, after two earlier conversations. (Interview with King, June 2014) Lawson?s synopsis was approved by the Conference. In a private email message Mary King told me: He [James Lawson] was reading from the FOR booklist from a young age, but I don?t think that he was influenced on notions of Consensus by Quakers, because the connection was too abstract. Let me underscore that he says it was for him Methodist origins. (Private email, 15 April 2014) In his interview with Mary King, Lawson confirmed that the origin of Consensus in SNCC was the Nashville Central Committee, confirming what Mary King had told me in April. As to the roots Consensus in Lawson?s own experience, he emphasized that: It was the Methodist youth and student movements with which I had grown up, and this is how they made decisions. They knew the rules of parliamentary procedures, but they wanted to find a common mind. (Interview with King, June 2014) The Methodist Church to this very day still mandates Majority decisions, but this would never have entailed children voting ? in general youngsters in these organizations were simply told what to do. The Black congregations had operated separately for more than a century, so there was some room for Lawson to develop a consensual model of collaboration in working with young people. It is also possible the Black congregations, like other Black Churches in America, drew on other traditions of decision making. -- ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Mon Jan 23 13:10:36 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2017 21:10:36 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: References: <1485031482970.89461@iped.uio.no> <1485191332785.92884@iped.uio.no>, Message-ID: <1485205835977.73743@iped.uio.no> Thanks Martin for helping in becoming more precise, no, I would not try to make all what is going on fit into a question of psychological development in the sense: "Are Trump followers at the age of 6 or rather are they 4", as tempting as it may be for some to say this of Trump himself (although Trump's speech has already been analysed in terms of him being a stagnated and egoistic teenager: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0RMwjaZouNY I wonder, however, whether there is not something that Vygotsky's theory of development, as an heuristic model for understanding how personality relates to the social situations, can help with if we consider how the structure of Trump's speech, in the way it treats verbal forms, may be in a relation to a person such that this speech stimulate consciousness, that is, to move thinking, in such a way as to move and develop in one or other direction. I am not saying that I think you have to be at a lower or higher stage to be moved by the speech. We have empirical evidence that you can be deeply moved by his words, and the anger that can be elicited has been articulated well here in the thread and elsewhere. This whole thread is evidence that those of us who do not hear his speech with the same passion as perhaps the Bikers for Trump do, but that there is a passion nonetheless. What can Vygotsky's theory of development, in particular that related to perezhivanie,tell us about this different forms of hearing? Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Martin John Packer Sent: 23 January 2017 21:52 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie Hi Alfredo, I?m not familiar with a specific developmental stage that LSV describes in terms of ?magic.? Perhaps David can help us here. I think it would somewhat problematic to characterize people pro and contra Trump as being at different stages of psychological development, but I doubt that this is what you have in mind. :) Martin > On Jan 23, 2017, at 12:08 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > > Dear Martin, > > thanks for the nuances you introduce. Yes, I agree with you, it is totally sensible to hear Trump's words with hope and actually experience (perezhivat) them in such a way as to become moving force towards transformation. I was only approaching the speech from a developmental stages perspective, where, to hear the speech with contempt given the speech's formal structure as a type of generalisation, would mean to hear them within that stage that Andy very appropriately (in my view) called as "magic". Vygotsky (I think) also used this term to refer to a stage in child development. > > But I do not wish to say that contempt is the only possible quality, and so, as you very nicely remark, hope, enthusiasm, empowerment, all these and their developmental and historical conditions should be considered as possibilities of hearing Trump's speech. > > Thanks a lot for the resources/links, I am incorporating them to our joint document. > Alfredo > > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Martin John Packer > Sent: 22 January 2017 16:08 > To: xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie > > Hi Alfredo. > > I think your proposal is very interesting; that we could explore two different ways of hearing and understanding Trump?s words. But if I understand you correctly, I don?t agree that ?in the first case, there is no hope for change, there is contempt.? I have lived in Michigan and Pennsylvania, and in both states industries that were central to the economic rise of the working class, auto manufacturing and steel foundries, collapsed as a result of globalization. I have seen first hand some of the communities that were almost completely destroyed. I believe that people who experienced these changes do hear Trump?s words with hope for change, and if they have contempt it is for professional politicians who they feel speak but do not act. > > But perhaps you mean it was a lack of hope that *led* people to Trump: > > > > The New Yorker has published several articles by George Packer (no relation) on the appeal that Trump has to the white working class. For example: > > > > Martin > > > > > > On Jan 21, 2017, at 3:44 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > wrote: > > Dear Helena, Andy, all, > > > Unfortunately, I have not been able to find the time to watch the movie Fate of a Man, but I have followed the very interesting analyses and conversations about it. I am opening this thread as connexions between those analyses, perezhivanie, and current tragic social and political situation in the US and elsewhere. This also connects with the article that Mike shared on the position of the Learning Sciences with regard to this situation (how happy I was to see this initiative!). > > > In particular, I wanted to pick up on Helena's very true comment that "the US is going to have to produce some works of scholarship or art, or both, that attempt to explain what is happening now here in the US -- for example, this afternoon, under President Trump." > > > Yesterday, we saw at home Trump's speech. Although we had followed Trump's campaign and its denigrating tenor, it was yesterday, for the first time, that my wife and me got this gut feeling of true tragedy, of a real *drama* as we heard those empty, but to recover the prior article for discussion, hollowed and hollowing words coming out of that mouth. It came upon us that there may be lots of people for whom those words are not hollowed, but actually encouraging, rich, beautiful. How can you hear that as beauty? > > > So, I was wondering, and in following up with our 2016 MCA Issue 4 discussion, whether we could not actually conduct an analysis of the sort Marc offers in his article of the perezhivanie. Just as Vygotsky explains how 3 different children experience the situation of an alcoholic mother differently, could not we perform an analysis ?of that perezhivanie in which a person experiences yesterday's situation as one of encouragement, of freedom and hope. Would that not be a way to try to understand what is going on? This would not be a piece of art, but could be something we could do to try to understand and change this situation. > > We could then contrast that perezhivanie with the one many of as have, in which the situation is experience as a real TRAGEDY. I think in the first case, there is no hope for change, there is contempt; in the second, hearing those words as hollowed and hollowing require that you live the situation as a doubled situation in which you experienced it from a very different developmental stage. One in which the speech sounds as a case of involution. > > Should we find the transcribed speech and perform such analysis? > > > Going now to support the Woman's march here in Victoria BC. > > Alfredo > > > From rbeach@umn.edu Mon Jan 23 14:09:00 2017 From: rbeach@umn.edu (Richard Beach) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2017 14:09:00 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Trump's "talking" versus "speaking" In-Reply-To: <58866d1f.90966b0a.1b7d5.c1c8@mx.google.com> References: <628ebbd3-8b51-8e15-47d0-9164e8352c36@mira.net> <58866d1f.90966b0a.1b7d5.c1c8@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <289C4B7F-0A9A-4A10-BB1F-0619858FFBAA@umn.edu> In a New York Times op-ed , the linguist, John McWhorter, distinguishes between Trump?s informal, spontaneous ?talking? versus ?speaking? that involves employing a more formal register associated with written language. He cites the example of Trump?s talking: ?Look, having nuclear ? my uncle was a great professor and scientist and engineer, Dr. John Trump at M.I.T.; good genes, very good genes, O.K., very smart, the Wharton School of Finance, very good, very smart ? you know, if you?re a conservative Republican, if I were a liberal, if, like, O.K. ?? What?s problematic here is that Trump?s off-the-cuff ?talking,? as well as his use of tweets, can convey messages with problematic uptakes from others, resulting in taking action without careful thought or consultation with others. As McWhorter notes: ?All understand that his speech is structurally ungraceful. It may be harder to grasp that Mr. Trump, as someone just talking rather than artfully communicating ideas, has no sense of the tacit understanding that a politician?s utterances are more signals than statements, vehicles meant to convey larger messages.? When one of his hotels is another country is attacked by ?terrorists,? will Trump, as someone who perceives himself as the prime actor, spontaneously declare war with little or no consideration of the consequences of his actions? Richard Beach, Professor Emeritus of English Education, University of Minnesota rbeach@umn.edu Websites: Digital writing , Media?literacy , Teaching literature , Identity-focused ELA Teaching , Common Core?State Standards , Apps for literacy?learning , Teaching about climate change > On Jan 23, 2017, at 12:52 PM, lpscholar2@gmail.com wrote: > > Andrew, Andy, > I also want to pursue the example of James Lawson. > What struck me was his relationship to both parents as formative. > Moving to Trump?s inauguration, what struck me was the bodily gesture he was expressing walking down the hallway just prior to speaking. > This body language that i was reading before he spoke a word. > I hope some of you watched the Frontline documentary on PBS EXPLORING both Trump?s and Clinton?s early family life. > > Trump?s father was only interested in ?winners? and to come second was to be a ?loser?. The father sent Trump as a young man to a military academy that would teach his son how to be a ?winner? a lesson that Trump inhabits and is incarnating in his every gesture. > > His emotional, cognitive, and performative symmetry captured in his facial expression as he walked forward to give his inaugural address. > > In other words, James Lawson, Donald Trump, and Martin Packer?s book review i see as overlapping themes. > When we explore ?expression? and ?intentionality? and ?language? i want to include the family upbringing as formative. > > Now as an aside, Simmel would say both James and Donald are inhabiting (fictions) that INform their experiences, but that may be a leap too far. Simmel was following the philosopher Vasinger (spelling?) who focused on how we live our lives (as is) or (as though) but to take this turn would be for another thread. > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > From: Andrew Babson > Sent: January 23, 2017 9:08 AM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: James Lawson and perezhivanie > > Andy, thank you for the timely post, especially as we move forward in the > shadow of authoritarianism here in the USA. Lawson's example of choosing > non-violent protest, following Gandhi, is helpful. Consider the > effectiveness of millions of people last weekend peacefully taking to the > streets with few if any arrests (side note: we all went as a family here in > Philly, it was great). Contrast the Black Bloc member's sucker punch of > neo-nazi Richard Spencer: people are cheering it, but those same people > probably realize it's not a scalable strategy. Different tours de force, > different effects, the gender connotations of which are interesting. > > *P **erezhivanie > *is a new term to me, which I > link here to the XMCA blog for those other also unfamiliar with it. It > seems like a pretty clear gloss of a term I do know well, *Erlebnis, > *"experience" > (I dislike the gloss of that Dilthey-an term as "lived" experience...but > that's for another discussion). > > It's fascinating to learn about Lawson's vocational decision-making > process, and to consider the possible effects of violent and non-violent > dissent. But perhaps you could clarify for us Andy why you thought Lawson's > story was an example of *perezhivanie*? Where's the point of analytical > traction? If it means more than "experience", how can we apply that broader > meaning here? It seems like he had a Pauline metanoia/conversion > experience. Is that what you mean? > > Andrew > > ------------------------------------------------ > Andrew Babson, Ph.D. > Lecturer > Graduate School of Education > University of Pennsylvania > > On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 4:40 AM, Andy Blunden wrote: > > James Lawson is the Methodist preacher who trained the young members of the > SNCC in non-violent action and wrote their constitution. I paste below and > attach an excerpt from my book "The Origins of Collective Decision Making" > which narrates Lawson's life up until April 1960. Perezhivanie was not the > topic under discussion so it is not mentioned in the text, but xmca-ers > should be able to see it, an example of perezhivanie: > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > James Lawson was born in 1928, in Uniontown, Pennsylvania. His father, > James Snr., was the grandson of an escaped slave, and a Minister for the > African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church in New England. > > > > > > Via the Free African Society(FAS) the Methodists had recruited freed slaves > in Philadelphiain 1787, but as a result of a racist incident, some left to > found the African Methodist Episcopal Church(AMEC). Nonetheless, many > African Americans stayed with the United Methodist Church. The AMEC split > started in Philadelphia and the AMEC Zion Church was a split that came out > of New York. It was to AMEC Zion, James Lawson was born. > > > > > > However, Lawson returned to The United Methodist Church, created by a 1939 > merger of several branches of the Methodist Church, which set up five > regional ?jurisdictions? of Methodists in the US, organized to maintain > regionally identity and a sixth, called the ?Central Jurisdiction? which > combined the Black annual conferences, thus building segregation into the > constitution of the Church.The Methodists went through a long and painful > process, carried out in accordance with the Methodist Code of Discipline, > which mandates the principle of Majority, to re-integrate the white and > Black, but it was not till after 1964 that Black conferences started to > merge into white conferences. At the local level, congregations continued > much as before. So it was within the Black section of the segregated United > Methodist Church, that James Lawson became a Methodist. > > > > > > James Snr. was a militant preacher; he packed a 38 pistol and set up > branches of the NAACP wherever he was assigned to preach. After serving at > St. James AMEZ Church in Massillon, Ohio, he transferred to the Lexington > Annual Conference of the Central Jurisdiction of the United Methodist > Church. James Snr. was no pacifist and according to Lawson he ?refused to > take any guff from anyone, particularly on the point of race? and ?insisted > that he was going to be treated as a man.? > > > > > > Lawson?s mother, Philane May Cover, on the other hand, was decidedly > nonviolent. Lawson?s challenge, which was to form his character, was to > reconcile his father?s militancy with his mother?s nonviolence. Lawson grew > up in Massillon. One day, at the age of 10, Lawson was asked by his mother > to run an errand: > > > > > > A little white child in an automobile yelled ?nigger? out the opened > window. I walked over ... and, since I was in a hurry running my mother?s > errand, I smacked the child and went on my way. When the Lawson kids got > called ?nigger? on the streets or at school, we usually fought. I don?t > know where we got that from, except that we figured that it was something > to fight over. (Lawson, cited in King, 1999) > > > > > > On the return trip home, aware of possible repercussions, Lawson tried to > find the parents of the offending child, to talk to them, but the car was > gone. Once home, he told his mother of the incident. Lawson?s mother > replied, ?Jimmy, what good did that do?? > > > > > > She talked about who I was, the fact of God?s love, that we were a family > of love and that such an incident could not hurt me, because of who I was. > I don?t remember anyone else being around, but a stillness took over my > being at that moment. It was, as I realized much later on, a mystical > experience. In a very real way, my life stood still. I realized in that > stillness that I had changed forever. One of the phrases my mother used in > her conversation with me was that ?there must be a better way?. I > determined, from then on, that I would find the better way. (Lawson, cited > in King, 1999, pp. 187-188) > > > > > > He first became acquainted with Gandhi?s experiments in nonviolence as a > child, thanks to the African-American press which the family discussed > around the dinner table, and had read Gandhi?s autobiography as a teenager. > At Baldwin Wallace College, a liberal arts Methodistcollege in Berea, Ohio, > he studied Thoreau, Gandhi and Tolstoy, and the pacifist theologians > Dietrich Bonhoeffer and Reinhold Niebuhr. At age 19, he became a draft > resister, refusing service in the Korean War. Executive director of > Fellowship Of Reconciliation (FOR), A. J. Muste,frequently visited to > lecture at the College: > > > > > > All of us in history classes were required to hear Muste. I was thrilled. > He made me realize that I was not alone in my experimentation, that there > was a world movement, and a national movement. ... He acquainted me with > the Fellowship Of Reconciliation, which I joined on the spot in 1947. That > meant that I got exposed to their book list. > > > > > > After hearing a lecture by A. J. Muste, he joined FOR and CORE. Muste was > instrumental thereafter in strengthening Lawson?s nonviolent orientation, > directing him towards Gandhi and later facilitating his entry into the > sit-in and boycott movement beginning in the South. In the late 1940s and > early 1950s Lawson had organized sit-ins and protests directed at > establishments that discriminated against blacks in Massillon, long before > the Montgomery bus-boycott. > > > > > > He was also active with the National Conference of Methodist Youth. > Although a member of a segregated Methodist Church, he found plenty of > support for his stands against racial discrimination and war from his white > colleagues and church fellows. While he was in prison serving thirteen > months of a two and a half year term for draft resistance in 1952, he was > re-elected as Vice-President of the NCMY. > > > > > > Wesleyan Methodism was central to Lawson?s outlook. Just as John Wesley had > sought to cleanse individuals of iniquity, so could society be purged of > the social sins of slavery, segregation, poverty, and war.Generations of > African American Methodists from Harriet Tubman (AMEZ) and Henry M. Turner > (AME) in the nineteenth century, to Rosa Parks (AME) and James Farmer > (MEC), were led to social justice activism by this Methodist heritage. > > > > > > Lawson used his prison time to read and think. Writing from prison in 1952 > aged 23 years old and yet to enter the seminary, Lawson said he aspired to > emulate ?the life of Jesus, St. Francis, George Fox, Gandhi, Buddha... and > other great religious persons.? These figures attached little importance to > ?theology but (to their) experience with God.?Further, he noted ?religious > failures today are in (the arena of) experience and practice, not > theology.? When Lawson entered prison, he was a Christian pacifist.He told > Mary King however, that his ?first commitment was to work on race,? and > conscientious objection came second.By the time of his release, he had > advanced to Gandhian nonviolence. He wondered ?why can?t a mass non-violent > revolution be staged throughout the South where the segregation pattern is > much like the ?untouchables? of India? Such a movement would have to start > with one person who had the Christian vision to make such a revolution a > reality in his own life.? Gandhian nonviolence became the synthesizing > factor for Lawson?s religious thinking: the militancy of his father?s > Methodism and the Christian pacifism that he drew from his mother. > > > > > > Muste arranged for Lawson to visit India after his release from prison with > a letter of introduction to activists in the Gandhian movement, and he > remained in India from May 1953 to 1956, working at Hislop College in > Nagpur, reading Indian literature and working with Gandhi?s movement. > Lawson?s practice would remain deeply religious; his nonviolence was > saturated with the message of Christian love, and blended with principles > synthesized from a broad range of religious and secular sources, both > Eastern and Western. His aim was the ?mass education and training of people > in the use of nonviolent direct action techniques.? Lawson insisted that > ?you are fighting a system, not an individual, not a race, or not the > people of another country, but a system.? > > > > > > He continued his study of pacifism and Gandhian nonviolence at Oberlin > College, Ohio. While still in India, he had read about Martin Luther King > and his successful leadership of the Montgomery bus boycott.King?s lecture > at Oberlin on February 6, 1957, fortified his long-held intention to work > in the South for transformative social change. After King?s lecture to a > packed audience, he and Lawson talked together at dinner.Though Lawson was > contemplating study for a Ph.D., King told him ?don?t wait, but come south > now!? adding that there was no one else like Lawson.Muste arranged for FOR > to hire Lawson as southern field secretary to be stationed at Nashville in > January 1958. Upon his arrival, he found that Glenn Smiley, national field > director of FOR, had arranged for Lawson to run a full schedule of > workshops ? including one to take place early that year at the first annual > meeting of the SCLC in Columbia, South Carolina. > > > > > > At the SCLC meeting, King made an exuberant introduction of Lawson as FOR?s > new regional representative and discussed the organization?s role in > Montgomery, telling delegates to be sure to attend Lawson?s workshop on > nonviolence. King took his seat in the first pew, waiting for the > three-hour session to start: > > > > > > Martin did that at every SCLC meeting as long as he lived. He would ask me > to conduct an afternoon workshop, usually two or three hours, and he would > arrange for it to be ?at-large? so that everyone could attend, with nothing > else to compete. He put it on the schedule himself. A few minutes early, he > would show up and sit alone, as an example, in the front row. > > > > > > Back in Nashville, Lawson continued with Monday evening workshops during > the autumn of 1959 in which he trained the students who were to be the core > of the Nashville sit-in movement. As a result of his involvement with the > sit-ins Lawson was expelled from Vanderbilt, but he enrolled with Boston > University to finish his degree in theology,while continuing to work with > the students. Several professors in the School of Theology resigned over > his expulsion. > > > > > > The techniques that the students deployed were drawn from Lawson?s > workshops. In 1958 and 1959, Lawson mobilized all that he knew about > Christian pacifism, Gandhian nonviolence, and Methodist social ministry and > blended them into an unprecedented curriculum that influenced the civil > rights movement in Nashville and beyond. > > > > > > Blending Christianity and interreligious sources, he did not present its > philosophy and practice as a secular doctrine, but as the essence of > religion itself. Core to nonviolence was mirroring God?s love for humankind > and exhibiting it through concrete relationships of human solidarity and > community. ?Nonviolence,? Lawson taught, is the aggressive, forgiving, > patient, long-suffering Christ-like and Christ-commanded love or good-will > for all humankind even in the face of tension, fear, hatred, or demonic > evil.? Moreover, ?it is the readiness to absorb suffering with forgiveness > and courage rather than to inflict suffering on others.? > > > > > > Lawson divided his instruction into four modules: how nonviolence reacts, > training for nonviolence, the virtues of nonviolence, and the methods of > nonviolence. Practitioners prepared themselves by jettisoning anger, > hostility and fear thus ?minimizing the effect of an attack,? valuing love, > courage, fearlessness, and forgiveness, and pursuing redemptive suffering > which ?releases unknown elements for good.? Preparation included meditation > and prayer, study of the scriptures, practicing nonviolence through > challenges to segregation in bus transportation and in other public > facilities.The practice steps included fact-finding, negotiation, education > of the community, and various methods of nonviolent direct action including > sit-ins, boycotts, strikes, and civil disobedience. Lawson provided an > extensive bibliography including relevant verses from the Bible, the > Bhagavad Gita, and from the Chinese philosopher, Mo Ti and the Hebrew > prophet, Isaiah. > > > > > > The Nashville sit-ins and those led by students in other southern cities > convinced Ella Baker of the SCLC to call a conference in April, 1960, at > Shaw University in Raleigh, North Carolina. Out of this meeting emerged the > Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee.Lawson delivered an opening > keynote address that helped to frame SNCC?s nonviolent trajectory.Later, > Lawson summarized discussions and consensus that emerged out of the > conference, and his synopsis received the approval of everyone there. > Lawson?s overall comments said that ?nonviolence as it grows from > Judaic-Christian tradition seeks a social order of justice permeated by > love.? > > > > > > It was Lawson who delivered the keynote address and framed SNCC?s > nonviolent orientation. > > > > > > The whole group, perhaps 120 participants, all in the room, asked me to > draft a statement. Eventually, three different drafts emerged. The > Nashville group was cohesive. The extant draft was the third, influenced by > the Nashville group, after two earlier conversations. (Interview with King, > June 2014) > > > > > > Lawson?s synopsis was approved by the Conference. > > > > > > In a private email message Mary King told me: > > > > > > He [James Lawson] was reading from the FOR booklist from a young age, but I > don?t think that he was influenced on notions of Consensus by Quakers, > because the connection was too abstract. Let me underscore that he says it > was for him Methodist origins. (Private email, 15 April 2014) > > > > > > In his interview with Mary King, Lawson confirmed that the origin of > Consensus in SNCC was the Nashville Central Committee, confirming what Mary > King had told me in April. As to the roots Consensus in Lawson?s own > experience, he emphasized that: > > > > > > It was the Methodist youth and student movements with which I had grown up, > and this is how they made decisions. They knew the rules of parliamentary > procedures, but they wanted to find a common mind. (Interview with King, > June 2014) > > > > > > The Methodist Church to this very day still mandates Majority decisions, > but this would never have entailed children voting ? in general youngsters > in these organizations were simply told what to do. The Black congregations > had operated separately for more than a century, so there was some room for > Lawson to develop a consensual model of collaboration in working with young > people. It is also possible the Black congregations, like other Black > Churches in America, drew on other traditions of decision making. > > > > > > -- > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > Andy Blunden > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > From dkellogg60@gmail.com Mon Jan 23 15:12:41 2017 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2017 10:12:41 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: References: <1485031482970.89461@iped.uio.no> <1485191332785.92884@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: Martin: LSV talks about magic in a couple of places. First of all, in Chapter 5 of HDHMF he sometimes refers to the na?ve, folk stage of forming a complex behaviour (such as mediated remembering or a mediated choice reaction) as magical, because the child imagines that the mediational device by itself brings about the change (e.g. cards will help you remember even when you don't use them, and reciting directions will help you carry out an action even if you don't understand them). Secondly, in Chapter 15 he takes on Piaget's idea of "magical thinking" by arguing that when a child talks to an object in order to get it to come here the child is not thinking magically but rather asking somebody to come and help. He produces the same anti-magical argument in his pedological lecture on infancy. Mike asked about the "perizhivanie" of the Cult Revolt. I looked at the work he has in mind, and it doesn't seem much different from a lot of material that was published in China even during the 1980s. The Great Famine is a little different, and the "anti-Rightist" movement very different, and the reason is simply that the current leaders were victims of the Cult Revolt but perpetrators of the famine and the anti-Rightist movement. The liberal darling Zhao Ziyang, for example, earned his right to be purged during the Cult Revolt by beating Guangdong peasants to death if they did not submit to grain requisitions which later resulted in starvation. My wife points out that Jang Chung's father, who is the persecuted hero of "Wild Swans", got the position he lost by persecuting "Rightists" and enforcing the grain requisitions of the "Great Leap" into famine. In Beijing in 1984 I taught a group of doctors who had survived the Cult Revolt: I had two students whose husbands had died--one had lost her husband in the Tangshan Earthquake and one as a result of suicide. I never saw the former smile--not once. I have no memory of the latter not smiling or laughing at something or other, usually ending up with a sheepish grin that made her rheumy eyes quite disappear in brown folds. When I mentioned them to my wife, I got a long, long story about how wonderful the Tangshan Earthquake had been for her, because the government distributed plastic sheeting and the kids got to sleep outside and play for weeks on end. Whatever "perizhivanie" is, it is a difference that makes a difference. Here's another difference that makes a difference. Korotaeva is giving us a stenograph of a lecture whose lecture notes appear, in edited form, in Vygotsky's Collected Works (CW): Stenogram: ???????, ??????? ?? ?????, ????? ????? ???????, ??????? ???????? ??? ??????? ???????, ??? ???????, ??????????? ? ????????? ?????????? ??????, ?? ??????????. ?????????? ?????? - ???????????? ??????????? ? ????? ????? ??????????? ??????????? - ?????????? ????????? ?????. ("The child who does not know which candy to take, that which is more or that which is sweeter, such a child finds himself in a state of inner conflict; he hesitates. Inner conflicsts--contradictions between perizhivaniya and choices amongst his own proper lived experiences--they become possible here.") CW: ???????, ??????? ?? ?????, ????? ????? ??????? ? ???????? ??? ???????, ?? ????????? ? ????????? ?????????? ??????, ???? ?? ? ??????????. ?????????? ?????? (???????????? ??????????? ? ????? ??????????? ???????????) ?????????? ???????? ?????? ??????. ("The child who does not know which candy to take--the sweeter or the plentiful--does NOT (my emphasis: DK) find himself in a state of inner conflict, even though he may be hesitating. Inner conflicts (contradictory perizhivanii and choices of one's proper perizhivanii) become possible only now.") You can see the problem. The stenograph says that the child DOES find himself in a state of inner conflict faced with a choice between a small pile of chocolates and big heap of sourballs. The CW version says the child does not. The stenograph version implies that the contradictions between perizhivanie are of this fairly petty type. The CW version distinguishes between this petty type and inner conflicts. Finally, the K version says that all of these things become possible "here"--apparently referring to the experiment. But the CW version says that all of these things become possible "only now" with the Crisis at Seven. To me, the K version sounds like a stenographer who is not quite following what is being taken down, while the CW version sounds like a thoughtfully edited version that makes sense. But someone who knows more Russian than I do should look at this. Mike? David Kellogg Macquarie University On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 7:52 AM, Martin John Packer wrote: > Hi Alfredo, > > I?m not familiar with a specific developmental stage that LSV describes in > terms of ?magic.? Perhaps David can help us here. I think it would > somewhat problematic to characterize people pro and contra Trump as being > at different stages of psychological development, but I doubt that this is > what you have in mind. :) > > Martin > > > > On Jan 23, 2017, at 12:08 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > wrote: > > > > Dear Martin, > > > > thanks for the nuances you introduce. Yes, I agree with you, it is > totally sensible to hear Trump's words with hope and actually experience > (perezhivat) them in such a way as to become moving force towards > transformation. I was only approaching the speech from a developmental > stages perspective, where, to hear the speech with contempt given the > speech's formal structure as a type of generalisation, would mean to hear > them within that stage that Andy very appropriately (in my view) called as > "magic". Vygotsky (I think) also used this term to refer to a stage in > child development. > > > > But I do not wish to say that contempt is the only possible quality, and > so, as you very nicely remark, hope, enthusiasm, empowerment, all these and > their developmental and historical conditions should be considered as > possibilities of hearing Trump's speech. > > > > Thanks a lot for the resources/links, I am incorporating them to our > joint document. > > Alfredo > > > > ________________________________________ > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of Martin John Packer > > Sent: 22 January 2017 16:08 > > To: xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie > > > > Hi Alfredo. > > > > I think your proposal is very interesting; that we could explore two > different ways of hearing and understanding Trump?s words. But if I > understand you correctly, I don?t agree that ?in the first case, there is > no hope for change, there is contempt.? I have lived in Michigan and > Pennsylvania, and in both states industries that were central to the > economic rise of the working class, auto manufacturing and steel foundries, > collapsed as a result of globalization. I have seen first hand some of the > communities that were almost completely destroyed. I believe that people > who experienced these changes do hear Trump?s words with hope for change, > and if they have contempt it is for professional politicians who they feel > speak but do not act. > > > > But perhaps you mean it was a lack of hope that *led* people to Trump: > > > > donald-trump-manufacturing-jobs-hope/496541/> > > > > The New Yorker has published several articles by George Packer (no > relation) on the appeal that Trump has to the white working class. For > example: > > > > donald-trump-appeals-to-the-white-working-class> > > > > Martin > > > > > > > > > > > > On Jan 21, 2017, at 3:44 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > wrote: > > > > Dear Helena, Andy, all, > > > > > > Unfortunately, I have not been able to find the time to watch the movie > Fate of a Man, but I have followed the very interesting analyses and > conversations about it. I am opening this thread as connexions between > those analyses, perezhivanie, and current tragic social and political > situation in the US and elsewhere. This also connects with the article that > Mike shared on the position of the Learning Sciences with regard to this > situation (how happy I was to see this initiative!). > > > > > > In particular, I wanted to pick up on Helena's very true comment that > "the US is going to have to produce some works of scholarship or art, or > both, that attempt to explain what is happening now here in the US -- for > example, this afternoon, under President Trump." > > > > > > Yesterday, we saw at home Trump's speech. Although we had followed > Trump's campaign and its denigrating tenor, it was yesterday, for the first > time, that my wife and me got this gut feeling of true tragedy, of a real > *drama* as we heard those empty, but to recover the prior article for > discussion, hollowed and hollowing words coming out of that mouth. It came > upon us that there may be lots of people for whom those words are not > hollowed, but actually encouraging, rich, beautiful. How can you hear that > as beauty? > > > > > > So, I was wondering, and in following up with our 2016 MCA Issue 4 > discussion, whether we could not actually conduct an analysis of the sort > Marc offers in his article of the perezhivanie. Just as Vygotsky explains > how 3 different children experience the situation of an alcoholic mother > differently, could not we perform an analysis ?of that perezhivanie in > which a person experiences yesterday's situation as one of encouragement, > of freedom and hope. Would that not be a way to try to understand what is > going on? This would not be a piece of art, but could be something we could > do to try to understand and change this situation. > > > > We could then contrast that perezhivanie with the one many of as have, > in which the situation is experience as a real TRAGEDY. I think in the > first case, there is no hope for change, there is contempt; in the second, > hearing those words as hollowed and hollowing require that you live the > situation as a doubled situation in which you experienced it from a very > different developmental stage. One in which the speech sounds as a case of > involution. > > > > Should we find the transcribed speech and perform such analysis? > > > > > > Going now to support the Woman's march here in Victoria BC. > > > > Alfredo > > > > > > > > > From mcole@ucsd.edu Mon Jan 23 15:54:29 2017 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2017 15:54:29 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: <1485191332785.92884@iped.uio.no> References: <1485031482970.89461@iped.uio.no> <1485191332785.92884@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: Martin's caution relates to my suggestion that we not restrict the same to our families or students and friends. People experienced the Trump victory in different ways. The example from LSV involves kids of three ages. That still seems an important focus. Our contemporaries are in there 30's + (and ++). Our students are in latest teens or 20+. High school kids are in the teens. Middle school kids..... It is my strong impression that there are significant age differences in ones experience of the event that could be elicited pretty easily and compared in the group across other interesting categories of difference such as nationality. A small, positive, collective effort? mike On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 9:08 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > Dear Martin, > > thanks for the nuances you introduce. Yes, I agree with you, it is totally > sensible to hear Trump's words with hope and actually experience > (perezhivat) them in such a way as to become moving force towards > transformation. I was only approaching the speech from a developmental > stages perspective, where, to hear the speech with contempt given the > speech's formal structure as a type of generalisation, would mean to hear > them within that stage that Andy very appropriately (in my view) called as > "magic". Vygotsky (I think) also used this term to refer to a stage in > child development. > > But I do not wish to say that contempt is the only possible quality, and > so, as you very nicely remark, hope, enthusiasm, empowerment, all these and > their developmental and historical conditions should be considered as > possibilities of hearing Trump's speech. > > Thanks a lot for the resources/links, I am incorporating them to our joint > document. > Alfredo > > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of Martin John Packer > Sent: 22 January 2017 16:08 > To: xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie > > Hi Alfredo. > > I think your proposal is very interesting; that we could explore two > different ways of hearing and understanding Trump?s words. But if I > understand you correctly, I don?t agree that ?in the first case, there is > no hope for change, there is contempt.? I have lived in Michigan and > Pennsylvania, and in both states industries that were central to the > economic rise of the working class, auto manufacturing and steel foundries, > collapsed as a result of globalization. I have seen first hand some of the > communities that were almost completely destroyed. I believe that people > who experienced these changes do hear Trump?s words with hope for change, > and if they have contempt it is for professional politicians who they feel > speak but do not act. > > But perhaps you mean it was a lack of hope that *led* people to Trump: > > donald-trump-manufacturing-jobs-hope/496541/> > > The New Yorker has published several articles by George Packer (no > relation) on the appeal that Trump has to the white working class. For > example: > > donald-trump-appeals-to-the-white-working-class> > > Martin > > > > > > On Jan 21, 2017, at 3:44 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > wrote: > > Dear Helena, Andy, all, > > > Unfortunately, I have not been able to find the time to watch the movie > Fate of a Man, but I have followed the very interesting analyses and > conversations about it. I am opening this thread as connexions between > those analyses, perezhivanie, and current tragic social and political > situation in the US and elsewhere. This also connects with the article that > Mike shared on the position of the Learning Sciences with regard to this > situation (how happy I was to see this initiative!). > > > In particular, I wanted to pick up on Helena's very true comment that "the > US is going to have to produce some works of scholarship or art, or both, > that attempt to explain what is happening now here in the US -- for > example, this afternoon, under President Trump." > > > Yesterday, we saw at home Trump's speech. Although we had followed Trump's > campaign and its denigrating tenor, it was yesterday, for the first time, > that my wife and me got this gut feeling of true tragedy, of a real *drama* > as we heard those empty, but to recover the prior article for discussion, > hollowed and hollowing words coming out of that mouth. It came upon us that > there may be lots of people for whom those words are not hollowed, but > actually encouraging, rich, beautiful. How can you hear that as beauty? > > > So, I was wondering, and in following up with our 2016 MCA Issue 4 > discussion, whether we could not actually conduct an analysis of the sort > Marc offers in his article of the perezhivanie. Just as Vygotsky explains > how 3 different children experience the situation of an alcoholic mother > differently, could not we perform an analysis ?of that perezhivanie in > which a person experiences yesterday's situation as one of encouragement, > of freedom and hope. Would that not be a way to try to understand what is > going on? This would not be a piece of art, but could be something we could > do to try to understand and change this situation. > > We could then contrast that perezhivanie with the one many of as have, in > which the situation is experience as a real TRAGEDY. I think in the first > case, there is no hope for change, there is contempt; in the second, > hearing those words as hollowed and hollowing require that you live the > situation as a doubled situation in which you experienced it from a very > different developmental stage. One in which the speech sounds as a case of > involution. > > Should we find the transcribed speech and perform such analysis? > > > Going now to support the Woman's march here in Victoria BC. > > Alfredo > > > > From helenaworthen@gmail.com Mon Jan 23 17:16:00 2017 From: helenaworthen@gmail.com (Helena Worthen) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2017 17:16:00 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: References: <1485031482970.89461@iped.uio.no> <58840b10.4319620a.49c0c.033a@mx.google.com> <0A8D9897-86CD-4674-A823-FB75571AE830@gmail.com> <6F36B192-D012-4CE8-A68F-9DABFBC15BFA@gmail.com> <1485070853888.71427@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <14BDCB5B-6BE8-409B-83DE-CA07E00E4858@gmail.com> David, did you include the ?coarse analysis?? I?d be interested. H Helena Worthen helenaworthen@gmail.com Berkeley, CA 94707 Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com > On Jan 22, 2017, at 9:52 PM, David Kellogg wrote: > > Vygotsky argued for a "semantic" rather than a "cognitive" view of human > consciousness. What's the difference? > > Halliday says that it is largely a matter of in which direction you > proceed. The semantic view takes language and works "inwards", from the > syntagm of speech to the paradigm of thinking. Things said acquire meaning > when we compare them, not with objects, or even objects of thought, but > with other things not said. This was Vygotsky in Chapter Seven of Thinking > and Speech. The consciousness model starts with knowledge and works > "outwards", from the ostensible structure of thought to the structure of > speaking. This means that perizhivanie isn't a form of knowledge but a form > of meaning. It's the definition Halliday offers for "experience": "the > reality that we construe for ourselves by means of language". > > So for example one way to construe Trump's inaugural (see attached) is to > compare what he said with what he could have said and did not say. I think > that the most revealing part of the speech is actually the most frequent > Theme of all: "we". > > Here's a rather coarse analysis of "Theme", "Subject" and "Actor" in the > speech to bear this out! > > David Kellogg > Macquarie University > > > On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 6:47 AM, Helena Worthen > wrote: > >> One more thought, before plowing ahead into this thickening conversation: >> >> The Destiny of a Man can be seen as an attempt (1959) to tell "The >> Russian/Soviet Story" in a way that brought as many as possible of the >> clashing contradictions into one narrative that makes it possible for the >> people who might watch it go forward. We can look around at examples of >> comparable attempts to tell ?The American story.? The nature of the story >> will correspond to the time in history when it ?worked? as the right story >> for the time. The Destiny of a Man ?worked? in 1959, when the generation >> that had suffered in the Great Patriotic War was still healing but a >> turning point (Kruschev?s speech) had been reached. It interpreted the >> perezvanhie of the war for the generation that had survived it. It >> distorted some things (what often happened to ex-prisoners of war, for >> example) and confirmed others (the gas chambers). It wasn?t history; it was >> art. >> >> I notice that Vygotsky says that perezvanhie is a unit that joins the >> internal emotional experience and the external situation. I am tempted to >> play with the Engestrom ?unit of analysis? here but all refrain. >> >> So what works of art can we point out that would serve comparable >> purposes, related to their moment in time? >> >> How about Uncle Tom?s Cabin? The images of African Americans are >> cartoonish to modern eyes, but the book itself made the Black experience >> accessible to the readers of 1852. It widened the circle of perezvhanie - >> the environment - for white readers who were no doubt troubled but >> uncertain (social situation of development?) as they sensed the tremors >> that would flare up into the Civil War 10 years later. >> >> Note that the work of art that achieves this purpose (creates the right >> story for the time) is created in the moment when uncertainty, fear, etc >> are dominant ? when it is needed, in other words - not when 100 years have >> gone by (or 60, as in the case of The Destiny of a Man) and we know, or >> think we know, what happened next. When its time is past, it becomes a >> ?classic.? Example: Steinbeck: The Grapes of Wrath. >> >> So what can we point to that achieves this purpose for us today? >> >> >> Helena Worthen >> helenaworthen@gmail.com >> Berkeley, CA 94707 >> Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com >> >> >> >>> On Jan 21, 2017, at 11:40 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >> wrote: >>> >>> Thank you all for following up on the Trump's speech suggestion. >>> Helena, the way you have re-phrased my proposal is exactly they way I >> had hoped it to be heard. I think Andy, Helena, Sue, Greg and Larry have >> offered empirical materials for and analyses of the type we would be >> producing if we were to follow the proposal. Thanks Greg for the reference, >> which seems right to the point, and Sue for the glimpse to people's best >> protest signs (they are good empirical materials for sure). Thanks Andy, >> too, offering your body and soul to scientific progress and undergoing the >> inaugural speech again. The way you describe it is very close to how I >> thought and felt yesterday. >>> My family and friends today joined the march here in Victoria, and, like >> Helena mentions, we all commented on how well it felt. There was a very >> cheerful, friendly atmosphere, and lots of affection. I too felt better >> today. >>> >>> In case we wanted to go forward with this project, I have created a >> google doc in which I am collecting the resources, empirical cases, and >> analyses that we have begun producing. I have also added additional links >> (like one to the "Bikers for Trump" site, and the full transcript of the >> inaugural speech plus a link from the Washington Post. >>> >>> The document should be accessible to everyone who follow this link: >>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Nmn77hKa8XhDJ043ZfVuTUtT7NxDA >> ibuzdv0KJDGqCo/edit?usp=sharing >>> I guess the easiest way is that I curate it, populating it with content >> shared in xmca, but everyone is able and welcome to edit. >>> Alfredo >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ________________________________________ >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> on behalf of Helena Worthen >>> Sent: 22 January 2017 06:54 >>> To: ablunden@mira.net; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie >>> >>> OK, got it. >>> >>> H >>> >>> Helena Worthen >>> helenaworthen@gmail.com >>> Berkeley, CA 94707 >>> Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com >>> >>> >>> >>>> On Jan 21, 2017, at 9:29 PM, Andy Blunden wrote: >>>> >>>> No, Helena, the *environment* is the same, but each are in a different >> *social situation of development*, thus the different perezhivanie. >>>> >>>> Andy >>>> >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>> Andy Blunden >>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy >>>> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making >>>> On 22/01/2017 3:48 PM, Helena Worthen wrote: >>>>> ... The social situation ? like the alcoholic mother in the case with >> the three children each with a different perezvhanie - is the same for both >> people who are listening to the speech, but the people (like the children) >> respond differently. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >> -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Trump Inaugural Analysis.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 170792 bytes Desc: not available Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20170123/824b32c0/attachment-0001.bin -------------- next part -------------- > From lsmolucha@hotmail.com Mon Jan 23 17:35:31 2017 From: lsmolucha@hotmail.com (Larry Smolucha) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2017 01:35:31 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism In-Reply-To: <2c9faf42-cb69-9860-4b9f-ea0f6f0ca307@mira.net> References: <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C71964@CIO-KRC-D1MBX04.osuad.osu.edu> <1485073527094.7145@iped.uio.no> <5E5B95EA-374F-48EB-B308-BCE49DA52760@gmail.com> <1485113892233.91870@iped.uio.no> , <2c9faf42-cb69-9860-4b9f-ea0f6f0ca307@mira.net> Message-ID: Message from Francine: Helena Worthen was right - I am serious about finding (and creating) new tools for understanding the Trump movement. Analysis is only one tool and there is no insight when it is overused. Figurative, analogical, metaphorical thinking gives us other tools. Recognizing IRONY means getting the punch line in a joke (as Freud explained in Jokes and Their Relation to the Unconscious). Is there a term in literature for the reversal that commonly occurs in fairy tales? All that is gold does not glitter, not all those who wander are lost . . . 1) The ironic reversals that are taking place as people change their alignment with political parties remind me of a geophysics phenomena - the reversal of the earth's magnetic field that can happen over hundreds of thousands of years. Both are disorienting. I will give this more thought, but for the moment consider this much. When magnetic fields shift it is not all at once, magnetic currents in the molten layers beneath the earth's solid crust change polarities, sometimes causing a total reversal. Our political parties are commonly referred to as polar opposites but those polarities are not fixed they are fluid. The blue collar working class can shift from the Democratic Party to the Republican. The Black vote can shift to the Republicans, the Democrats don't own it. In the 1950's Russian sympathies were a hallmark of the left, now the left denounces Trumps outreach to the Russians. [A caveat here - this is two dimensional thinking because there are only two poles on one geometric plane.] 2) There is another concept, the Overton Window that is a scale of how radical of a discourse the public will tolerate (also called the window of discourse). The Window opens and closes along a range of discourse from the acceptable to the unthinkable. What discourse resonates with the general public (strikes a chord)? What will they regard as taboo (or not politically correct)? Issues like that. Here are a couple links worth looking at: Donald Trump & The Overton Window --Resetting America's Political www.nationalreview.com/.../donald-trump-overton-window-american-p.. Trump's Win Smashed the 'Overton Window' | LifeZette www.lifezette.com/polizette/trumps-win-smashed-overton-window/ Can any of this be used with the concept of perezhivanie? ________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Andy Blunden Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 9:37 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism "Irony" - good word to introduce here Francine. ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy Andy Blunden?s Home Page home.mira.net Andy Blunden's Home Page with links to pages I maintain and mail-to buttons http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making [http://www.brill.com/sites/default/files/styles/large/public/ftp/images/products/295x295/92947.jpg?itok=j5KXqZw3] The Origins of Collective Decision Making | Brill www.brill.com The Origins of Collective Decision Making, identifies three paradigms of collective decision making ? Counsel, Majority and Consensus, and discovers their origins ... On 23/01/2017 2:32 PM, Larry Smolucha wrote: > Message from Francine Smolucha: > > > The key to an analysis of the Trump movement is understanding the > > fundamental IRONIES that have rocked American politics. > > > The workers revolution has resulted in the > > workers/unions deserting the Left, the socialists, the Democratic Party. > > Trump is a Capitalist regardless of whether he actually has a Republican ideology. > > The workers' movement has been hijacked by a capitalist. > > > The other great IRONY is that Trump wants to make Russia a U.S. ally (again). > > The Left, the socialists, the Democratic Party are the ones demonizing Russia - > > what a reversal! > > > Since CHAT derives from Russian psychology (Leontiev and Vygotsky) and the backlash against Trump is also a backlash against all things Russian - this puts CHAT in a particularly awkward position. How can a cultural historical psychology that originated in Russia become the leader in the anti-Trump discourse? or lead an anti-Trump educational movement? You are even extolling a Russian concept PEREZHIVANIE. > > > I think the XMCA needs to examine its own perezhivanie at this time. > > > > > ________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of mike cole > Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 3:01 PM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Cc: Mariane Hedegaard; Reijo Miettinen; Seth Chaiklin > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism > > Helena et al -- > > An important emphasis in the article for me was on the fact that although > the article focused on the American nationalist movement that has just > pulled of an alt-right coup, similar movements are poised to take hold in a > lot of places in Europe to join the many already entrenched unsavory > governments in other parts of the world. > > The CRADLE center in Helsinki is under very concerted attack and the right > wing government appears, from this distance, to be making great progress on > destroying its legacy. The same process has been in Denmark for some time, > also with apparent success. > > What do our international colleagues who have already felt the hot breath > of right wing nationalism have to offer in terms of strategies of > resistence? > > Back to "what is to be done," that sombre question from an earlier era. The > answer last time did not produce what it promised. > > mike > > mike > > On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 12:22 PM, Helena Worthen > wrote: > >> Thank you, Alfredo - I gave it a read. >> >> Sure, of course they?re right. But I am very disappointed. >> >> I was hoping that the following was only item #1 in a long list of "what >> the 2016 election made apparent": >> >> The 2016 election has made apparent the need for scholarship that >> explicitly defends and furthers the rights and well-being of people of >> color, immigrants, Muslims, women, people who are differently abled, LGBTQ >> communities, and the earth. These are stances that have been limited, at >> least explicitly, in the Learning Sciences. >> >> But the call for inclusion was not just #1, it seems to be the whole >> thing. In other words, it?s all about identity ?plus the earth, of course. >> While inclusion is necessary, it?s not even a start. Yes, research, >> teaching, publishing, promotion, conferences ? everything associated with >> teaching and learning has to include everyone as equals (see Andy?s book) >> in one way or another ? but then what? What are they (we) supposed to do? >> Where does the pretty language touch the ground? >> >> I was listening to a broadcast of the Women?s March in DC on Saturday >> morning, and Kamala Harris, who was the California State Attorney General >> and is now a junior Senator from CA, was addressing the rally. She said, >> ?People always ask me to talk about women?s issues. I say, ?Oh, I?m SO glad >> you?re interested in economics!! Let?s talk about economics.? And she ran >> through a whole set of parallel back-and-forths, always pulling identity >> questions back to wages, jobs, earning, supporting your family, etc etc. >> >> Much as we need to wipe away any barriers to the Learning Sciences (and >> the professions and institutions dedicated to them) due to identity, until >> the Learning Sciences start taking a look at the place where most people >> spend most of their lives ? not school, I mean ? but work, they will be >> engaging in a soft conversation at the edge of the real issue. It?s a >> pleasant conversation but it doesn?t put a hand on the levers that >> translate skill and knowledge into rent and groceries. >> >> H >> >> >> Helena Worthen >> helenaworthen@gmail.com >> Berkeley, CA 94707 >> Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com >> >> >> >>> On Jan 22, 2017, at 11:38 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >> wrote: >>> Here it is, >>> >>> http://cognitionandinstruction.com/engagements-the-learning- >> sciences-in-a-new-era-of-u-s-nationalism/ >>> Alfredo >>> ________________________________________ >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> on behalf of Helena Worthen >>> Sent: 22 January 2017 20:24 >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >> Nationalism >>> Someone please re-send the link to this article? I think I?m going to >> want to read it and respond to Mike?s question. >>> Thanks ? H >>> >>> >>> Helena Worthen >>> helenaworthen@gmail.com >>> Berkeley, CA 94707 >>> Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com >>> >>> >>> >>>> On Jan 22, 2017, at 12:25 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >> wrote: >>>> Mike, >>>> >>>> thanks a lot for sharing this article. You and Michael, who have and >> know more history, have spoken in terms of reminiscences. I have lived and >> know less, and the article feels like fresh air. During my PhD, I begun to >> increasingly feel that I had to due something to act and respond to the >> increasing ecological and humanitarian globe crises. But how could I do >> anything if I had children and a PhD to finalise?? What could I do that >> would also be doing my job as researcher in a department of education? It >> was very difficult to find anything, partly because almost every academic >> quest would focus on learning, but so little on social development. How >> many scientific articles are dedicated to socio-political questions in the >> most cited educational journals? I felt very powerless. >>>> To be able to address these questions within my expertise, is a >> challenge partly because contrary to Dewey's hope, educational research has >> only marginally focused on these questions, and yet they may be exactly the >> question that matter to education. What are we educating for? Indeed, what >> is education for? I think we face a serious problem when someone (like >> myself), being an educational researchers/scholar, still has to scratch her >> head wondering <> development?>> Vygotsky would be shocked! >>>> Alfredo >>>> >>>> >>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> on behalf of mike cole >>>> Sent: 19 January 2017 04:51 >>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >> Nationalism >>>> Yes Michael, >>>> >>>> It feels like the world of the later 1930's about the time I was born as >>>> that period came down to me through the prism of a family of "premature >>>> anti fascists." >>>> >>>> For a great re-creation of those times see the highly ambivalent film by >>>> Frank Capra, "meet John Doe." It has American big capital interconnected >>>> with fascism combined with populist collectivism in a manner that >> points at >>>> the media (as then experienced) as the bad guys in disguise. Happy >> Ending, >>>> Beethoven Ode to Joy and all. >>>> >>>> It's come round again, nastier this time. >>>> >>>> Mike >>>> On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 6:20 PM Glassman, Michael >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Mike >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> It was so interesting to read this note after reading the Cognition and >>>>> Instruction essay. All the way through it I kept thinking we have been >>>>> here before. It reminded me of the scholars, especially those who had >>>>> escaped from Germany, trying to make sense of what had happened to >> their >>>>> society during World War II. The foremost in my mind was Lewin. >> Except I >>>>> wonder if he would say the process of transformative action starts not >> with >>>>> emergence of quasi-needs, but our willingness and abilities to step >> back >>>>> from our quasi-needs and the ways that they drive us, often to >>>>> dysfunctional behaviors that it ultimately destructive to both our >> society >>>>> and to us as individuals. How hard this is to do, we have to keep >> going >>>>> back again and again. The quasi-needs, tribalism, acceptance, >> standing are >>>>> always there. It is how they shape us that is critical. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Michael >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> >>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto: >>>>> xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole >>>>> >>>>> Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 8:31 PM >>>>> >>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>> >>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> In following the perezhivanie thread I encountered the note I >> re-membered. >>>>> And interestingly mis-remembered. A translation into my focus on >>>>> mediational means. He places the starting point of the process of >>>>> transformative action at the emergence of quasi-needs (from Kurt >> Lewin). >>>>> That seems correct to me. The new mediational means emerge under >>>>> environmental presses. Ever functionalist ego need a goal(!). (The >> problem >>>>> with functionalism) In David's words, >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Perhaps the place we should look for "exaptations" that can save both >> our >>>>> personalities and our environment is not in our evolved needs, but in >> yet >>>>> to be designed quasi-needs. Artificial organs, after all, always >> suggest >>>>> new and ever more artificial functions, like chess and language. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> This point seems worth keeping in mind as we look at where this group >> of >>>>> critical scholars who work within the Learning Sciences disciplinary >>>>> framework would like to lead us. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> mike >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>> >> > From dkellogg60@gmail.com Mon Jan 23 20:29:15 2017 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2017 15:29:15 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: <14BDCB5B-6BE8-409B-83DE-CA07E00E4858@gmail.com> References: <1485031482970.89461@iped.uio.no> <58840b10.4319620a.49c0c.033a@mx.google.com> <0A8D9897-86CD-4674-A823-FB75571AE830@gmail.com> <6F36B192-D012-4CE8-A68F-9DABFBC15BFA@gmail.com> <1485070853888.71427@iped.uio.no> <14BDCB5B-6BE8-409B-83DE-CA07E00E4858@gmail.com> Message-ID: Helena: Yes, I included it. And Alfredo actually managed to incorporate it into the Google doc draft somehow. But to tell you the truth, I was pretty exhausted when I finished the speech--nothing was quite what it seemed, and in particular the pronouns seemed to be wandering all over the place, as if the speaker was speaking exophorically all the time, with a kind of parade of different people passing in front of his eyes like a pageant. So I didn't write much of an introduction, and I managed to write a completely incoherent posting to go with it, in lieu of my usual half-incoherent one. Here's a somewhat tidier version of the very untidy speech, with a bit of an intro and an executive summary for those who don't have the endurance to submit themselves to the speech again. A coarse analysis of a coarse bit of oratory. David Kellogg Macquarie University On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 12:16 PM, Helena Worthen wrote: > David, did you include the ?coarse analysis?? I?d be interested. > > H > > Helena Worthen > helenaworthen@gmail.com > Berkeley, CA 94707 > Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com > > > > > On Jan 22, 2017, at 9:52 PM, David Kellogg wrote: > > > > Vygotsky argued for a "semantic" rather than a "cognitive" view of human > > consciousness. What's the difference? > > > > Halliday says that it is largely a matter of in which direction you > > proceed. The semantic view takes language and works "inwards", from the > > syntagm of speech to the paradigm of thinking. Things said acquire > meaning > > when we compare them, not with objects, or even objects of thought, but > > with other things not said. This was Vygotsky in Chapter Seven of > Thinking > > and Speech. The consciousness model starts with knowledge and works > > "outwards", from the ostensible structure of thought to the structure of > > speaking. This means that perizhivanie isn't a form of knowledge but a > form > > of meaning. It's the definition Halliday offers for "experience": "the > > reality that we construe for ourselves by means of language". > > > > So for example one way to construe Trump's inaugural (see attached) is to > > compare what he said with what he could have said and did not say. I > think > > that the most revealing part of the speech is actually the most frequent > > Theme of all: "we". > > > > Here's a rather coarse analysis of "Theme", "Subject" and "Actor" in the > > speech to bear this out! > > > > David Kellogg > > Macquarie University > > > > > > On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 6:47 AM, Helena Worthen > > > wrote: > > > >> One more thought, before plowing ahead into this thickening > conversation: > >> > >> The Destiny of a Man can be seen as an attempt (1959) to tell "The > >> Russian/Soviet Story" in a way that brought as many as possible of the > >> clashing contradictions into one narrative that makes it possible for > the > >> people who might watch it go forward. We can look around at examples of > >> comparable attempts to tell ?The American story.? The nature of the > story > >> will correspond to the time in history when it ?worked? as the right > story > >> for the time. The Destiny of a Man ?worked? in 1959, when the generation > >> that had suffered in the Great Patriotic War was still healing but a > >> turning point (Kruschev?s speech) had been reached. It interpreted the > >> perezvanhie of the war for the generation that had survived it. It > >> distorted some things (what often happened to ex-prisoners of war, for > >> example) and confirmed others (the gas chambers). It wasn?t history; it > was > >> art. > >> > >> I notice that Vygotsky says that perezvanhie is a unit that joins the > >> internal emotional experience and the external situation. I am tempted > to > >> play with the Engestrom ?unit of analysis? here but all refrain. > >> > >> So what works of art can we point out that would serve comparable > >> purposes, related to their moment in time? > >> > >> How about Uncle Tom?s Cabin? The images of African Americans are > >> cartoonish to modern eyes, but the book itself made the Black experience > >> accessible to the readers of 1852. It widened the circle of perezvhanie > - > >> the environment - for white readers who were no doubt troubled but > >> uncertain (social situation of development?) as they sensed the tremors > >> that would flare up into the Civil War 10 years later. > >> > >> Note that the work of art that achieves this purpose (creates the right > >> story for the time) is created in the moment when uncertainty, fear, etc > >> are dominant ? when it is needed, in other words - not when 100 years > have > >> gone by (or 60, as in the case of The Destiny of a Man) and we know, or > >> think we know, what happened next. When its time is past, it becomes a > >> ?classic.? Example: Steinbeck: The Grapes of Wrath. > >> > >> So what can we point to that achieves this purpose for us today? > >> > >> > >> Helena Worthen > >> helenaworthen@gmail.com > >> Berkeley, CA 94707 > >> Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com > >> > >> > >> > >>> On Jan 21, 2017, at 11:40 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > >> wrote: > >>> > >>> Thank you all for following up on the Trump's speech suggestion. > >>> Helena, the way you have re-phrased my proposal is exactly they way I > >> had hoped it to be heard. I think Andy, Helena, Sue, Greg and Larry have > >> offered empirical materials for and analyses of the type we would be > >> producing if we were to follow the proposal. Thanks Greg for the > reference, > >> which seems right to the point, and Sue for the glimpse to people's best > >> protest signs (they are good empirical materials for sure). Thanks Andy, > >> too, offering your body and soul to scientific progress and undergoing > the > >> inaugural speech again. The way you describe it is very close to how I > >> thought and felt yesterday. > >>> My family and friends today joined the march here in Victoria, and, > like > >> Helena mentions, we all commented on how well it felt. There was a very > >> cheerful, friendly atmosphere, and lots of affection. I too felt better > >> today. > >>> > >>> In case we wanted to go forward with this project, I have created a > >> google doc in which I am collecting the resources, empirical cases, and > >> analyses that we have begun producing. I have also added additional > links > >> (like one to the "Bikers for Trump" site, and the full transcript of the > >> inaugural speech plus a link from the Washington Post. > >>> > >>> The document should be accessible to everyone who follow this link: > >>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Nmn77hKa8XhDJ043ZfVuTUtT7NxDA > >> ibuzdv0KJDGqCo/edit?usp=sharing > >>> I guess the easiest way is that I curate it, populating it with content > >> shared in xmca, but everyone is able and welcome to edit. > >>> Alfredo > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> ________________________________________ > >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >> on behalf of Helena Worthen > >>> Sent: 22 January 2017 06:54 > >>> To: ablunden@mira.net; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie > >>> > >>> OK, got it. > >>> > >>> H > >>> > >>> Helena Worthen > >>> helenaworthen@gmail.com > >>> Berkeley, CA 94707 > >>> Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>> On Jan 21, 2017, at 9:29 PM, Andy Blunden wrote: > >>>> > >>>> No, Helena, the *environment* is the same, but each are in a different > >> *social situation of development*, thus the different perezhivanie. > >>>> > >>>> Andy > >>>> > >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ > >>>> Andy Blunden > >>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy > >>>> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > >>>> On 22/01/2017 3:48 PM, Helena Worthen wrote: > >>>>> ... The social situation ? like the alcoholic mother in the case with > >> the three children each with a different perezvhanie - is the same for > both > >> people who are listening to the speech, but the people (like the > children) > >> respond differently. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>> > >> > >> > > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Trump Inaugural Analysis.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 171714 bytes Desc: not available Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20170124/13e31d7a/attachment.bin From helenaworthen@gmail.com Mon Jan 23 20:29:32 2017 From: helenaworthen@gmail.com (Helena Worthen) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2017 20:29:32 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism In-Reply-To: References: <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C71964@CIO-KRC-D1MBX04.osuad.osu.edu> <1485073527094.7145@iped.uio.no> <5E5B95EA-374F-48EB-B308-BCE49DA52760@gmail.com> <1485113892233.91870@iped.uio.no> <7BD412C4-D775-4D3A-9992-68ACACFB188C@gmail.com> Message-ID: <8004DEFF-7DEE-4D14-8B25-721A97DE1384@gmail.com> Julian, the movie you?re thinking of is Pride. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pride_(2014_film) Are you suggesting stepping from looking at and studying identity groups to ?coming out? as being a member of one, and then in full feather of one?s identity, relating to the stranger across the aisle? But could you please explain what this means: ??..whose cultural capital in his analysis is a transposition of the dominant economic, capitalist class.? What does ?transposition? mean here? Thanks ? Helena Worthen helenaworthen@gmail.com Berkeley, CA 94707 Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com > On Jan 23, 2017, at 10:49 AM, Julian Williams wrote: > > Dear Helena and all > > The victories of the right in the US and Europe surely cannot be explained > only by cultural identity issues, and not only by the disaffection of the > workers with their traditional (-ly hopeless social democratic) parties, > though these are important elements of the situation that are making the > far right a possible option for capital. > > Surely we have to look at the global failure of capitalism: the reasons > are essentially economic. Our rulers seem ever more desperate to manage a > rate of profit that will satisfy capital and it seems a small portion of > them are prepared to back the far right as an option on the political > field if necessary. Not yet a significant minority of the Davos class, > because they still need to be convinced that the traditional order cannot > be made to work, but the Murdoch's and the UKIP/ Tory petit bourgeois > backbone are nearly there already: Trump himself is pretty much there, as > is Le Pen et al, .. > > Within this context, and more if/when another 2008 crash hits, the fascist > strategy will grow more attractive as the rightist parties attract more > disaffected workers, non-workers and petit bourgeois. All the > cultural-ideological elements of fascism and nationalism are there in the > Uk and France/Netherlands etc just as bad as in Trumpland. (Hey Trump > didn't even get the majority vote - on any democratic conception he has no > right to have been declared a winner?. Unless we can declare 'Remain' a > victory because its 48% vote is represented in our parliament by a > majority of the representatives?) > > What can 'we' do? Only to keep trying to clarify it, keep telling it as it > is and might be. What part a conceptualisation of perezhivanie has in this > I don't know - but it might be worth re-reading 'The struggle against > fascism in Germany' again (not being ironic). The lesson then/there was to > block with Social Democracy and labour unions/parties while explaining its > failures, helping their support to move left as well as showing there is > an alternative to the alternative (here we have Corbyn and momentum; the > US have Bernie and ?). > > But maybe this strategy is not enough? What else? I think there are > important interventions also in the cultural fields and so identity is an > issue for capital. I wrote a bit about this from Bourdieu's perspective? > what progressives in every field have in common is that they resist the > dominant powers in their cultural field - whose cultural capital in his > analysis is a transposition of the dominant economic, capitalist class. > That?s what LGBT, underprivileged groups, national/ethnic minorities, etc > everywhere have in common, if we can be helped to see it? like that film > of the gay rights activists from London who marched to South Wales to > support the miners strike? and the miners who in returned joined a gay > rights march in London? what was that called? > > Julian. > > > > On 23/01/2017 17:55, "xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Helena > Worthen" helenaworthen@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Well, yes. Good question: How? I take it Francine is not asking this >> ironically: she really wants us to figure out how. >> >> The challenge is to answer the question. >> >> I don?t think any of us have a quick answer, but it certainly is a >> question that is within our collective knowledge to address. >> >> H >> >> Helena Worthen >> helenaworthen@gmail.com >> Berkeley, CA 94707 >> Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com >> >> >> >>> On Jan 22, 2017, at 7:32 PM, Larry Smolucha >>> wrote: >>> >>> Message from Francine Smolucha: >>> >>> >>> The key to an analysis of the Trump movement is understanding the >>> >>> fundamental IRONIES that have rocked American politics. >>> >>> >>> The workers revolution has resulted in the >>> >>> workers/unions deserting the Left, the socialists, the Democratic Party. >>> >>> Trump is a Capitalist regardless of whether he actually has a >>> Republican ideology. >>> >>> The workers' movement has been hijacked by a capitalist. >>> >>> >>> The other great IRONY is that Trump wants to make Russia a U.S. ally >>> (again). >>> >>> The Left, the socialists, the Democratic Party are the ones demonizing >>> Russia - >>> >>> what a reversal! >>> >>> >>> Since CHAT derives from Russian psychology (Leontiev and Vygotsky) and >>> the backlash against Trump is also a backlash against all things Russian >>> - this puts CHAT in a particularly awkward position. How can a cultural >>> historical psychology that originated in Russia become the leader in the >>> anti-Trump discourse? or lead an anti-Trump educational movement? You >>> are even extolling a Russian concept PEREZHIVANIE. >>> >>> >>> I think the XMCA needs to examine its own perezhivanie at this time. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ________________________________ >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>> on behalf of mike cole >>> Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 3:01 PM >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>> Cc: Mariane Hedegaard; Reijo Miettinen; Seth Chaiklin >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >>> Nationalism >>> >>> Helena et al -- >>> >>> An important emphasis in the article for me was on the fact that >>> although >>> the article focused on the American nationalist movement that has just >>> pulled of an alt-right coup, similar movements are poised to take hold >>> in a >>> lot of places in Europe to join the many already entrenched unsavory >>> governments in other parts of the world. >>> >>> The CRADLE center in Helsinki is under very concerted attack and the >>> right >>> wing government appears, from this distance, to be making great >>> progress on >>> destroying its legacy. The same process has been in Denmark for some >>> time, >>> also with apparent success. >>> >>> What do our international colleagues who have already felt the hot >>> breath >>> of right wing nationalism have to offer in terms of strategies of >>> resistence? >>> >>> Back to "what is to be done," that sombre question from an earlier era. >>> The >>> answer last time did not produce what it promised. >>> >>> mike >>> >>> mike >>> >>> On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 12:22 PM, Helena Worthen >>> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Thank you, Alfredo - I gave it a read. >>>> >>>> Sure, of course they?re right. But I am very disappointed. >>>> >>>> I was hoping that the following was only item #1 in a long list of >>>> "what >>>> the 2016 election made apparent": >>>> >>>> The 2016 election has made apparent the need for scholarship that >>>> explicitly defends and furthers the rights and well-being of people of >>>> color, immigrants, Muslims, women, people who are differently abled, >>>> LGBTQ >>>> communities, and the earth. These are stances that have been limited, >>>> at >>>> least explicitly, in the Learning Sciences. >>>> >>>> But the call for inclusion was not just #1, it seems to be the whole >>>> thing. In other words, it?s all about identity ?plus the earth, of >>>> course. >>>> While inclusion is necessary, it?s not even a start. Yes, research, >>>> teaching, publishing, promotion, conferences ? everything associated >>>> with >>>> teaching and learning has to include everyone as equals (see Andy?s >>>> book) >>>> in one way or another ? but then what? What are they (we) supposed to >>>> do? >>>> Where does the pretty language touch the ground? >>>> >>>> I was listening to a broadcast of the Women?s March in DC on Saturday >>>> morning, and Kamala Harris, who was the California State Attorney >>>> General >>>> and is now a junior Senator from CA, was addressing the rally. She >>>> said, >>>> ?People always ask me to talk about women?s issues. I say, ?Oh, I?m SO >>>> glad >>>> you?re interested in economics!! Let?s talk about economics.? And she >>>> ran >>>> through a whole set of parallel back-and-forths, always pulling >>>> identity >>>> questions back to wages, jobs, earning, supporting your family, etc >>>> etc. >>>> >>>> Much as we need to wipe away any barriers to the Learning Sciences (and >>>> the professions and institutions dedicated to them) due to identity, >>>> until >>>> the Learning Sciences start taking a look at the place where most >>>> people >>>> spend most of their lives ? not school, I mean ? but work, they will be >>>> engaging in a soft conversation at the edge of the real issue. It?s a >>>> pleasant conversation but it doesn?t put a hand on the levers that >>>> translate skill and knowledge into rent and groceries. >>>> >>>> H >>>> >>>> >>>> Helena Worthen >>>> helenaworthen@gmail.com >>>> Berkeley, CA 94707 >>>> Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> On Jan 22, 2017, at 11:38 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Here it is, >>>>> >>>>> http://cognitionandinstruction.com/engagements-the-learning- >>>> sciences-in-a-new-era-of-u-s-nationalism/ >>>>> >>>>> Alfredo >>>>> ________________________________________ >>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>> >>>> on behalf of Helena Worthen >>>>> Sent: 22 January 2017 20:24 >>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >>>> Nationalism >>>>> >>>>> Someone please re-send the link to this article? I think I?m going to >>>> want to read it and respond to Mike?s question. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks ? H >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Helena Worthen >>>>> helenaworthen@gmail.com >>>>> Berkeley, CA 94707 >>>>> Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> On Jan 22, 2017, at 12:25 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >>>>>> >>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Mike, >>>>>> >>>>>> thanks a lot for sharing this article. You and Michael, who have and >>>> know more history, have spoken in terms of reminiscences. I have lived >>>> and >>>> know less, and the article feels like fresh air. During my PhD, I >>>> begun to >>>> increasingly feel that I had to due something to act and respond to the >>>> increasing ecological and humanitarian globe crises. But how could I do >>>> anything if I had children and a PhD to finalise?? What could I do that >>>> would also be doing my job as researcher in a department of education? >>>> It >>>> was very difficult to find anything, partly because almost every >>>> academic >>>> quest would focus on learning, but so little on social development. How >>>> many scientific articles are dedicated to socio-political questions in >>>> the >>>> most cited educational journals? I felt very powerless. >>>>>> >>>>>> To be able to address these questions within my expertise, is a >>>> challenge partly because contrary to Dewey's hope, educational >>>> research has >>>> only marginally focused on these questions, and yet they may be >>>> exactly the >>>> question that matter to education. What are we educating for? Indeed, >>>> what >>>> is education for? I think we face a serious problem when someone (like >>>> myself), being an educational researchers/scholar, still has to >>>> scratch her >>>> head wondering <>>> and >>>> development?>> Vygotsky would be shocked! >>>>>> >>>>>> Alfredo >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>>> >>>> on behalf of mike cole >>>>>> Sent: 19 January 2017 04:51 >>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >>>> Nationalism >>>>>> >>>>>> Yes Michael, >>>>>> >>>>>> It feels like the world of the later 1930's about the time I was >>>>>> born as >>>>>> that period came down to me through the prism of a family of >>>>>> "premature >>>>>> anti fascists." >>>>>> >>>>>> For a great re-creation of those times see the highly ambivalent >>>>>> film by >>>>>> Frank Capra, "meet John Doe." It has American big capital >>>>>> interconnected >>>>>> with fascism combined with populist collectivism in a manner that >>>> points at >>>>>> the media (as then experienced) as the bad guys in disguise. Happy >>>> Ending, >>>>>> Beethoven Ode to Joy and all. >>>>>> >>>>>> It's come round again, nastier this time. >>>>>> >>>>>> Mike >>>>>> On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 6:20 PM Glassman, Michael >>>>>> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Mike >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It was so interesting to read this note after reading the Cognition >>>>>>> and >>>>>>> Instruction essay. All the way through it I kept thinking we have >>>>>>> been >>>>>>> here before. It reminded me of the scholars, especially those who >>>>>>> had >>>>>>> escaped from Germany, trying to make sense of what had happened to >>>> their >>>>>>> society during World War II. The foremost in my mind was Lewin. >>>> Except I >>>>>>> wonder if he would say the process of transformative action starts >>>>>>> not >>>> with >>>>>>> emergence of quasi-needs, but our willingness and abilities to step >>>> back >>>>>>> from our quasi-needs and the ways that they drive us, often to >>>>>>> dysfunctional behaviors that it ultimately destructive to both our >>>> society >>>>>>> and to us as individuals. How hard this is to do, we have to keep >>>> going >>>>>>> back again and again. The quasi-needs, tribalism, acceptance, >>>> standing are >>>>>>> always there. It is how they shape us that is critical. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Michael >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto: >>>>>>> xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 8:31 PM >>>>>>> >>>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >>>>>>> Nationalism >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> In following the perezhivanie thread I encountered the note I >>>> re-membered. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> And interestingly mis-remembered. A translation into my focus on >>>>>>> mediational means. He places the starting point of the process of >>>>>>> transformative action at the emergence of quasi-needs (from Kurt >>>> Lewin). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> That seems correct to me. The new mediational means emerge under >>>>>>> environmental presses. Ever functionalist ego need a goal(!). (The >>>> problem >>>>>>> with functionalism) In David's words, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Perhaps the place we should look for "exaptations" that can save >>>>>>> both >>>> our >>>>>>> personalities and our environment is not in our evolved needs, but >>>>>>> in >>>> yet >>>>>>> to be designed quasi-needs. Artificial organs, after all, always >>>> suggest >>>>>>> new and ever more artificial functions, like chess and language. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This point seems worth keeping in mind as we look at where this >>>>>>> group >>>> of >>>>>>> critical scholars who work within the Learning Sciences disciplinary >>>>>>> framework would like to lead us. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> mike >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >> >> > > From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Mon Jan 23 22:58:33 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2017 06:58:33 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism In-Reply-To: References: <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C71964@CIO-KRC-D1MBX04.osuad.osu.edu> <1485073527094.7145@iped.uio.no> <5E5B95EA-374F-48EB-B308-BCE49DA52760@gmail.com> <1485113892233.91870@iped.uio.no> , <2c9faf42-cb69-9860-4b9f-ea0f6f0ca307@mira.net>, Message-ID: <1485241112188.8167@iped.uio.no> Francine, I agree analysis is only one tool and I hope we can do much more here and elsewhere. But the overtone window seems to resonate well with our quest for understanding the possibilities/conditions for hearing Trump's voice sound like a pleasant flute or like toilette flush. I think the idea of Irony also adds to the question of perezhivanie and Trump in the sense that different perezhivanie will also imply different forms of generalisation/consciousness. Irony seems to always involve moving a step up in the types of generalisation or metaphor. A good example may be found in considering the "Love Trumps Hate" message that has been going around in the media. Although I am no linguist, I am gonna give it a try: If you were to hear the assertion literally, you may hear an imperative to do love Trump's hate in such a way as to enter into a double bind situation. To find yourself in this situation, you need to stick to the transitive form of the subject (you love) with respect to the object (Trump hate). You kind of have to have faith in this form, respect the integrity of the object and the integrity of the subject each in its own terms, and so you may come to feel confused, or perhaps end up hating just the same way Trump plays he hates. On the other hand, to be able to hear "love trumps hate" as a message of love, as an equivalent (as per Vygotsky's equivalence) for another message that we also have seen these days, "when they go low we go high," then you have to take the relation between subject and object in a higher level of metaphor: you now hear the sentence in a context that modifies both subject and object; hate and love cannot be exclusive opposites. The sentence then is heard as intransitive, love and hate no longer are independent. And most importantly, once you hear the sentence in its intransitive form, love and hate no longer are the same. Similarly, to hear everything Trump said and take it literally takes a very different act of faith that it takes hearing it literally as an irony. Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Larry Smolucha Sent: 24 January 2017 02:35 To: ablunden@mira.net; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism Message from Francine: Helena Worthen was right - I am serious about finding (and creating) new tools for understanding the Trump movement. Analysis is only one tool and there is no insight when it is overused. Figurative, analogical, metaphorical thinking gives us other tools. Recognizing IRONY means getting the punch line in a joke (as Freud explained in Jokes and Their Relation to the Unconscious). Is there a termteson in literature for the reversal that commonly occurs in fairy tales? All that is gold does not glitter, not all those who wander are lost . . . 1) The ironic reversals that are taking place as people change their alignment with political parties remind me of a geophysics phenomena - the reversal of the earth's magnetic field that can happen over hundreds of thousands of years. Both are disorienting. I will give this more thought, but for the moment consider this much. When magnetic fields shift it is not all at once, magnetic currents in the molten layers beneath the earth's solid crust change polarities, sometimes causing a total reversal. Our political parties are commonly referred to as polar opposites but those polarities are not fixed they are fluid. The blue collar working class can shift from the Democratic Party to the Republican. The Black vote can shift to the Republicans, the Democrats don't own it. In the 1950's Russian sympathies were a hallmark of the left, now the left denounces Trumps outreach to the Russians. [A caveat here - this is two dimensional thinking because there are only two poles on one geometric plane.] 2) There is another concept, the Overton Window that is a scale of how radical of a discourse the public will tolerate (also called the window of discourse). The Window opens and closes along a range of discourse from the acceptable to the unthinkable. What discourse resonates with the general public (strikes a chord)? What will they regard as taboo (or not politically correct)? Issues like that. Here are a couple links worth looking at: Donald Trump & The Overton Window --Resetting America's Political www.nationalreview.com/.../donald-trump-overton-window-american-p.. Trump's Win Smashed the 'Overton Window' | LifeZette www.lifezette.com/polizette/trumps-win-smashed-overton-window/ Can any of this be used with the concept of perezhivanie? ________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Andy Blunden Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 9:37 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism "Irony" - good word to introduce here Francine. ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy Andy Blunden?s Home Page home.mira.net Andy Blunden's Home Page with links to pages I maintain and mail-to buttons http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making [http://www.brill.com/sites/default/files/styles/large/public/ftp/images/products/295x295/92947.jpg?itok=j5KXqZw3] The Origins of Collective Decision Making | Brill www.brill.com The Origins of Collective Decision Making, identifies three paradigms of collective decision making ? Counsel, Majority and Consensus, and discovers their origins ... On 23/01/2017 2:32 PM, Larry Smolucha wrote: > Message from Francine Smolucha: > > > The key to an analysis of the Trump movement is understanding the > > fundamental IRONIES that have rocked American politics. > > > The workers revolution has resulted in the > > workers/unions deserting the Left, the socialists, the Democratic Party. > > Trump is a Capitalist regardless of whether he actually has a Republican ideology. > > The workers' movement has been hijacked by a capitalist. > > > The other great IRONY is that Trump wants to make Russia a U.S. ally (again). > > The Left, the socialists, the Democratic Party are the ones demonizing Russia - > > what a reversal! > > > Since CHAT derives from Russian psychology (Leontiev and Vygotsky) and the backlash against Trump is also a backlash against all things Russian - this puts CHAT in a particularly awkward position. How can a cultural historical psychology that originated in Russia become the leader in the anti-Trump discourse? or lead an anti-Trump educational movement? You are even extolling a Russian concept PEREZHIVANIE. > > > I think the XMCA needs to examine its own perezhivanie at this time. > > > > > ________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of mike cole > Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 3:01 PM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Cc: Mariane Hedegaard; Reijo Miettinen; Seth Chaiklin > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism > > Helena et al -- > > An important emphasis in the article for me was on the fact that although > the article focused on the American nationalist movement that has just > pulled of an alt-right coup, similar movements are poised to take hold in a > lot of places in Europe to join the many already entrenched unsavory > governments in other parts of the world. > > The CRADLE center in Helsinki is under very concerted attack and the right > wing government appears, from this distance, to be making great progress on > destroying its legacy. The same process has been in Denmark for some time, > also with apparent success. > > What do our international colleagues who have already felt the hot breath > of right wing nationalism have to offer in terms of strategies of > resistence? > > Back to "what is to be done," that sombre question from an earlier era. The > answer last time did not produce what it promised. > > mike > > mike > > On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 12:22 PM, Helena Worthen > wrote: > >> Thank you, Alfredo - I gave it a read. >> >> Sure, of course they?re right. But I am very disappointed. >> >> I was hoping that the following was only item #1 in a long list of "what >> the 2016 election made apparent": >> >> The 2016 election has made apparent the need for scholarship that >> explicitly defends and furthers the rights and well-being of people of >> color, immigrants, Muslims, women, people who are differently abled, LGBTQ >> communities, and the earth. These are stances that have been limited, at >> least explicitly, in the Learning Sciences. >> >> But the call for inclusion was not just #1, it seems to be the whole >> thing. In other words, it?s all about identity ?plus the earth, of course. >> While inclusion is necessary, it?s not even a start. Yes, research, >> teaching, publishing, promotion, conferences ? everything associated with >> teaching and learning has to include everyone as equals (see Andy?s book) >> in one way or another ? but then what? What are they (we) supposed to do? >> Where does the pretty language touch the ground? >> >> I was listening to a broadcast of the Women?s March in DC on Saturday >> morning, and Kamala Harris, who was the California State Attorney General >> and is now a junior Senator from CA, was addressing the rally. She said, >> ?People always ask me to talk about women?s issues. I say, ?Oh, I?m SO glad >> you?re interested in economics!! Let?s talk about economics.? And she ran >> through a whole set of parallel back-and-forths, always pulling identity >> questions back to wages, jobs, earning, supporting your family, etc etc. >> >> Much as we need to wipe away any barriers to the Learning Sciences (and >> the professions and institutions dedicated to them) due to identity, until >> the Learning Sciences start taking a look at the place where most people >> spend most of their lives ? not school, I mean ? but work, they will be >> engaging in a soft conversation at the edge of the real issue. It?s a >> pleasant conversation but it doesn?t put a hand on the levers that >> translate skill and knowledge into rent and groceries. >> >> H >> >> >> Helena Worthen >> helenaworthen@gmail.com >> Berkeley, CA 94707 >> Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com >> >> >> >>> On Jan 22, 2017, at 11:38 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >> wrote: >>> Here it is, >>> >>> http://cognitionandinstruction.com/engagements-the-learning- >> sciences-in-a-new-era-of-u-s-nationalism/ >>> Alfredo >>> ________________________________________ >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> on behalf of Helena Worthen >>> Sent: 22 January 2017 20:24 >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >> Nationalism >>> Someone please re-send the link to this article? I think I?m going to >> want to read it and respond to Mike?s question. >>> Thanks ? H >>> >>> >>> Helena Worthen >>> helenaworthen@gmail.com >>> Berkeley, CA 94707 >>> Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com >>> >>> >>> >>>> On Jan 22, 2017, at 12:25 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >> wrote: >>>> Mike, >>>> >>>> thanks a lot for sharing this article. You and Michael, who have and >> know more history, have spoken in terms of reminiscences. I have lived and >> know less, and the article feels like fresh air. During my PhD, I begun to >> increasingly feel that I had to due something to act and respond to the >> increasing ecological and humanitarian globe crises. But how could I do >> anything if I had children and a PhD to finalise?? What could I do that >> would also be doing my job as researcher in a department of education? It >> was very difficult to find anything, partly because almost every academic >> quest would focus on learning, but so little on social development. How >> many scientific articles are dedicated to socio-political questions in the >> most cited educational journals? I felt very powerless. >>>> To be able to address these questions within my expertise, is a >> challenge partly because contrary to Dewey's hope, educational research has >> only marginally focused on these questions, and yet they may be exactly the >> question that matter to education. What are we educating for? Indeed, what >> is education for? I think we face a serious problem when someone (like >> myself), being an educational researchers/scholar, still has to scratch her >> head wondering <> development?>> Vygotsky would be shocked! >>>> Alfredo >>>> >>>> >>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> on behalf of mike cole >>>> Sent: 19 January 2017 04:51 >>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >> Nationalism >>>> Yes Michael, >>>> >>>> It feels like the world of the later 1930's about the time I was born as >>>> that period came down to me through the prism of a family of "premature >>>> anti fascists." >>>> >>>> For a great re-creation of those times see the highly ambivalent film by >>>> Frank Capra, "meet John Doe." It has American big capital interconnected >>>> with fascism combined with populist collectivism in a manner that >> points at >>>> the media (as then experienced) as the bad guys in disguise. Happy >> Ending, >>>> Beethoven Ode to Joy and all. >>>> >>>> It's come round again, nastier this time. >>>> >>>> Mike >>>> On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 6:20 PM Glassman, Michael >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Mike >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> It was so interesting to read this note after reading the Cognition and >>>>> Instruction essay. All the way through it I kept thinking we have been >>>>> here before. It reminded me of the scholars, especially those who had >>>>> escaped from Germany, trying to make sense of what had happened to >> their >>>>> society during World War II. The foremost in my mind was Lewin. >> Except I >>>>> wonder if he would say the process of transformative action starts not >> with >>>>> emergence of quasi-needs, but our willingness and abilities to step >> back >>>>> from our quasi-needs and the ways that they drive us, often to >>>>> dysfunctional behaviors that it ultimately destructive to both our >> society >>>>> and to us as individuals. How hard this is to do, we have to keep >> going >>>>> back again and again. The quasi-needs, tribalism, acceptance, >> standing are >>>>> always there. It is how they shape us that is critical. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Michael >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> >>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto: >>>>> xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole >>>>> >>>>> Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 8:31 PM >>>>> >>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>> >>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> In following the perezhivanie thread I encountered the note I >> re-membered. >>>>> And interestingly mis-remembered. A translation into my focus on >>>>> mediational means. He places the starting point of the process of >>>>> transformative action at the emergence of quasi-needs (from Kurt >> Lewin). >>>>> That seems correct to me. The new mediational means emerge under >>>>> environmental presses. Ever functionalist ego need a goal(!). (The >> problem >>>>> with functionalism) In David's words, >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Perhaps the place we should look for "exaptations" that can save both >> our >>>>> personalities and our environment is not in our evolved needs, but in >> yet >>>>> to be designed quasi-needs. Artificial organs, after all, always >> suggest >>>>> new and ever more artificial functions, like chess and language. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> This point seems worth keeping in mind as we look at where this group >> of >>>>> critical scholars who work within the Learning Sciences disciplinary >>>>> framework would like to lead us. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> mike >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>> >> > From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Mon Jan 23 23:03:00 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2017 07:03:00 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: References: <1485031482970.89461@iped.uio.no> <1485191332785.92884@iped.uio.no>, Message-ID: <1485241379454.56697@iped.uio.no> That would be interesting to explore, Mike. You suggest actually asking how people from different ages and demographics and share it here? That sounds doable! Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of mike cole Sent: 24 January 2017 00:54 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie Martin's caution relates to my suggestion that we not restrict the same to our families or students and friends. People experienced the Trump victory in different ways. The example from LSV involves kids of three ages. That still seems an important focus. Our contemporaries are in there 30's + (and ++). Our students are in latest teens or 20+. High school kids are in the teens. Middle school kids..... It is my strong impression that there are significant age differences in ones experience of the event that could be elicited pretty easily and compared in the group across other interesting categories of difference such as nationality. A small, positive, collective effort? mike On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 9:08 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > Dear Martin, > > thanks for the nuances you introduce. Yes, I agree with you, it is totally > sensible to hear Trump's words with hope and actually experience > (perezhivat) them in such a way as to become moving force towards > transformation. I was only approaching the speech from a developmental > stages perspective, where, to hear the speech with contempt given the > speech's formal structure as a type of generalisation, would mean to hear > them within that stage that Andy very appropriately (in my view) called as > "magic". Vygotsky (I think) also used this term to refer to a stage in > child development. > > But I do not wish to say that contempt is the only possible quality, and > so, as you very nicely remark, hope, enthusiasm, empowerment, all these and > their developmental and historical conditions should be considered as > possibilities of hearing Trump's speech. > > Thanks a lot for the resources/links, I am incorporating them to our joint > document. > Alfredo > > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of Martin John Packer > Sent: 22 January 2017 16:08 > To: xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie > > Hi Alfredo. > > I think your proposal is very interesting; that we could explore two > different ways of hearing and understanding Trump?s words. But if I > understand you correctly, I don?t agree that ?in the first case, there is > no hope for change, there is contempt.? I have lived in Michigan and > Pennsylvania, and in both states industries that were central to the > economic rise of the working class, auto manufacturing and steel foundries, > collapsed as a result of globalization. I have seen first hand some of the > communities that were almost completely destroyed. I believe that people > who experienced these changes do hear Trump?s words with hope for change, > and if they have contempt it is for professional politicians who they feel > speak but do not act. > > But perhaps you mean it was a lack of hope that *led* people to Trump: > > donald-trump-manufacturing-jobs-hope/496541/> > > The New Yorker has published several articles by George Packer (no > relation) on the appeal that Trump has to the white working class. For > example: > > donald-trump-appeals-to-the-white-working-class> > > Martin > > > > > > On Jan 21, 2017, at 3:44 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > wrote: > > Dear Helena, Andy, all, > > > Unfortunately, I have not been able to find the time to watch the movie > Fate of a Man, but I have followed the very interesting analyses and > conversations about it. I am opening this thread as connexions between > those analyses, perezhivanie, and current tragic social and political > situation in the US and elsewhere. This also connects with the article that > Mike shared on the position of the Learning Sciences with regard to this > situation (how happy I was to see this initiative!). > > > In particular, I wanted to pick up on Helena's very true comment that "the > US is going to have to produce some works of scholarship or art, or both, > that attempt to explain what is happening now here in the US -- for > example, this afternoon, under President Trump." > > > Yesterday, we saw at home Trump's speech. Although we had followed Trump's > campaign and its denigrating tenor, it was yesterday, for the first time, > that my wife and me got this gut feeling of true tragedy, of a real *drama* > as we heard those empty, but to recover the prior article for discussion, > hollowed and hollowing words coming out of that mouth. It came upon us that > there may be lots of people for whom those words are not hollowed, but > actually encouraging, rich, beautiful. How can you hear that as beauty? > > > So, I was wondering, and in following up with our 2016 MCA Issue 4 > discussion, whether we could not actually conduct an analysis of the sort > Marc offers in his article of the perezhivanie. Just as Vygotsky explains > how 3 different children experience the situation of an alcoholic mother > differently, could not we perform an analysis ?of that perezhivanie in > which a person experiences yesterday's situation as one of encouragement, > of freedom and hope. Would that not be a way to try to understand what is > going on? This would not be a piece of art, but could be something we could > do to try to understand and change this situation. > > We could then contrast that perezhivanie with the one many of as have, in > which the situation is experience as a real TRAGEDY. I think in the first > case, there is no hope for change, there is contempt; in the second, > hearing those words as hollowed and hollowing require that you live the > situation as a doubled situation in which you experienced it from a very > different developmental stage. One in which the speech sounds as a case of > involution. > > Should we find the transcribed speech and perform such analysis? > > > Going now to support the Woman's march here in Victoria BC. > > Alfredo > > > > From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Mon Jan 23 23:09:43 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2017 07:09:43 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's "talking" versus "speaking" In-Reply-To: <289C4B7F-0A9A-4A10-BB1F-0619858FFBAA@umn.edu> References: <628ebbd3-8b51-8e15-47d0-9164e8352c36@mira.net> <58866d1f.90966b0a.1b7d5.c1c8@mx.google.com>, <289C4B7F-0A9A-4A10-BB1F-0619858FFBAA@umn.edu> Message-ID: <1485241782176.85472@iped.uio.no> Richard, what this linguist says and you comment on Trump's talk is pretty close to what I was just writing to Francine in the main "trump's speech" thread about hearing him literally and hearing him as irony. If you stick to hearing in the same he seems to treat his recipients, then you may have to believe that each word conveys an idea and that one word suffices to give the idea, like "it's true". It seems to be enough. As per your question, yes, it's a very scary question. It also is very scary that he may say, "it's true" and so be it. Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Richard Beach Sent: 23 January 2017 23:09 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Trump's "talking" versus "speaking" In a New York Times op-ed , the linguist, John McWhorter, distinguishes between Trump?s informal, spontaneous ?talking? versus ?speaking? that involves employing a more formal register associated with written language. He cites the example of Trump?s talking: ?Look, having nuclear ? my uncle was a great professor and scientist and engineer, Dr. John Trump at M.I.T.; good genes, very good genes, O.K., very smart, the Wharton School of Finance, very good, very smart ? you know, if you?re a conservative Republican, if I were a liberal, if, like, O.K. ?? What?s problematic here is that Trump?s off-the-cuff ?talking,? as well as his use of tweets, can convey messages with problematic uptakes from others, resulting in taking action without careful thought or consultation with others. As McWhorter notes: ?All understand that his speech is structurally ungraceful. It may be harder to grasp that Mr. Trump, as someone just talking rather than artfully communicating ideas, has no sense of the tacit understanding that a politician?s utterances are more signals than statements, vehicles meant to convey larger messages.? When one of his hotels is another country is attacked by ?terrorists,? will Trump, as someone who perceives himself as the prime actor, spontaneously declare war with little or no consideration of the consequences of his actions? Richard Beach, Professor Emeritus of English Education, University of Minnesota rbeach@umn.edu Websites: Digital writing , Media literacy , Teaching literature , Identity-focused ELA Teaching , Common Core State Standards , Apps for literacy learning , Teaching about climate change > On Jan 23, 2017, at 12:52 PM, lpscholar2@gmail.com wrote: > > Andrew, Andy, > I also want to pursue the example of James Lawson. > What struck me was his relationship to both parents as formative. > Moving to Trump?s inauguration, what struck me was the bodily gesture he was expressing walking down the hallway just prior to speaking. > This body language that i was reading before he spoke a word. > I hope some of you watched the Frontline documentary on PBS EXPLORING both Trump?s and Clinton?s early family life. > > Trump?s father was only interested in ?winners? and to come second was to be a ?loser?. The father sent Trump as a young man to a military academy that would teach his son how to be a ?winner? a lesson that Trump inhabits and is incarnating in his every gesture. > > His emotional, cognitive, and performative symmetry captured in his facial expression as he walked forward to give his inaugural address. > > In other words, James Lawson, Donald Trump, and Martin Packer?s book review i see as overlapping themes. > When we explore ?expression? and ?intentionality? and ?language? i want to include the family upbringing as formative. > > Now as an aside, Simmel would say both James and Donald are inhabiting (fictions) that INform their experiences, but that may be a leap too far. Simmel was following the philosopher Vasinger (spelling?) who focused on how we live our lives (as is) or (as though) but to take this turn would be for another thread. > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > From: Andrew Babson > Sent: January 23, 2017 9:08 AM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: James Lawson and perezhivanie > > Andy, thank you for the timely post, especially as we move forward in the > shadow of authoritarianism here in the USA. Lawson's example of choosing > non-violent protest, following Gandhi, is helpful. Consider the > effectiveness of millions of people last weekend peacefully taking to the > streets with few if any arrests (side note: we all went as a family here in > Philly, it was great). Contrast the Black Bloc member's sucker punch of > neo-nazi Richard Spencer: people are cheering it, but those same people > probably realize it's not a scalable strategy. Different tours de force, > different effects, the gender connotations of which are interesting. > > *P **erezhivanie > *is a new term to me, which I > link here to the XMCA blog for those other also unfamiliar with it. It > seems like a pretty clear gloss of a term I do know well, *Erlebnis, > *"experience" > (I dislike the gloss of that Dilthey-an term as "lived" experience...but > that's for another discussion). > > It's fascinating to learn about Lawson's vocational decision-making > process, and to consider the possible effects of violent and non-violent > dissent. But perhaps you could clarify for us Andy why you thought Lawson's > story was an example of *perezhivanie*? Where's the point of analytical > traction? If it means more than "experience", how can we apply that broader > meaning here? It seems like he had a Pauline metanoia/conversion > experience. Is that what you mean? > > Andrew > > ------------------------------------------------ > Andrew Babson, Ph.D. > Lecturer > Graduate School of Education > University of Pennsylvania > > On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 4:40 AM, Andy Blunden wrote: > > James Lawson is the Methodist preacher who trained the young members of the > SNCC in non-violent action and wrote their constitution. I paste below and > attach an excerpt from my book "The Origins of Collective Decision Making" > which narrates Lawson's life up until April 1960. Perezhivanie was not the > topic under discussion so it is not mentioned in the text, but xmca-ers > should be able to see it, an example of perezhivanie: > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > James Lawson was born in 1928, in Uniontown, Pennsylvania. His father, > James Snr., was the grandson of an escaped slave, and a Minister for the > African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church in New England. > > > > > > Via the Free African Society(FAS) the Methodists had recruited freed slaves > in Philadelphiain 1787, but as a result of a racist incident, some left to > found the African Methodist Episcopal Church(AMEC). Nonetheless, many > African Americans stayed with the United Methodist Church. The AMEC split > started in Philadelphia and the AMEC Zion Church was a split that came out > of New York. It was to AMEC Zion, James Lawson was born. > > > > > > However, Lawson returned to The United Methodist Church, created by a 1939 > merger of several branches of the Methodist Church, which set up five > regional ?jurisdictions? of Methodists in the US, organized to maintain > regionally identity and a sixth, called the ?Central Jurisdiction? which > combined the Black annual conferences, thus building segregation into the > constitution of the Church.The Methodists went through a long and painful > process, carried out in accordance with the Methodist Code of Discipline, > which mandates the principle of Majority, to re-integrate the white and > Black, but it was not till after 1964 that Black conferences started to > merge into white conferences. At the local level, congregations continued > much as before. So it was within the Black section of the segregated United > Methodist Church, that James Lawson became a Methodist. > > > > > > James Snr. was a militant preacher; he packed a 38 pistol and set up > branches of the NAACP wherever he was assigned to preach. After serving at > St. James AMEZ Church in Massillon, Ohio, he transferred to the Lexington > Annual Conference of the Central Jurisdiction of the United Methodist > Church. James Snr. was no pacifist and according to Lawson he ?refused to > take any guff from anyone, particularly on the point of race? and ?insisted > that he was going to be treated as a man.? > > > > > > Lawson?s mother, Philane May Cover, on the other hand, was decidedly > nonviolent. Lawson?s challenge, which was to form his character, was to > reconcile his father?s militancy with his mother?s nonviolence. Lawson grew > up in Massillon. One day, at the age of 10, Lawson was asked by his mother > to run an errand: > > > > > > A little white child in an automobile yelled ?nigger? out the opened > window. I walked over ... and, since I was in a hurry running my mother?s > errand, I smacked the child and went on my way. When the Lawson kids got > called ?nigger? on the streets or at school, we usually fought. I don?t > know where we got that from, except that we figured that it was something > to fight over. (Lawson, cited in King, 1999) > > > > > > On the return trip home, aware of possible repercussions, Lawson tried to > find the parents of the offending child, to talk to them, but the car was > gone. Once home, he told his mother of the incident. Lawson?s mother > replied, ?Jimmy, what good did that do?? > > > > > > She talked about who I was, the fact of God?s love, that we were a family > of love and that such an incident could not hurt me, because of who I was. > I don?t remember anyone else being around, but a stillness took over my > being at that moment. It was, as I realized much later on, a mystical > experience. In a very real way, my life stood still. I realized in that > stillness that I had changed forever. One of the phrases my mother used in > her conversation with me was that ?there must be a better way?. I > determined, from then on, that I would find the better way. (Lawson, cited > in King, 1999, pp. 187-188) > > > > > > He first became acquainted with Gandhi?s experiments in nonviolence as a > child, thanks to the African-American press which the family discussed > around the dinner table, and had read Gandhi?s autobiography as a teenager. > At Baldwin Wallace College, a liberal arts Methodistcollege in Berea, Ohio, > he studied Thoreau, Gandhi and Tolstoy, and the pacifist theologians > Dietrich Bonhoeffer and Reinhold Niebuhr. At age 19, he became a draft > resister, refusing service in the Korean War. Executive director of > Fellowship Of Reconciliation (FOR), A. J. Muste,frequently visited to > lecture at the College: > > > > > > All of us in history classes were required to hear Muste. I was thrilled. > He made me realize that I was not alone in my experimentation, that there > was a world movement, and a national movement. ... He acquainted me with > the Fellowship Of Reconciliation, which I joined on the spot in 1947. That > meant that I got exposed to their book list. > > > > > > After hearing a lecture by A. J. Muste, he joined FOR and CORE. Muste was > instrumental thereafter in strengthening Lawson?s nonviolent orientation, > directing him towards Gandhi and later facilitating his entry into the > sit-in and boycott movement beginning in the South. In the late 1940s and > early 1950s Lawson had organized sit-ins and protests directed at > establishments that discriminated against blacks in Massillon, long before > the Montgomery bus-boycott. > > > > > > He was also active with the National Conference of Methodist Youth. > Although a member of a segregated Methodist Church, he found plenty of > support for his stands against racial discrimination and war from his white > colleagues and church fellows. While he was in prison serving thirteen > months of a two and a half year term for draft resistance in 1952, he was > re-elected as Vice-President of the NCMY. > > > > > > Wesleyan Methodism was central to Lawson?s outlook. Just as John Wesley had > sought to cleanse individuals of iniquity, so could society be purged of > the social sins of slavery, segregation, poverty, and war.Generations of > African American Methodists from Harriet Tubman (AMEZ) and Henry M. Turner > (AME) in the nineteenth century, to Rosa Parks (AME) and James Farmer > (MEC), were led to social justice activism by this Methodist heritage. > > > > > > Lawson used his prison time to read and think. Writing from prison in 1952 > aged 23 years old and yet to enter the seminary, Lawson said he aspired to > emulate ?the life of Jesus, St. Francis, George Fox, Gandhi, Buddha... and > other great religious persons.? These figures attached little importance to > ?theology but (to their) experience with God.?Further, he noted ?religious > failures today are in (the arena of) experience and practice, not > theology.? When Lawson entered prison, he was a Christian pacifist.He told > Mary King however, that his ?first commitment was to work on race,? and > conscientious objection came second.By the time of his release, he had > advanced to Gandhian nonviolence. He wondered ?why can?t a mass non-violent > revolution be staged throughout the South where the segregation pattern is > much like the ?untouchables? of India? Such a movement would have to start > with one person who had the Christian vision to make such a revolution a > reality in his own life.? Gandhian nonviolence became the synthesizing > factor for Lawson?s religious thinking: the militancy of his father?s > Methodism and the Christian pacifism that he drew from his mother. > > > > > > Muste arranged for Lawson to visit India after his release from prison with > a letter of introduction to activists in the Gandhian movement, and he > remained in India from May 1953 to 1956, working at Hislop College in > Nagpur, reading Indian literature and working with Gandhi?s movement. > Lawson?s practice would remain deeply religious; his nonviolence was > saturated with the message of Christian love, and blended with principles > synthesized from a broad range of religious and secular sources, both > Eastern and Western. His aim was the ?mass education and training of people > in the use of nonviolent direct action techniques.? Lawson insisted that > ?you are fighting a system, not an individual, not a race, or not the > people of another country, but a system.? > > > > > > He continued his study of pacifism and Gandhian nonviolence at Oberlin > College, Ohio. While still in India, he had read about Martin Luther King > and his successful leadership of the Montgomery bus boycott.King?s lecture > at Oberlin on February 6, 1957, fortified his long-held intention to work > in the South for transformative social change. After King?s lecture to a > packed audience, he and Lawson talked together at dinner.Though Lawson was > contemplating study for a Ph.D., King told him ?don?t wait, but come south > now!? adding that there was no one else like Lawson.Muste arranged for FOR > to hire Lawson as southern field secretary to be stationed at Nashville in > January 1958. Upon his arrival, he found that Glenn Smiley, national field > director of FOR, had arranged for Lawson to run a full schedule of > workshops ? including one to take place early that year at the first annual > meeting of the SCLC in Columbia, South Carolina. > > > > > > At the SCLC meeting, King made an exuberant introduction of Lawson as FOR?s > new regional representative and discussed the organization?s role in > Montgomery, telling delegates to be sure to attend Lawson?s workshop on > nonviolence. King took his seat in the first pew, waiting for the > three-hour session to start: > > > > > > Martin did that at every SCLC meeting as long as he lived. He would ask me > to conduct an afternoon workshop, usually two or three hours, and he would > arrange for it to be ?at-large? so that everyone could attend, with nothing > else to compete. He put it on the schedule himself. A few minutes early, he > would show up and sit alone, as an example, in the front row. > > > > > > Back in Nashville, Lawson continued with Monday evening workshops during > the autumn of 1959 in which he trained the students who were to be the core > of the Nashville sit-in movement. As a result of his involvement with the > sit-ins Lawson was expelled from Vanderbilt, but he enrolled with Boston > University to finish his degree in theology,while continuing to work with > the students. Several professors in the School of Theology resigned over > his expulsion. > > > > > > The techniques that the students deployed were drawn from Lawson?s > workshops. In 1958 and 1959, Lawson mobilized all that he knew about > Christian pacifism, Gandhian nonviolence, and Methodist social ministry and > blended them into an unprecedented curriculum that influenced the civil > rights movement in Nashville and beyond. > > > > > > Blending Christianity and interreligious sources, he did not present its > philosophy and practice as a secular doctrine, but as the essence of > religion itself. Core to nonviolence was mirroring God?s love for humankind > and exhibiting it through concrete relationships of human solidarity and > community. ?Nonviolence,? Lawson taught, is the aggressive, forgiving, > patient, long-suffering Christ-like and Christ-commanded love or good-will > for all humankind even in the face of tension, fear, hatred, or demonic > evil.? Moreover, ?it is the readiness to absorb suffering with forgiveness > and courage rather than to inflict suffering on others.? > > > > > > Lawson divided his instruction into four modules: how nonviolence reacts, > training for nonviolence, the virtues of nonviolence, and the methods of > nonviolence. Practitioners prepared themselves by jettisoning anger, > hostility and fear thus ?minimizing the effect of an attack,? valuing love, > courage, fearlessness, and forgiveness, and pursuing redemptive suffering > which ?releases unknown elements for good.? Preparation included meditation > and prayer, study of the scriptures, practicing nonviolence through > challenges to segregation in bus transportation and in other public > facilities.The practice steps included fact-finding, negotiation, education > of the community, and various methods of nonviolent direct action including > sit-ins, boycotts, strikes, and civil disobedience. Lawson provided an > extensive bibliography including relevant verses from the Bible, the > Bhagavad Gita, and from the Chinese philosopher, Mo Ti and the Hebrew > prophet, Isaiah. > > > > > > The Nashville sit-ins and those led by students in other southern cities > convinced Ella Baker of the SCLC to call a conference in April, 1960, at > Shaw University in Raleigh, North Carolina. Out of this meeting emerged the > Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee.Lawson delivered an opening > keynote address that helped to frame SNCC?s nonviolent trajectory.Later, > Lawson summarized discussions and consensus that emerged out of the > conference, and his synopsis received the approval of everyone there. > Lawson?s overall comments said that ?nonviolence as it grows from > Judaic-Christian tradition seeks a social order of justice permeated by > love.? > > > > > > It was Lawson who delivered the keynote address and framed SNCC?s > nonviolent orientation. > > > > > > The whole group, perhaps 120 participants, all in the room, asked me to > draft a statement. Eventually, three different drafts emerged. The > Nashville group was cohesive. The extant draft was the third, influenced by > the Nashville group, after two earlier conversations. (Interview with King, > June 2014) > > > > > > Lawson?s synopsis was approved by the Conference. > > > > > > In a private email message Mary King told me: > > > > > > He [James Lawson] was reading from the FOR booklist from a young age, but I > don?t think that he was influenced on notions of Consensus by Quakers, > because the connection was too abstract. Let me underscore that he says it > was for him Methodist origins. (Private email, 15 April 2014) > > > > > > In his interview with Mary King, Lawson confirmed that the origin of > Consensus in SNCC was the Nashville Central Committee, confirming what Mary > King had told me in April. As to the roots Consensus in Lawson?s own > experience, he emphasized that: > > > > > > It was the Methodist youth and student movements with which I had grown up, > and this is how they made decisions. They knew the rules of parliamentary > procedures, but they wanted to find a common mind. (Interview with King, > June 2014) > > > > > > The Methodist Church to this very day still mandates Majority decisions, > but this would never have entailed children voting ? in general youngsters > in these organizations were simply told what to do. The Black congregations > had operated separately for more than a century, so there was some room for > Lawson to develop a consensual model of collaboration in working with young > people. It is also possible the Black congregations, like other Black > Churches in America, drew on other traditions of decision making. > > > > > > -- > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > Andy Blunden > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Mon Jan 23 23:20:13 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2017 07:20:13 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism In-Reply-To: <1485241112188.8167@iped.uio.no> References: <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C71964@CIO-KRC-D1MBX04.osuad.osu.edu> <1485073527094.7145@iped.uio.no> <5E5B95EA-374F-48EB-B308-BCE49DA52760@gmail.com> <1485113892233.91870@iped.uio.no> , <2c9faf42-cb69-9860-4b9f-ea0f6f0ca307@mira.net>, , <1485241112188.8167@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <1485242411787.55255@iped.uio.no> I forgot to add the link to an article in which Irony and the "love trumps hate" banner are related, but this time is from yet another frame: seeing as a irony a person that holds a "love trumps hate" banner with clear expression of anger. (Even more related, the words "between anger and compassion" are in the title of our shared google docs. https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/values-matter/201701/the-irony-expressing-love-trumps-hate-in-hate ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil Sent: 24 January 2017 07:58 To: ablunden@mira.net; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism Francine, I agree analysis is only one tool and I hope we can do much more here and elsewhere. But the overtone window seems to resonate well with our quest for understanding the possibilities/conditions for hearing Trump's voice sound like a pleasant flute or like toilette flush. I think the idea of Irony also adds to the question of perezhivanie and Trump in the sense that different perezhivanie will also imply different forms of generalisation/consciousness. Irony seems to always involve moving a step up in the types of generalisation or metaphor. A good example may be found in considering the "Love Trumps Hate" message that has been going around in the media. Although I am no linguist, I am gonna give it a try: If you were to hear the assertion literally, you may hear an imperative to do love Trump's hate in such a way as to enter into a double bind situation. To find yourself in this situation, you need to stick to the transitive form of the subject (you love) with respect to the object (Trump hate). You kind of have to have faith in this form, respect the integrity of the object and the integrity of the subject each in its own terms, and so you may come to feel confused, or perhaps end up hating just the same way Trump plays he hates. On the other hand, to be able to hear "love trumps hate" as a message of love, as an equivalent (as per Vygotsky's equivalence) for another message that we also have seen these days, "when they go low we go high," then you have to take the relation between subject and object in a higher level of metaphor: you now hear the sentence in a context that modifies both subject and object; hate and love cannot be exclusive opposites. The sentence then is heard as intransitive, love and hate no longer are independent. And most importantly, once you hear the sentence in its intransitive form, love and hate no longer are the same. Similarly, to hear everything Trump said and take it literally takes a very different act of faith that it takes hearing it literally as an irony. Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Larry Smolucha Sent: 24 January 2017 02:35 To: ablunden@mira.net; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism Message from Francine: Helena Worthen was right - I am serious about finding (and creating) new tools for understanding the Trump movement. Analysis is only one tool and there is no insight when it is overused. Figurative, analogical, metaphorical thinking gives us other tools. Recognizing IRONY means getting the punch line in a joke (as Freud explained in Jokes and Their Relation to the Unconscious). Is there a termteson in literature for the reversal that commonly occurs in fairy tales? All that is gold does not glitter, not all those who wander are lost . . . 1) The ironic reversals that are taking place as people change their alignment with political parties remind me of a geophysics phenomena - the reversal of the earth's magnetic field that can happen over hundreds of thousands of years. Both are disorienting. I will give this more thought, but for the moment consider this much. When magnetic fields shift it is not all at once, magnetic currents in the molten layers beneath the earth's solid crust change polarities, sometimes causing a total reversal. Our political parties are commonly referred to as polar opposites but those polarities are not fixed they are fluid. The blue collar working class can shift from the Democratic Party to the Republican. The Black vote can shift to the Republicans, the Democrats don't own it. In the 1950's Russian sympathies were a hallmark of the left, now the left denounces Trumps outreach to the Russians. [A caveat here - this is two dimensional thinking because there are only two poles on one geometric plane.] 2) There is another concept, the Overton Window that is a scale of how radical of a discourse the public will tolerate (also called the window of discourse). The Window opens and closes along a range of discourse from the acceptable to the unthinkable. What discourse resonates with the general public (strikes a chord)? What will they regard as taboo (or not politically correct)? Issues like that. Here are a couple links worth looking at: Donald Trump & The Overton Window --Resetting America's Political www.nationalreview.com/.../donald-trump-overton-window-american-p.. Trump's Win Smashed the 'Overton Window' | LifeZette www.lifezette.com/polizette/trumps-win-smashed-overton-window/ Can any of this be used with the concept of perezhivanie? ________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Andy Blunden Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 9:37 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism "Irony" - good word to introduce here Francine. ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy Andy Blunden?s Home Page home.mira.net Andy Blunden's Home Page with links to pages I maintain and mail-to buttons http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making [http://www.brill.com/sites/default/files/styles/large/public/ftp/images/products/295x295/92947.jpg?itok=j5KXqZw3] The Origins of Collective Decision Making | Brill www.brill.com The Origins of Collective Decision Making, identifies three paradigms of collective decision making ? Counsel, Majority and Consensus, and discovers their origins ... On 23/01/2017 2:32 PM, Larry Smolucha wrote: > Message from Francine Smolucha: > > > The key to an analysis of the Trump movement is understanding the > > fundamental IRONIES that have rocked American politics. > > > The workers revolution has resulted in the > > workers/unions deserting the Left, the socialists, the Democratic Party. > > Trump is a Capitalist regardless of whether he actually has a Republican ideology. > > The workers' movement has been hijacked by a capitalist. > > > The other great IRONY is that Trump wants to make Russia a U.S. ally (again). > > The Left, the socialists, the Democratic Party are the ones demonizing Russia - > > what a reversal! > > > Since CHAT derives from Russian psychology (Leontiev and Vygotsky) and the backlash against Trump is also a backlash against all things Russian - this puts CHAT in a particularly awkward position. How can a cultural historical psychology that originated in Russia become the leader in the anti-Trump discourse? or lead an anti-Trump educational movement? You are even extolling a Russian concept PEREZHIVANIE. > > > I think the XMCA needs to examine its own perezhivanie at this time. > > > > > ________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of mike cole > Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 3:01 PM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Cc: Mariane Hedegaard; Reijo Miettinen; Seth Chaiklin > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism > > Helena et al -- > > An important emphasis in the article for me was on the fact that although > the article focused on the American nationalist movement that has just > pulled of an alt-right coup, similar movements are poised to take hold in a > lot of places in Europe to join the many already entrenched unsavory > governments in other parts of the world. > > The CRADLE center in Helsinki is under very concerted attack and the right > wing government appears, from this distance, to be making great progress on > destroying its legacy. The same process has been in Denmark for some time, > also with apparent success. > > What do our international colleagues who have already felt the hot breath > of right wing nationalism have to offer in terms of strategies of > resistence? > > Back to "what is to be done," that sombre question from an earlier era. The > answer last time did not produce what it promised. > > mike > > mike > > On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 12:22 PM, Helena Worthen > wrote: > >> Thank you, Alfredo - I gave it a read. >> >> Sure, of course they?re right. But I am very disappointed. >> >> I was hoping that the following was only item #1 in a long list of "what >> the 2016 election made apparent": >> >> The 2016 election has made apparent the need for scholarship that >> explicitly defends and furthers the rights and well-being of people of >> color, immigrants, Muslims, women, people who are differently abled, LGBTQ >> communities, and the earth. These are stances that have been limited, at >> least explicitly, in the Learning Sciences. >> >> But the call for inclusion was not just #1, it seems to be the whole >> thing. In other words, it?s all about identity ?plus the earth, of course. >> While inclusion is necessary, it?s not even a start. Yes, research, >> teaching, publishing, promotion, conferences ? everything associated with >> teaching and learning has to include everyone as equals (see Andy?s book) >> in one way or another ? but then what? What are they (we) supposed to do? >> Where does the pretty language touch the ground? >> >> I was listening to a broadcast of the Women?s March in DC on Saturday >> morning, and Kamala Harris, who was the California State Attorney General >> and is now a junior Senator from CA, was addressing the rally. She said, >> ?People always ask me to talk about women?s issues. I say, ?Oh, I?m SO glad >> you?re interested in economics!! Let?s talk about economics.? And she ran >> through a whole set of parallel back-and-forths, always pulling identity >> questions back to wages, jobs, earning, supporting your family, etc etc. >> >> Much as we need to wipe away any barriers to the Learning Sciences (and >> the professions and institutions dedicated to them) due to identity, until >> the Learning Sciences start taking a look at the place where most people >> spend most of their lives ? not school, I mean ? but work, they will be >> engaging in a soft conversation at the edge of the real issue. It?s a >> pleasant conversation but it doesn?t put a hand on the levers that >> translate skill and knowledge into rent and groceries. >> >> H >> >> >> Helena Worthen >> helenaworthen@gmail.com >> Berkeley, CA 94707 >> Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com >> >> >> >>> On Jan 22, 2017, at 11:38 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >> wrote: >>> Here it is, >>> >>> http://cognitionandinstruction.com/engagements-the-learning- >> sciences-in-a-new-era-of-u-s-nationalism/ >>> Alfredo >>> ________________________________________ >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> on behalf of Helena Worthen >>> Sent: 22 January 2017 20:24 >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >> Nationalism >>> Someone please re-send the link to this article? I think I?m going to >> want to read it and respond to Mike?s question. >>> Thanks ? H >>> >>> >>> Helena Worthen >>> helenaworthen@gmail.com >>> Berkeley, CA 94707 >>> Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com >>> >>> >>> >>>> On Jan 22, 2017, at 12:25 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >> wrote: >>>> Mike, >>>> >>>> thanks a lot for sharing this article. You and Michael, who have and >> know more history, have spoken in terms of reminiscences. I have lived and >> know less, and the article feels like fresh air. During my PhD, I begun to >> increasingly feel that I had to due something to act and respond to the >> increasing ecological and humanitarian globe crises. But how could I do >> anything if I had children and a PhD to finalise?? What could I do that >> would also be doing my job as researcher in a department of education? It >> was very difficult to find anything, partly because almost every academic >> quest would focus on learning, but so little on social development. How >> many scientific articles are dedicated to socio-political questions in the >> most cited educational journals? I felt very powerless. >>>> To be able to address these questions within my expertise, is a >> challenge partly because contrary to Dewey's hope, educational research has >> only marginally focused on these questions, and yet they may be exactly the >> question that matter to education. What are we educating for? Indeed, what >> is education for? I think we face a serious problem when someone (like >> myself), being an educational researchers/scholar, still has to scratch her >> head wondering <> development?>> Vygotsky would be shocked! >>>> Alfredo >>>> >>>> >>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> on behalf of mike cole >>>> Sent: 19 January 2017 04:51 >>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >> Nationalism >>>> Yes Michael, >>>> >>>> It feels like the world of the later 1930's about the time I was born as >>>> that period came down to me through the prism of a family of "premature >>>> anti fascists." >>>> >>>> For a great re-creation of those times see the highly ambivalent film by >>>> Frank Capra, "meet John Doe." It has American big capital interconnected >>>> with fascism combined with populist collectivism in a manner that >> points at >>>> the media (as then experienced) as the bad guys in disguise. Happy >> Ending, >>>> Beethoven Ode to Joy and all. >>>> >>>> It's come round again, nastier this time. >>>> >>>> Mike >>>> On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 6:20 PM Glassman, Michael >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Mike >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> It was so interesting to read this note after reading the Cognition and >>>>> Instruction essay. All the way through it I kept thinking we have been >>>>> here before. It reminded me of the scholars, especially those who had >>>>> escaped from Germany, trying to make sense of what had happened to >> their >>>>> society during World War II. The foremost in my mind was Lewin. >> Except I >>>>> wonder if he would say the process of transformative action starts not >> with >>>>> emergence of quasi-needs, but our willingness and abilities to step >> back >>>>> from our quasi-needs and the ways that they drive us, often to >>>>> dysfunctional behaviors that it ultimately destructive to both our >> society >>>>> and to us as individuals. How hard this is to do, we have to keep >> going >>>>> back again and again. The quasi-needs, tribalism, acceptance, >> standing are >>>>> always there. It is how they shape us that is critical. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Michael >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> >>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto: >>>>> xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole >>>>> >>>>> Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 8:31 PM >>>>> >>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>> >>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> In following the perezhivanie thread I encountered the note I >> re-membered. >>>>> And interestingly mis-remembered. A translation into my focus on >>>>> mediational means. He places the starting point of the process of >>>>> transformative action at the emergence of quasi-needs (from Kurt >> Lewin). >>>>> That seems correct to me. The new mediational means emerge under >>>>> environmental presses. Ever functionalist ego need a goal(!). (The >> problem >>>>> with functionalism) In David's words, >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Perhaps the place we should look for "exaptations" that can save both >> our >>>>> personalities and our environment is not in our evolved needs, but in >> yet >>>>> to be designed quasi-needs. Artificial organs, after all, always >> suggest >>>>> new and ever more artificial functions, like chess and language. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> This point seems worth keeping in mind as we look at where this group >> of >>>>> critical scholars who work within the Learning Sciences disciplinary >>>>> framework would like to lead us. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> mike >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>> >> > From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Mon Jan 23 23:27:25 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2017 07:27:25 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: <1485241379454.56697@iped.uio.no> References: <1485031482970.89461@iped.uio.no> <1485191332785.92884@iped.uio.no>, , <1485241379454.56697@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <1485242844800.97347@iped.uio.no> Another article exploring Trump's age: http://elpais.com/elpais/2017/01/20/inenglish/1484911522_528712.html?rel=cx_articulo#cxrecs_s Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil Sent: 24 January 2017 08:03 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie That would be interesting to explore, Mike. You suggest actually asking how people from different ages and demographics and share it here? That sounds doable! Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of mike cole Sent: 24 January 2017 00:54 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie Martin's caution relates to my suggestion that we not restrict the same to our families or students and friends. People experienced the Trump victory in different ways. The example from LSV involves kids of three ages. That still seems an important focus. Our contemporaries are in there 30's + (and ++). Our students are in latest teens or 20+. High school kids are in the teens. Middle school kids..... It is my strong impression that there are significant age differences in ones experience of the event that could be elicited pretty easily and compared in the group across other interesting categories of difference such as nationality. A small, positive, collective effort? mike On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 9:08 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > Dear Martin, > > thanks for the nuances you introduce. Yes, I agree with you, it is totally > sensible to hear Trump's words with hope and actually experience > (perezhivat) them in such a way as to become moving force towards > transformation. I was only approaching the speech from a developmental > stages perspective, where, to hear the speech with contempt given the > speech's formal structure as a type of generalisation, would mean to hear > them within that stage that Andy very appropriately (in my view) called as > "magic". Vygotsky (I think) also used this term to refer to a stage in > child development. > > But I do not wish to say that contempt is the only possible quality, and > so, as you very nicely remark, hope, enthusiasm, empowerment, all these and > their developmental and historical conditions should be considered as > possibilities of hearing Trump's speech. > > Thanks a lot for the resources/links, I am incorporating them to our joint > document. > Alfredo > > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of Martin John Packer > Sent: 22 January 2017 16:08 > To: xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie > > Hi Alfredo. > > I think your proposal is very interesting; that we could explore two > different ways of hearing and understanding Trump?s words. But if I > understand you correctly, I don?t agree that ?in the first case, there is > no hope for change, there is contempt.? I have lived in Michigan and > Pennsylvania, and in both states industries that were central to the > economic rise of the working class, auto manufacturing and steel foundries, > collapsed as a result of globalization. I have seen first hand some of the > communities that were almost completely destroyed. I believe that people > who experienced these changes do hear Trump?s words with hope for change, > and if they have contempt it is for professional politicians who they feel > speak but do not act. > > But perhaps you mean it was a lack of hope that *led* people to Trump: > > donald-trump-manufacturing-jobs-hope/496541/> > > The New Yorker has published several articles by George Packer (no > relation) on the appeal that Trump has to the white working class. For > example: > > donald-trump-appeals-to-the-white-working-class> > > Martin > > > > > > On Jan 21, 2017, at 3:44 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > wrote: > > Dear Helena, Andy, all, > > > Unfortunately, I have not been able to find the time to watch the movie > Fate of a Man, but I have followed the very interesting analyses and > conversations about it. I am opening this thread as connexions between > those analyses, perezhivanie, and current tragic social and political > situation in the US and elsewhere. This also connects with the article that > Mike shared on the position of the Learning Sciences with regard to this > situation (how happy I was to see this initiative!). > > > In particular, I wanted to pick up on Helena's very true comment that "the > US is going to have to produce some works of scholarship or art, or both, > that attempt to explain what is happening now here in the US -- for > example, this afternoon, under President Trump." > > > Yesterday, we saw at home Trump's speech. Although we had followed Trump's > campaign and its denigrating tenor, it was yesterday, for the first time, > that my wife and me got this gut feeling of true tragedy, of a real *drama* > as we heard those empty, but to recover the prior article for discussion, > hollowed and hollowing words coming out of that mouth. It came upon us that > there may be lots of people for whom those words are not hollowed, but > actually encouraging, rich, beautiful. How can you hear that as beauty? > > > So, I was wondering, and in following up with our 2016 MCA Issue 4 > discussion, whether we could not actually conduct an analysis of the sort > Marc offers in his article of the perezhivanie. Just as Vygotsky explains > how 3 different children experience the situation of an alcoholic mother > differently, could not we perform an analysis ?of that perezhivanie in > which a person experiences yesterday's situation as one of encouragement, > of freedom and hope. Would that not be a way to try to understand what is > going on? This would not be a piece of art, but could be something we could > do to try to understand and change this situation. > > We could then contrast that perezhivanie with the one many of as have, in > which the situation is experience as a real TRAGEDY. I think in the first > case, there is no hope for change, there is contempt; in the second, > hearing those words as hollowed and hollowing require that you live the > situation as a doubled situation in which you experienced it from a very > different developmental stage. One in which the speech sounds as a case of > involution. > > Should we find the transcribed speech and perform such analysis? > > > Going now to support the Woman's march here in Victoria BC. > > Alfredo > > > > From s.davis@cqu.edu.au Tue Jan 24 02:39:58 2017 From: s.davis@cqu.edu.au (Susan Davis) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2017 10:39:58 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: <1485242844800.97347@iped.uio.no> References: <1485031482970.89461@iped.uio.no> <1485191332785.92884@iped.uio.no> <1485241379454.56697@iped.uio.no> <1485242844800.97347@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: Hi folks, I am quite interested in the idea of collecting accounts of experiences from younger people and those with different views from our own. It made me think of a conversation I had with my son over the weekend, and his response to my sense of frustration. While Martin suggests not only talking to family and friends, in terms of ethics and immediacy they may be easier to approach to begin with ? especially if they don?t hold views similar to our own. I therefore include below some of what I recall of our conversation and some reflections upon it. I also note with interest his use of the terms ?ironic? and ?unironically? in terms of his perception of some of the people he knows who are Trump ?followers?. J?s view ? young adult male (Australian), a ?gamer?, in his final year of school ? interacts online with a global networks of other gamers, predominantly male ?Your generation of social justice warriors don?t get it. A lot of young people are sick of all the concern over the so-called ?disadvantaged? people and sick of the political correctness. They think anyone could be disadvantaged depending on how you twist it, there can never be equality for all. While as an individual I find him detestable I know people who follow him unironically as well as ironically.? Q: What do you mean follow him ironically? ?They are people who just follow him because they want to see what happens, they think it?s funny.? Q: So are you saying they are just after the spectacle? ?It?s like following the WWE (wrestling) people love it, they love the characters, but it?s not serious. Some people follow him in that kind of way. He?s a larger than life character. He creates chaos around him and they like to watch that.? Q: And what about the people you say are following him unironically, what do you mean? ?They?re people who like the fact he is unapologetic and totally non-PC, so he?s saying the things a lot of people think but could never get away with saying. His political and economic ideas might be rubbish, but they like the fact he?s saying ?up yours? to the system. Even though in the end he has to work through that system to get anything done.? Some of my reflections ?. This identification of the significance of a form of Engagement (and perhaps lived ?emotional experience) that may appear to be flippant or shallow even, brought to mind Bakhtin?s discussion of carnival ? something I drew upon in my Masters work when attempting to understand some of the interactions involving young people on theInternet. In searching for some means of trying to understand this fascination with the humorous, the grotesque and the profane being circulated on the Internet Bakhtin?s work on ?folk humour and carnival laughter? seems to offer some parallels and insights. Bakhtin?s study explored the work of French writer Francois Rabelais (c.1494-1553) and the role of folk humour during the Middle Ages and the Renaissance. What Bakhtin identified was that while historically the ?authoritarian word? of the official realm (involving the church and recorded politics of the day) is generally that which is studied and explored, that there was a complementary and unofficial realm that existed alongside the official realm and that this culture, rooted in folk humour, laughter and carnival has been largely ignored and rarely studied: ?A boundless world of humour forms and manifestations opposed the official and serious tone of medieval ecclesiastical and feudal culture. In spite of their variety, folk festivities of the carnival type, the comic rites and cults, the clowns and fools, giants, dwarfs, and jugglers, the vast and manifold literature of parody ? all these forms have one style in common: they belong to one culture of folk carnival humour?. (Bakhtin in Morris, 1994: 196) Perhaps it is the case that the Internet and now the political sphere is the current space for the experience of carnival, in Bakhtin?s discussion this was often outside the official realm, but now the distinctions seem to have disintegrated. What is of intriguing now is that through Trump many features of carnival have been drawn into what would historically be considered ?the official realm?. He adopts the persona, the language, the acts more characteristic of carnival, introducing features of abuse, the grotesque and profanities not generally associated with the authoriatative order. He is certainly creating a spectacle that many people find deeply engaging (though not necessarily necessarily hopeful or profound) some find the spectacle deeply offensive but can?t help watching, while other are quite enjoying the disruption and entertainment! (Sorry if the formatting of this is bit strange - I typed it elsewhere first)! I look forward to others thoughts and accounts. Sue. On 24/01/2017 5:27 pm, "xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil" wrote: >Another article exploring Trump's age: >http://elpais.com/elpais/2017/01/20/inenglish/1484911522_528712.html?rel=c >x_articulo#cxrecs_s > >Alfredo >________________________________________ >From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil >Sent: 24 January 2017 08:03 >To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie > >That would be interesting to explore, Mike. You suggest actually asking >how people from different ages and demographics and share it here? That >sounds doable! >Alfredo >________________________________________ >From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >on behalf of mike cole >Sent: 24 January 2017 00:54 >To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie > >Martin's caution relates to my suggestion that we not restrict the same to >our families or students and friends. People experienced the Trump victory >in different ways. The example from LSV involves kids of three ages. That >still seems an important focus. Our contemporaries are in there 30's + >(and >++). Our students are in latest teens or 20+. High school kids are in the >teens. Middle school kids..... > >It is my strong impression that there are significant age differences in >ones experience of the event that could be elicited pretty easily and >compared in the group across other interesting categories of difference >such as nationality. > >A small, positive, collective effort? > >mike > >On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 9:08 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >wrote: > >> Dear Martin, >> >> thanks for the nuances you introduce. Yes, I agree with you, it is >>totally >> sensible to hear Trump's words with hope and actually experience >> (perezhivat) them in such a way as to become moving force towards >> transformation. I was only approaching the speech from a developmental >> stages perspective, where, to hear the speech with contempt given the >> speech's formal structure as a type of generalisation, would mean to >>hear >> them within that stage that Andy very appropriately (in my view) called >>as >> "magic". Vygotsky (I think) also used this term to refer to a stage in >> child development. >> >> But I do not wish to say that contempt is the only possible quality, and >> so, as you very nicely remark, hope, enthusiasm, empowerment, all these >>and >> their developmental and historical conditions should be considered as >> possibilities of hearing Trump's speech. >> >> Thanks a lot for the resources/links, I am incorporating them to our >>joint >> document. >> Alfredo >> >> ________________________________________ >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> on behalf of Martin John Packer >> Sent: 22 January 2017 16:08 >> To: xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie >> >> Hi Alfredo. >> >> I think your proposal is very interesting; that we could explore two >> different ways of hearing and understanding Trump?s words. But if I >> understand you correctly, I don?t agree that ?in the first case, there >>is >> no hope for change, there is contempt.? I have lived in Michigan and >> Pennsylvania, and in both states industries that were central to the >> economic rise of the working class, auto manufacturing and steel >>foundries, >> collapsed as a result of globalization. I have seen first hand some of >>the >> communities that were almost completely destroyed. I believe that people >> who experienced these changes do hear Trump?s words with hope for >>change, >> and if they have contempt it is for professional politicians who they >>feel >> speak but do not act. >> >> But perhaps you mean it was a lack of hope that *led* people to Trump: >> >> > donald-trump-manufacturing-jobs-hope/496541/> >> >> The New Yorker has published several articles by George Packer (no >> relation) on the appeal that Trump has to the white working class. For >> example: >> >> > donald-trump-appeals-to-the-white-working-class> >> >> Martin >> >> >> >> >> >> On Jan 21, 2017, at 3:44 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > > wrote: >> >> Dear Helena, Andy, all, >> >> >> Unfortunately, I have not been able to find the time to watch the movie >> Fate of a Man, but I have followed the very interesting analyses and >> conversations about it. I am opening this thread as connexions between >> those analyses, perezhivanie, and current tragic social and political >> situation in the US and elsewhere. This also connects with the article >>that >> Mike shared on the position of the Learning Sciences with regard to this >> situation (how happy I was to see this initiative!). >> >> >> In particular, I wanted to pick up on Helena's very true comment that >>"the >> US is going to have to produce some works of scholarship or art, or >>both, >> that attempt to explain what is happening now here in the US -- for >> example, this afternoon, under President Trump." >> >> >> Yesterday, we saw at home Trump's speech. Although we had followed >>Trump's >> campaign and its denigrating tenor, it was yesterday, for the first >>time, >> that my wife and me got this gut feeling of true tragedy, of a real >>*drama* >> as we heard those empty, but to recover the prior article for >>discussion, >> hollowed and hollowing words coming out of that mouth. It came upon us >>that >> there may be lots of people for whom those words are not hollowed, but >> actually encouraging, rich, beautiful. How can you hear that as beauty? >> >> >> So, I was wondering, and in following up with our 2016 MCA Issue 4 >> discussion, whether we could not actually conduct an analysis of the >>sort >> Marc offers in his article of the perezhivanie. Just as Vygotsky >>explains >> how 3 different children experience the situation of an alcoholic mother >> differently, could not we perform an analysis ?of that perezhivanie in >> which a person experiences yesterday's situation as one of >>encouragement, >> of freedom and hope. Would that not be a way to try to understand what >>is >> going on? This would not be a piece of art, but could be something we >>could >> do to try to understand and change this situation. >> >> We could then contrast that perezhivanie with the one many of as have, >>in >> which the situation is experience as a real TRAGEDY. I think in the >>first >> case, there is no hope for change, there is contempt; in the second, >> hearing those words as hollowed and hollowing require that you live the >> situation as a doubled situation in which you experienced it from a very >> different developmental stage. One in which the speech sounds as a case >>of >> involution. >> >> Should we find the transcribed speech and perform such analysis? >> >> >> Going now to support the Woman's march here in Victoria BC. >> >> Alfredo >> >> >> >> -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: default[1].xml Type: application/xml Size: 3222 bytes Desc: default[1].xml Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20170124/1d239f2b/attachment.rdf From ablunden@mira.net Tue Jan 24 02:47:08 2017 From: ablunden@mira.net (Andy Blunden) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2017 21:47:08 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: References: <1485031482970.89461@iped.uio.no> <1485191332785.92884@iped.uio.no> <1485241379454.56697@iped.uio.no> <1485242844800.97347@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <62f11f62-1f3e-f91c-fc57-c2f773ea9d1b@mira.net> Katie Simpson found this interesting page which includes an extended essay by a young fellow explaining why he voted for Trump and excerpts from a subsequent conversation with his teacher: http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2017/01/donald-trump-2016-election-oklahoma-working-class Andy ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making On 24/01/2017 9:39 PM, Susan Davis wrote: > Hi folks, > > I am quite interested in the idea of collecting accounts of > experiences from younger people and those with different views from our > own. It > made me think of a conversation I had with my son over the weekend, and his > response to my sense of frustration. While Martin > suggests not only talking to family and friends, in terms of ethics and > immediacy they may be easier to approach to begin with ? especially if they > don?t hold views similar to our own. I > therefore include below some of what I recall of our conversation and some > reflections upon it. I also note with interest his use of the terms > ?ironic? and ?unironically? in terms of his perception of some of the > people he knows who are Trump ?followers?. > > > J?s view ? young adult male (Australian), a ?gamer?, in his final year of > school ? interacts online with a global networks of other gamers, > predominantly male > > > ?Your generation of social justice warriors don?t get it. A > lot of young people are sick of all the concern over the so-called > ?disadvantaged? people and sick of the political correctness. They think > anyone > could be disadvantaged depending on how you twist it, there can never be > equality for all. > > While as an individual I find him detestable I know people > who follow him unironically as well as ironically.? > > > Q: What do you mean follow him ironically? > > > ?They are people who just follow him because they want to > see what happens, they think it?s funny.? > > > Q: So are you saying they are just after the spectacle? > > > ?It?s like following the WWE (wrestling) people love it, > they love the characters, but it?s not serious. Some people follow him in > that > kind of way. He?s a larger than life character. He creates chaos around > him and > they like to watch that.? > > > Q: And what about the people you say are following him > unironically, what do you mean? > > > ?They?re people who like the fact he is unapologetic and > totally non-PC, so he?s saying the things a lot of people think but could > never > get away with saying. His political and > economic ideas might be rubbish, but they like the fact he?s saying ?up > yours? > to the system. Even though in the end he > has to work through that system to get anything done.? > > > Some of my reflections ?. > This identification of the significance of a form of > Engagement (and perhaps lived ?emotional experience) that may appear to be > flippant or shallow even, brought to mind > Bakhtin?s discussion of carnival ? something I drew upon in my Masters > work when > attempting to understand some of the interactions involving young people on > theInternet. > > > In searching for some means of trying to understand this fascination with > the > humorous, the grotesque and the profane being circulated on the Internet > Bakhtin?s work on ?folk humour and carnival > laughter? seems to offer some parallels and insights. Bakhtin?s study > explored the work of French > writer Francois Rabelais (c.1494-1553) and the role of folk humour during > the > Middle Ages and the Renaissance. What > Bakhtin identified was that while historically the ?authoritarian word? of > the > official realm (involving the church and recorded politics of the day) is > generally that which is studied and explored, that there was a > complementary > and unofficial realm that existed alongside the official realm and that > this > culture, rooted in folk humour, laughter and carnival has been largely > ignored > and rarely studied: > > > ?A > boundless world of humour forms and manifestations opposed the official and > serious tone of medieval ecclesiastical and feudal culture. In spite of > their variety, folk festivities > of the carnival type, the comic rites and cults, the clowns and fools, > giants, > dwarfs, and jugglers, the vast and manifold literature of parody ? all > these > forms have one style in common: they > belong to one culture of folk carnival humour?. (Bakhtin in Morris, 1994: > 196) > > > Perhaps it > is the case that the Internet and now the political sphere is the current > space > for the experience of carnival, in Bakhtin?s discussion this was often > outside > the official realm, but now the distinctions seem to have disintegrated. > What > is of intriguing now is that through Trump many features of carnival have > been > drawn into what would historically be considered ?the official realm?. He > adopts the persona, the language, the acts more characteristic of > carnival, introducing features of abuse, > the grotesque and profanities not generally associated with the > authoriatative > order. He is certainly creating a spectacle that many people find deeply > engaging (though not necessarily necessarily hopeful or profound) some > find the spectacle deeply > offensive but can?t help watching, while other are quite enjoying the > disruption > and entertainment! > > > (Sorry if the formatting of this is bit strange - I typed it elsewhere > first)! > > I look forward to others thoughts and accounts. > > Sue. > > > On 24/01/2017 5:27 pm, "xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of > Alfredo Jornet Gil" a.j.gil@iped.uio.no> wrote: > >> Another article exploring Trump's age: >> http://elpais.com/elpais/2017/01/20/inenglish/1484911522_528712.html?rel=c >> x_articulo#cxrecs_s >> >> Alfredo >> ________________________________________ >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil >> Sent: 24 January 2017 08:03 >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie >> >> That would be interesting to explore, Mike. You suggest actually asking >> how people from different ages and demographics and share it here? That >> sounds doable! >> Alfredo >> ________________________________________ >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> on behalf of mike cole >> Sent: 24 January 2017 00:54 >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie >> >> Martin's caution relates to my suggestion that we not restrict the same to >> our families or students and friends. People experienced the Trump victory >> in different ways. The example from LSV involves kids of three ages. That >> still seems an important focus. Our contemporaries are in there 30's + >> (and >> ++). Our students are in latest teens or 20+. High school kids are in the >> teens. Middle school kids..... >> >> It is my strong impression that there are significant age differences in >> ones experience of the event that could be elicited pretty easily and >> compared in the group across other interesting categories of difference >> such as nationality. >> >> A small, positive, collective effort? >> >> mike >> >> On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 9:08 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >> wrote: >> >>> Dear Martin, >>> >>> thanks for the nuances you introduce. Yes, I agree with you, it is >>> totally >>> sensible to hear Trump's words with hope and actually experience >>> (perezhivat) them in such a way as to become moving force towards >>> transformation. I was only approaching the speech from a developmental >>> stages perspective, where, to hear the speech with contempt given the >>> speech's formal structure as a type of generalisation, would mean to >>> hear >>> them within that stage that Andy very appropriately (in my view) called >>> as >>> "magic". Vygotsky (I think) also used this term to refer to a stage in >>> child development. >>> >>> But I do not wish to say that contempt is the only possible quality, and >>> so, as you very nicely remark, hope, enthusiasm, empowerment, all these >>> and >>> their developmental and historical conditions should be considered as >>> possibilities of hearing Trump's speech. >>> >>> Thanks a lot for the resources/links, I am incorporating them to our >>> joint >>> document. >>> Alfredo >>> >>> ________________________________________ >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>> on behalf of Martin John Packer >>> Sent: 22 January 2017 16:08 >>> To: xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie >>> >>> Hi Alfredo. >>> >>> I think your proposal is very interesting; that we could explore two >>> different ways of hearing and understanding Trump?s words. But if I >>> understand you correctly, I don?t agree that ?in the first case, there >>> is >>> no hope for change, there is contempt.? I have lived in Michigan and >>> Pennsylvania, and in both states industries that were central to the >>> economic rise of the working class, auto manufacturing and steel >>> foundries, >>> collapsed as a result of globalization. I have seen first hand some of >>> the >>> communities that were almost completely destroyed. I believe that people >>> who experienced these changes do hear Trump?s words with hope for >>> change, >>> and if they have contempt it is for professional politicians who they >>> feel >>> speak but do not act. >>> >>> But perhaps you mean it was a lack of hope that *led* people to Trump: >>> >>> >> donald-trump-manufacturing-jobs-hope/496541/> >>> >>> The New Yorker has published several articles by George Packer (no >>> relation) on the appeal that Trump has to the white working class. For >>> example: >>> >>> >> donald-trump-appeals-to-the-white-working-class> >>> >>> Martin >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Jan 21, 2017, at 3:44 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >> > wrote: >>> >>> Dear Helena, Andy, all, >>> >>> >>> Unfortunately, I have not been able to find the time to watch the movie >>> Fate of a Man, but I have followed the very interesting analyses and >>> conversations about it. I am opening this thread as connexions between >>> those analyses, perezhivanie, and current tragic social and political >>> situation in the US and elsewhere. This also connects with the article >>> that >>> Mike shared on the position of the Learning Sciences with regard to this >>> situation (how happy I was to see this initiative!). >>> >>> >>> In particular, I wanted to pick up on Helena's very true comment that >>> "the >>> US is going to have to produce some works of scholarship or art, or >>> both, >>> that attempt to explain what is happening now here in the US -- for >>> example, this afternoon, under President Trump." >>> >>> >>> Yesterday, we saw at home Trump's speech. Although we had followed >>> Trump's >>> campaign and its denigrating tenor, it was yesterday, for the first >>> time, >>> that my wife and me got this gut feeling of true tragedy, of a real >>> *drama* >>> as we heard those empty, but to recover the prior article for >>> discussion, >>> hollowed and hollowing words coming out of that mouth. It came upon us >>> that >>> there may be lots of people for whom those words are not hollowed, but >>> actually encouraging, rich, beautiful. How can you hear that as beauty? >>> >>> >>> So, I was wondering, and in following up with our 2016 MCA Issue 4 >>> discussion, whether we could not actually conduct an analysis of the >>> sort >>> Marc offers in his article of the perezhivanie. Just as Vygotsky >>> explains >>> how 3 different children experience the situation of an alcoholic mother >>> differently, could not we perform an analysis ?of that perezhivanie in >>> which a person experiences yesterday's situation as one of >>> encouragement, >>> of freedom and hope. Would that not be a way to try to understand what >>> is >>> going on? This would not be a piece of art, but could be something we >>> could >>> do to try to understand and change this situation. >>> >>> We could then contrast that perezhivanie with the one many of as have, >>> in >>> which the situation is experience as a real TRAGEDY. I think in the >>> first >>> case, there is no hope for change, there is contempt; in the second, >>> hearing those words as hollowed and hollowing require that you live the >>> situation as a doubled situation in which you experienced it from a very >>> different developmental stage. One in which the speech sounds as a case >>> of >>> involution. >>> >>> Should we find the transcribed speech and perform such analysis? >>> >>> >>> Going now to support the Woman's march here in Victoria BC. >>> >>> Alfredo >>> >>> >>> >>> From schuckcschuck@gmail.com Tue Jan 24 07:22:54 2017 From: schuckcschuck@gmail.com (Christopher Schuck) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2017 10:22:54 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's "talking" versus "speaking" In-Reply-To: <1485241782176.85472@iped.uio.no> References: <628ebbd3-8b51-8e15-47d0-9164e8352c36@mira.net> <58866d1f.90966b0a.1b7d5.c1c8@mx.google.com> <289C4B7F-0A9A-4A10-BB1F-0619858FFBAA@umn.edu> <1485241782176.85472@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: Another irony that hasn't been mentioned is that this distictive speaking/ talking style flagged by McWhorter made him unusually effective as a campaigner where the goal was to create chaos and premature action, yet would undermine his ability to be an effective (or safe) president and doesn't "fit." This is relevant insofar as it emphasizes the new experience of hearing him speak this way *as president* as opposed to president-wannabe. In the inauguration speech, this person who is known for talking not speaking attempts to speak formally, which creates yet another split between taking that pseudo-formal language literally and taking it ironically. So it is not just the difference between reading him literally and reading him ironically, but that what is formal and what is literal (as well as what is informal and what is indirect, and whether he is a "formal" leader or informal television personality) become tangled up with each other as he transitions from celebrity to this official role.That is one reason why I wonder whether looking at the formal text of this official speech (however fascinating) is such a useful way to explore the perezhivanie of the Trump experience, because it's so uniquely not about the written text. I suspect even many of Trump's supporters were not particularly interested in the speech. On Tuesday, January 24, 2017, Alfredo Jornet Gil > wrote: > Richard, > what this linguist says and you comment on Trump's talk is pretty close to > what I was just writing to Francine in the main "trump's speech" thread > about hearing him literally and hearing him as irony. If you stick to > hearing in the same he seems to treat his recipients, then you may have to > believe that each word conveys an idea and that one word suffices to give > the idea, like "it's true". It seems to be enough. As per your question, > yes, it's a very scary question. It also is very scary that he may say, > "it's true" and so be it. > Alfredo > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of Richard Beach > Sent: 23 January 2017 23:09 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Trump's "talking" versus "speaking" > > In a New York Times op-ed 01/21/opinion/sunday/how-to-listen-to-donald-trump-every-day > -for-years.html>, the linguist, John McWhorter, distinguishes between > Trump?s informal, spontaneous ?talking? versus ?speaking? that involves > employing a more formal register associated with written language. He cites > the example of Trump?s talking: ?Look, having nuclear ? my uncle was a > great professor and scientist and engineer, Dr. John Trump at M.I.T.; good > genes, very good genes, O.K., very smart, the Wharton School of Finance, > very good, very smart ? you know, if you?re a conservative Republican, if I > were a liberal, if, like, O.K. ?? > > > What?s problematic here is that Trump?s off-the-cuff ?talking,? as well as > his use of tweets, can convey messages with problematic uptakes from > others, resulting in taking action without careful thought or consultation > with others. As McWhorter notes: ?All understand that his speech is > structurally ungraceful. It may be harder to grasp that Mr. Trump, as > someone just talking rather than artfully communicating ideas, has no sense > of the tacit understanding that a politician?s utterances are more signals > than statements, vehicles meant to convey larger messages.? > > When one of his hotels is another country is attacked by ?terrorists,? > will Trump, as someone who perceives himself as the prime actor, > spontaneously declare war with little or no consideration of the > consequences of his actions? > > > > Richard Beach, Professor Emeritus of English Education, University of > Minnesota > rbeach@umn.edu > Websites: Digital writing , Media > literacy , Teaching literature > , Identity-focused ELA Teaching < > http://identities.pbworks.com/>, Common Core State Standards < > http://englishccss.pbworks.com/>, Apps for literacy learning < > http://usingipads.pbworks.com/>, Teaching about climate change < > http://climatechangeela.pbworks.com/> > > > > On Jan 23, 2017, at 12:52 PM, lpscholar2@gmail.com wrote: > > > > Andrew, Andy, > > I also want to pursue the example of James Lawson. > > What struck me was his relationship to both parents as formative. > > Moving to Trump?s inauguration, what struck me was the bodily gesture he > was expressing walking down the hallway just prior to speaking. > > This body language that i was reading before he spoke a word. > > I hope some of you watched the Frontline documentary on PBS EXPLORING > both Trump?s and Clinton?s early family life. > > > > Trump?s father was only interested in ?winners? and to come second was > to be a ?loser?. The father sent Trump as a young man to a military academy > that would teach his son how to be a ?winner? a lesson that Trump inhabits > and is incarnating in his every gesture. > > > > His emotional, cognitive, and performative symmetry captured in his > facial expression as he walked forward to give his inaugural address. > > > > In other words, James Lawson, Donald Trump, and Martin Packer?s book > review i see as overlapping themes. > > When we explore ?expression? and ?intentionality? and ?language? i want > to include the family upbringing as formative. > > > > Now as an aside, Simmel would say both James and Donald are inhabiting > (fictions) that INform their experiences, but that may be a leap too far. > Simmel was following the philosopher Vasinger (spelling?) who focused on > how we live our lives (as is) or (as though) but to take this turn would be > for another thread. > > > > > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > From: Andrew Babson > > Sent: January 23, 2017 9:08 AM > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: James Lawson and perezhivanie > > > > Andy, thank you for the timely post, especially as we move forward in the > > shadow of authoritarianism here in the USA. Lawson's example of choosing > > non-violent protest, following Gandhi, is helpful. Consider the > > effectiveness of millions of people last weekend peacefully taking to the > > streets with few if any arrests (side note: we all went as a family here > in > > Philly, it was great). Contrast the Black Bloc member's sucker punch of > > neo-nazi Richard Spencer: people are cheering it, but those same people > > probably realize it's not a scalable strategy. Different tours de force, > > different effects, the gender connotations of which are interesting. > > > > *P **erezhivanie > > *is a new term to me, > which I > > link here to the XMCA blog for those other also unfamiliar with it. It > > seems like a pretty clear gloss of a term I do know well, *Erlebnis, > > *"experience" > > (I dislike the gloss of that Dilthey-an term as "lived" experience...but > > that's for another discussion). > > > > It's fascinating to learn about Lawson's vocational decision-making > > process, and to consider the possible effects of violent and non-violent > > dissent. But perhaps you could clarify for us Andy why you thought > Lawson's > > story was an example of *perezhivanie*? Where's the point of analytical > > traction? If it means more than "experience", how can we apply that > broader > > meaning here? It seems like he had a Pauline metanoia/conversion > > experience. Is that what you mean? > > > > Andrew > > > > ------------------------------------------------ > > Andrew Babson, Ph.D. > > Lecturer > > Graduate School of Education > > University of Pennsylvania > > > > On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 4:40 AM, Andy Blunden wrote: > > > > James Lawson is the Methodist preacher who trained the young members of > the > > SNCC in non-violent action and wrote their constitution. I paste below > and > > attach an excerpt from my book "The Origins of Collective Decision > Making" > > which narrates Lawson's life up until April 1960. Perezhivanie was not > the > > topic under discussion so it is not mentioned in the text, but xmca-ers > > should be able to see it, an example of perezhivanie: > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > > > > > > > James Lawson was born in 1928, in Uniontown, Pennsylvania. His father, > > James Snr., was the grandson of an escaped slave, and a Minister for the > > African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church in New England. > > > > > > > > > > > > Via the Free African Society(FAS) the Methodists had recruited freed > slaves > > in Philadelphiain 1787, but as a result of a racist incident, some left > to > > found the African Methodist Episcopal Church(AMEC). Nonetheless, many > > African Americans stayed with the United Methodist Church. The AMEC split > > started in Philadelphia and the AMEC Zion Church was a split that came > out > > of New York. It was to AMEC Zion, James Lawson was born. > > > > > > > > > > > > However, Lawson returned to The United Methodist Church, created by a > 1939 > > merger of several branches of the Methodist Church, which set up five > > regional ?jurisdictions? of Methodists in the US, organized to maintain > > regionally identity and a sixth, called the ?Central Jurisdiction? which > > combined the Black annual conferences, thus building segregation into the > > constitution of the Church.The Methodists went through a long and painful > > process, carried out in accordance with the Methodist Code of Discipline, > > which mandates the principle of Majority, to re-integrate the white and > > Black, but it was not till after 1964 that Black conferences started to > > merge into white conferences. At the local level, congregations continued > > much as before. So it was within the Black section of the segregated > United > > Methodist Church, that James Lawson became a Methodist. > > > > > > > > > > > > James Snr. was a militant preacher; he packed a 38 pistol and set up > > branches of the NAACP wherever he was assigned to preach. After serving > at > > St. James AMEZ Church in Massillon, Ohio, he transferred to the Lexington > > Annual Conference of the Central Jurisdiction of the United Methodist > > Church. James Snr. was no pacifist and according to Lawson he ?refused to > > take any guff from anyone, particularly on the point of race? and > ?insisted > > that he was going to be treated as a man.? > > > > > > > > > > > > Lawson?s mother, Philane May Cover, on the other hand, was decidedly > > nonviolent. Lawson?s challenge, which was to form his character, was to > > reconcile his father?s militancy with his mother?s nonviolence. Lawson > grew > > up in Massillon. One day, at the age of 10, Lawson was asked by his > mother > > to run an errand: > > > > > > > > > > > > A little white child in an automobile yelled ?nigger? out the opened > > window. I walked over ... and, since I was in a hurry running my mother?s > > errand, I smacked the child and went on my way. When the Lawson kids got > > called ?nigger? on the streets or at school, we usually fought. I don?t > > know where we got that from, except that we figured that it was something > > to fight over. (Lawson, cited in King, 1999) > > > > > > > > > > > > On the return trip home, aware of possible repercussions, Lawson tried to > > find the parents of the offending child, to talk to them, but the car was > > gone. Once home, he told his mother of the incident. Lawson?s mother > > replied, ?Jimmy, what good did that do?? > > > > > > > > > > > > She talked about who I was, the fact of God?s love, that we were a family > > of love and that such an incident could not hurt me, because of who I > was. > > I don?t remember anyone else being around, but a stillness took over my > > being at that moment. It was, as I realized much later on, a mystical > > experience. In a very real way, my life stood still. I realized in that > > stillness that I had changed forever. One of the phrases my mother used > in > > her conversation with me was that ?there must be a better way?. I > > determined, from then on, that I would find the better way. (Lawson, > cited > > in King, 1999, pp. 187-188) > > > > > > > > > > > > He first became acquainted with Gandhi?s experiments in nonviolence as a > > child, thanks to the African-American press which the family discussed > > around the dinner table, and had read Gandhi?s autobiography as a > teenager. > > At Baldwin Wallace College, a liberal arts Methodistcollege in Berea, > Ohio, > > he studied Thoreau, Gandhi and Tolstoy, and the pacifist theologians > > Dietrich Bonhoeffer and Reinhold Niebuhr. At age 19, he became a draft > > resister, refusing service in the Korean War. Executive director of > > Fellowship Of Reconciliation (FOR), A. J. Muste,frequently visited to > > lecture at the College: > > > > > > > > > > > > All of us in history classes were required to hear Muste. I was thrilled. > > He made me realize that I was not alone in my experimentation, that there > > was a world movement, and a national movement. ... He acquainted me with > > the Fellowship Of Reconciliation, which I joined on the spot in 1947. > That > > meant that I got exposed to their book list. > > > > > > > > > > > > After hearing a lecture by A. J. Muste, he joined FOR and CORE. Muste was > > instrumental thereafter in strengthening Lawson?s nonviolent orientation, > > directing him towards Gandhi and later facilitating his entry into the > > sit-in and boycott movement beginning in the South. In the late 1940s and > > early 1950s Lawson had organized sit-ins and protests directed at > > establishments that discriminated against blacks in Massillon, long > before > > the Montgomery bus-boycott. > > > > > > > > > > > > He was also active with the National Conference of Methodist Youth. > > Although a member of a segregated Methodist Church, he found plenty of > > support for his stands against racial discrimination and war from his > white > > colleagues and church fellows. While he was in prison serving thirteen > > months of a two and a half year term for draft resistance in 1952, he was > > re-elected as Vice-President of the NCMY. > > > > > > > > > > > > Wesleyan Methodism was central to Lawson?s outlook. Just as John Wesley > had > > sought to cleanse individuals of iniquity, so could society be purged of > > the social sins of slavery, segregation, poverty, and war.Generations of > > African American Methodists from Harriet Tubman (AMEZ) and Henry M. > Turner > > (AME) in the nineteenth century, to Rosa Parks (AME) and James Farmer > > (MEC), were led to social justice activism by this Methodist heritage. > > > > > > > > > > > > Lawson used his prison time to read and think. Writing from prison in > 1952 > > aged 23 years old and yet to enter the seminary, Lawson said he aspired > to > > emulate ?the life of Jesus, St. Francis, George Fox, Gandhi, Buddha... > and > > other great religious persons.? These figures attached little importance > to > > ?theology but (to their) experience with God.?Further, he noted > ?religious > > failures today are in (the arena of) experience and practice, not > > theology.? When Lawson entered prison, he was a Christian pacifist.He > told > > Mary King however, that his ?first commitment was to work on race,? and > > conscientious objection came second.By the time of his release, he had > > advanced to Gandhian nonviolence. He wondered ?why can?t a mass > non-violent > > revolution be staged throughout the South where the segregation pattern > is > > much like the ?untouchables? of India? Such a movement would have to > start > > with one person who had the Christian vision to make such a revolution a > > reality in his own life.? Gandhian nonviolence became the synthesizing > > factor for Lawson?s religious thinking: the militancy of his father?s > > Methodism and the Christian pacifism that he drew from his mother. > > > > > > > > > > > > Muste arranged for Lawson to visit India after his release from prison > with > > a letter of introduction to activists in the Gandhian movement, and he > > remained in India from May 1953 to 1956, working at Hislop College in > > Nagpur, reading Indian literature and working with Gandhi?s movement. > > Lawson?s practice would remain deeply religious; his nonviolence was > > saturated with the message of Christian love, and blended with principles > > synthesized from a broad range of religious and secular sources, both > > Eastern and Western. His aim was the ?mass education and training of > people > > in the use of nonviolent direct action techniques.? Lawson insisted that > > ?you are fighting a system, not an individual, not a race, or not the > > people of another country, but a system.? > > > > > > > > > > > > He continued his study of pacifism and Gandhian nonviolence at Oberlin > > College, Ohio. While still in India, he had read about Martin Luther King > > and his successful leadership of the Montgomery bus boycott.King?s > lecture > > at Oberlin on February 6, 1957, fortified his long-held intention to work > > in the South for transformative social change. After King?s lecture to a > > packed audience, he and Lawson talked together at dinner.Though Lawson > was > > contemplating study for a Ph.D., King told him ?don?t wait, but come > south > > now!? adding that there was no one else like Lawson.Muste arranged for > FOR > > to hire Lawson as southern field secretary to be stationed at Nashville > in > > January 1958. Upon his arrival, he found that Glenn Smiley, national > field > > director of FOR, had arranged for Lawson to run a full schedule of > > workshops ? including one to take place early that year at the first > annual > > meeting of the SCLC in Columbia, South Carolina. > > > > > > > > > > > > At the SCLC meeting, King made an exuberant introduction of Lawson as > FOR?s > > new regional representative and discussed the organization?s role in > > Montgomery, telling delegates to be sure to attend Lawson?s workshop on > > nonviolence. King took his seat in the first pew, waiting for the > > three-hour session to start: > > > > > > > > > > > > Martin did that at every SCLC meeting as long as he lived. He would ask > me > > to conduct an afternoon workshop, usually two or three hours, and he > would > > arrange for it to be ?at-large? so that everyone could attend, with > nothing > > else to compete. He put it on the schedule himself. A few minutes early, > he > > would show up and sit alone, as an example, in the front row. > > > > > > > > > > > > Back in Nashville, Lawson continued with Monday evening workshops during > > the autumn of 1959 in which he trained the students who were to be the > core > > of the Nashville sit-in movement. As a result of his involvement with the > > sit-ins Lawson was expelled from Vanderbilt, but he enrolled with Boston > > University to finish his degree in theology,while continuing to work with > > the students. Several professors in the School of Theology resigned over > > his expulsion. > > > > > > > > > > > > The techniques that the students deployed were drawn from Lawson?s > > workshops. In 1958 and 1959, Lawson mobilized all that he knew about > > Christian pacifism, Gandhian nonviolence, and Methodist social ministry > and > > blended them into an unprecedented curriculum that influenced the civil > > rights movement in Nashville and beyond. > > > > > > > > > > > > Blending Christianity and interreligious sources, he did not present its > > philosophy and practice as a secular doctrine, but as the essence of > > religion itself. Core to nonviolence was mirroring God?s love for > humankind > > and exhibiting it through concrete relationships of human solidarity and > > community. ?Nonviolence,? Lawson taught, is the aggressive, forgiving, > > patient, long-suffering Christ-like and Christ-commanded love or > good-will > > for all humankind even in the face of tension, fear, hatred, or demonic > > evil.? Moreover, ?it is the readiness to absorb suffering with > forgiveness > > and courage rather than to inflict suffering on others.? > > > > > > > > > > > > Lawson divided his instruction into four modules: how nonviolence reacts, > > training for nonviolence, the virtues of nonviolence, and the methods of > > nonviolence. Practitioners prepared themselves by jettisoning anger, > > hostility and fear thus ?minimizing the effect of an attack,? valuing > love, > > courage, fearlessness, and forgiveness, and pursuing redemptive suffering > > which ?releases unknown elements for good.? Preparation included > meditation > > and prayer, study of the scriptures, practicing nonviolence through > > challenges to segregation in bus transportation and in other public > > facilities.The practice steps included fact-finding, negotiation, > education > > of the community, and various methods of nonviolent direct action > including > > sit-ins, boycotts, strikes, and civil disobedience. Lawson provided an > > extensive bibliography including relevant verses from the Bible, the > > Bhagavad Gita, and from the Chinese philosopher, Mo Ti and the Hebrew > > prophet, Isaiah. > > > > > > > > > > > > The Nashville sit-ins and those led by students in other southern cities > > convinced Ella Baker of the SCLC to call a conference in April, 1960, at > > Shaw University in Raleigh, North Carolina. Out of this meeting emerged > the > > Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee.Lawson delivered an opening > > keynote address that helped to frame SNCC?s nonviolent trajectory.Later, > > Lawson summarized discussions and consensus that emerged out of the > > conference, and his synopsis received the approval of everyone there. > > Lawson?s overall comments said that ?nonviolence as it grows from > > Judaic-Christian tradition seeks a social order of justice permeated by > > love.? > > > > > > > > > > > > It was Lawson who delivered the keynote address and framed SNCC?s > > nonviolent orientation. > > > > > > > > > > > > The whole group, perhaps 120 participants, all in the room, asked me to > > draft a statement. Eventually, three different drafts emerged. The > > Nashville group was cohesive. The extant draft was the third, influenced > by > > the Nashville group, after two earlier conversations. (Interview with > King, > > June 2014) > > > > > > > > > > > > Lawson?s synopsis was approved by the Conference. > > > > > > > > > > > > In a private email message Mary King told me: > > > > > > > > > > > > He [James Lawson] was reading from the FOR booklist from a young age, > but I > > don?t think that he was influenced on notions of Consensus by Quakers, > > because the connection was too abstract. Let me underscore that he says > it > > was for him Methodist origins. (Private email, 15 April 2014) > > > > > > > > > > > > In his interview with Mary King, Lawson confirmed that the origin of > > Consensus in SNCC was the Nashville Central Committee, confirming what > Mary > > King had told me in April. As to the roots Consensus in Lawson?s own > > experience, he emphasized that: > > > > > > > > > > > > It was the Methodist youth and student movements with which I had grown > up, > > and this is how they made decisions. They knew the rules of parliamentary > > procedures, but they wanted to find a common mind. (Interview with King, > > June 2014) > > > > > > > > > > > > The Methodist Church to this very day still mandates Majority decisions, > > but this would never have entailed children voting ? in general > youngsters > > in these organizations were simply told what to do. The Black > congregations > > had operated separately for more than a century, so there was some room > for > > Lawson to develop a consensual model of collaboration in working with > young > > people. It is also possible the Black congregations, like other Black > > Churches in America, drew on other traditions of decision making. > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > Andy Blunden > > > > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > > > > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > > > From lpscholar2@gmail.com Tue Jan 24 07:42:20 2017 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2017 07:42:20 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: References: <1485031482970.89461@iped.uio.no> <1485191332785.92884@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <58877609.4952620a.d7680.9475@mx.google.com> Mike, I once participated in a workshop where we were asked ?why did you become a teacher working in public schools? We were asked to gather in 10 year cohorts by decade we became teachers. Themes emerged that showed symmetry within each decade, but asymmetrical differences between cohorts. On example. I saw teaching as an opportunity for mobility. I could work, then quit, travel, and then teach again when i felt the need. Later cohorts could not imagine teaching being this open. They talked about security and stability. Same institution, different times. Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: mike cole Sent: January 23, 2017 3:57 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie Martin's caution relates to my suggestion that we not restrict the same to our families or students and friends. People experienced the Trump victory in different ways. The example from LSV involves kids of three ages. That still seems an important focus. Our contemporaries are in there 30's + (and ++). Our students are in latest teens or 20+. High school kids are in the teens. Middle school kids..... It is my strong impression that there are significant age differences in ones experience of the event that could be elicited pretty easily and compared in the group across other interesting categories of difference such as nationality. A small, positive, collective effort? mike On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 9:08 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > Dear Martin, > > thanks for the nuances you introduce. Yes, I agree with you, it is totally > sensible to hear Trump's words with hope and actually experience > (perezhivat) them in such a way as to become moving force towards > transformation. I was only approaching the speech from a developmental > stages perspective, where, to hear the speech with contempt given the > speech's formal structure as a type of generalisation, would mean to hear > them within that stage that Andy very appropriately (in my view) called as > "magic". Vygotsky (I think) also used this term to refer to a stage in > child development. > > But I do not wish to say that contempt is the only possible quality, and > so, as you very nicely remark, hope, enthusiasm, empowerment, all these and > their developmental and historical conditions should be considered as > possibilities of hearing Trump's speech. > > Thanks a lot for the resources/links, I am incorporating them to our joint > document. > Alfredo > > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of Martin John Packer > Sent: 22 January 2017 16:08 > To: xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie > > Hi Alfredo. > > I think your proposal is very interesting; that we could explore two > different ways of hearing and understanding Trump?s words. But if I > understand you correctly, I don?t agree that ?in the first case, there is > no hope for change, there is contempt.? I have lived in Michigan and > Pennsylvania, and in both states industries that were central to the > economic rise of the working class, auto manufacturing and steel foundries, > collapsed as a result of globalization. I have seen first hand some of the > communities that were almost completely destroyed. I believe that people > who experienced these changes do hear Trump?s words with hope for change, > and if they have contempt it is for professional politicians who they feel > speak but do not act. > > But perhaps you mean it was a lack of hope that *led* people to Trump: > > donald-trump-manufacturing-jobs-hope/496541/> > > The New Yorker has published several articles by George Packer (no > relation) on the appeal that Trump has to the white working class. For > example: > > donald-trump-appeals-to-the-white-working-class> > > Martin > > > > > > On Jan 21, 2017, at 3:44 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > wrote: > > Dear Helena, Andy, all, > > > Unfortunately, I have not been able to find the time to watch the movie > Fate of a Man, but I have followed the very interesting analyses and > conversations about it. I am opening this thread as connexions between > those analyses, perezhivanie, and current tragic social and political > situation in the US and elsewhere. This also connects with the article that > Mike shared on the position of the Learning Sciences with regard to this > situation (how happy I was to see this initiative!). > > > In particular, I wanted to pick up on Helena's very true comment that "the > US is going to have to produce some works of scholarship or art, or both, > that attempt to explain what is happening now here in the US -- for > example, this afternoon, under President Trump." > > > Yesterday, we saw at home Trump's speech. Although we had followed Trump's > campaign and its denigrating tenor, it was yesterday, for the first time, > that my wife and me got this gut feeling of true tragedy, of a real *drama* > as we heard those empty, but to recover the prior article for discussion, > hollowed and hollowing words coming out of that mouth. It came upon us that > there may be lots of people for whom those words are not hollowed, but > actually encouraging, rich, beautiful. How can you hear that as beauty? > > > So, I was wondering, and in following up with our 2016 MCA Issue 4 > discussion, whether we could not actually conduct an analysis of the sort > Marc offers in his article of the perezhivanie. Just as Vygotsky explains > how 3 different children experience the situation of an alcoholic mother > differently, could not we perform an analysis ?of that perezhivanie in > which a person experiences yesterday's situation as one of encouragement, > of freedom and hope. Would that not be a way to try to understand what is > going on? This would not be a piece of art, but could be something we could > do to try to understand and change this situation. > > We could then contrast that perezhivanie with the one many of as have, in > which the situation is experience as a real TRAGEDY. I think in the first > case, there is no hope for change, there is contempt; in the second, > hearing those words as hollowed and hollowing require that you live the > situation as a doubled situation in which you experienced it from a very > different developmental stage. One in which the speech sounds as a case of > involution. > > Should we find the transcribed speech and perform such analysis? > > > Going now to support the Woman's march here in Victoria BC. > > Alfredo > > > > From lpscholar2@gmail.com Tue Jan 24 07:52:58 2017 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2017 07:52:58 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: References: <1485031482970.89461@iped.uio.no> <1485191332785.92884@iped.uio.no> <1485241379454.56697@iped.uio.no> <1485242844800.97347@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <58877886.5156620a.28d1f.97e5@mx.google.com> Susan, Thanks for this reflection on the blending of authoritarian and carnival. 1st step?: Listen in silence to this cohort BEFORE responding. Thought provoking Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Susan Davis Sent: January 24, 2017 2:41 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie Hi folks, I am quite interested in the idea of collecting accounts of experiences from younger people and those with different views from our own. It made me think of a conversation I had with my son over the weekend, and his response to my sense of frustration. While Martin suggests not only talking to family and friends, in terms of ethics and immediacy they may be easier to approach to begin with ? especially if they don?t hold views similar to our own. I therefore include below some of what I recall of our conversation and some reflections upon it. I also note with interest his use of the terms ?ironic? and ?unironically? in terms of his perception of some of the people he knows who are Trump ?followers?. J?s view ? young adult male (Australian), a ?gamer?, in his final year of school ? interacts online with a global networks of other gamers, predominantly male ?Your generation of social justice warriors don?t get it. A lot of young people are sick of all the concern over the so-called ?disadvantaged? people and sick of the political correctness. They think anyone could be disadvantaged depending on how you twist it, there can never be equality for all. While as an individual I find him detestable I know people who follow him unironically as well as ironically.? Q: What do you mean follow him ironically? ?They are people who just follow him because they want to see what happens, they think it?s funny.? Q: So are you saying they are just after the spectacle? ?It?s like following the WWE (wrestling) people love it, they love the characters, but it?s not serious. Some people follow him in that kind of way. He?s a larger than life character. He creates chaos around him and they like to watch that.? Q: And what about the people you say are following him unironically, what do you mean? ?They?re people who like the fact he is unapologetic and totally non-PC, so he?s saying the things a lot of people think but could never get away with saying. His political and economic ideas might be rubbish, but they like the fact he?s saying ?up yours? to the system. Even though in the end he has to work through that system to get anything done.? Some of my reflections ?. This identification of the significance of a form of Engagement (and perhaps lived ?emotional experience) that may appear to be flippant or shallow even, brought to mind Bakhtin?s discussion of carnival ? something I drew upon in my Masters work when attempting to understand some of the interactions involving young people on theInternet. In searching for some means of trying to understand this fascination with the humorous, the grotesque and the profane being circulated on the Internet Bakhtin?s work on ?folk humour and carnival laughter? seems to offer some parallels and insights. Bakhtin?s study explored the work of French writer Francois Rabelais (c.1494-1553) and the role of folk humour during the Middle Ages and the Renaissance. What Bakhtin identified was that while historically the ?authoritarian word? of the official realm (involving the church and recorded politics of the day) is generally that which is studied and explored, that there was a complementary and unofficial realm that existed alongside the official realm and that this culture, rooted in folk humour, laughter and carnival has been largely ignored and rarely studied: ?A boundless world of humour forms and manifestations opposed the official and serious tone of medieval ecclesiastical and feudal culture. In spite of their variety, folk festivities of the carnival type, the comic rites and cults, the clowns and fools, giants, dwarfs, and jugglers, the vast and manifold literature of parody ? all these forms have one style in common: they belong to one culture of folk carnival humour?. (Bakhtin in Morris, 1994: 196) Perhaps it is the case that the Internet and now the political sphere is the current space for the experience of carnival, in Bakhtin?s discussion this was often outside the official realm, but now the distinctions seem to have disintegrated. What is of intriguing now is that through Trump many features of carnival have been drawn into what would historically be considered ?the official realm?. He adopts the persona, the language, the acts more characteristic of carnival, introducing features of abuse, the grotesque and profanities not generally associated with the authoriatative order. He is certainly creating a spectacle that many people find deeply engaging (though not necessarily necessarily hopeful or profound) some find the spectacle deeply offensive but can?t help watching, while other are quite enjoying the disruption and entertainment! (Sorry if the formatting of this is bit strange - I typed it elsewhere first)! I look forward to others thoughts and accounts. Sue. On 24/01/2017 5:27 pm, "xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil" wrote: >Another article exploring Trump's age: >http://elpais.com/elpais/2017/01/20/inenglish/1484911522_528712.html?rel=c >x_articulo#cxrecs_s > >Alfredo >________________________________________ >From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil >Sent: 24 January 2017 08:03 >To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie > >That would be interesting to explore, Mike. You suggest actually asking >how people from different ages and demographics and share it here? That >sounds doable! >Alfredo >________________________________________ >From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >on behalf of mike cole >Sent: 24 January 2017 00:54 >To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie > >Martin's caution relates to my suggestion that we not restrict the same to >our families or students and friends. People experienced the Trump victory >in different ways. The example from LSV involves kids of three ages. That >still seems an important focus. Our contemporaries are in there 30's + >(and >++). Our students are in latest teens or 20+. High school kids are in the >teens. Middle school kids..... > >It is my strong impression that there are significant age differences in >ones experience of the event that could be elicited pretty easily and >compared in the group across other interesting categories of difference >such as nationality. > >A small, positive, collective effort? > >mike > >On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 9:08 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >wrote: > >> Dear Martin, >> >> thanks for the nuances you introduce. Yes, I agree with you, it is >>totally >> sensible to hear Trump's words with hope and actually experience >> (perezhivat) them in such a way as to become moving force towards >> transformation. I was only approaching the speech from a developmental >> stages perspective, where, to hear the speech with contempt given the >> speech's formal structure as a type of generalisation, would mean to >>hear >> them within that stage that Andy very appropriately (in my view) called >>as >> "magic". Vygotsky (I think) also used this term to refer to a stage in >> child development. >> >> But I do not wish to say that contempt is the only possible quality, and >> so, as you very nicely remark, hope, enthusiasm, empowerment, all these >>and >> their developmental and historical conditions should be considered as >> possibilities of hearing Trump's speech. >> >> Thanks a lot for the resources/links, I am incorporating them to our >>joint >> document. >> Alfredo >> >> ________________________________________ >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> on behalf of Martin John Packer >> Sent: 22 January 2017 16:08 >> To: xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie >> >> Hi Alfredo. >> >> I think your proposal is very interesting; that we could explore two >> different ways of hearing and understanding Trump?s words. But if I >> understand you correctly, I don?t agree that ?in the first case, there >>is >> no hope for change, there is contempt.? I have lived in Michigan and >> Pennsylvania, and in both states industries that were central to the >> economic rise of the working class, auto manufacturing and steel >>foundries, >> collapsed as a result of globalization. I have seen first hand some of >>the >> communities that were almost completely destroyed. I believe that people >> who experienced these changes do hear Trump?s words with hope for >>change, >> and if they have contempt it is for professional politicians who they >>feel >> speak but do not act. >> >> But perhaps you mean it was a lack of hope that *led* people to Trump: >> >> > donald-trump-manufacturing-jobs-hope/496541/> >> >> The New Yorker has published several articles by George Packer (no >> relation) on the appeal that Trump has to the white working class. For >> example: >> >> > donald-trump-appeals-to-the-white-working-class> >> >> Martin >> >> >> >> >> >> On Jan 21, 2017, at 3:44 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > > wrote: >> >> Dear Helena, Andy, all, >> >> >> Unfortunately, I have not been able to find the time to watch the movie >> Fate of a Man, but I have followed the very interesting analyses and >> conversations about it. I am opening this thread as connexions between >> those analyses, perezhivanie, and current tragic social and political >> situation in the US and elsewhere. This also connects with the article >>that >> Mike shared on the position of the Learning Sciences with regard to this >> situation (how happy I was to see this initiative!). >> >> >> In particular, I wanted to pick up on Helena's very true comment that >>"the >> US is going to have to produce some works of scholarship or art, or >>both, >> that attempt to explain what is happening now here in the US -- for >> example, this afternoon, under President Trump." >> >> >> Yesterday, we saw at home Trump's speech. Although we had followed >>Trump's >> campaign and its denigrating tenor, it was yesterday, for the first >>time, >> that my wife and me got this gut feeling of true tragedy, of a real >>*drama* >> as we heard those empty, but to recover the prior article for >>discussion, >> hollowed and hollowing words coming out of that mouth. It came upon us >>that >> there may be lots of people for whom those words are not hollowed, but >> actually encouraging, rich, beautiful. How can you hear that as beauty? >> >> >> So, I was wondering, and in following up with our 2016 MCA Issue 4 >> discussion, whether we could not actually conduct an analysis of the >>sort >> Marc offers in his article of the perezhivanie. Just as Vygotsky >>explains >> how 3 different children experience the situation of an alcoholic mother >> differently, could not we perform an analysis ?of that perezhivanie in >> which a person experiences yesterday's situation as one of >>encouragement, >> of freedom and hope. Would that not be a way to try to understand what >>is >> going on? This would not be a piece of art, but could be something we >>could >> do to try to understand and change this situation. >> >> We could then contrast that perezhivanie with the one many of as have, >>in >> which the situation is experience as a real TRAGEDY. I think in the >>first >> case, there is no hope for change, there is contempt; in the second, >> hearing those words as hollowed and hollowing require that you live the >> situation as a doubled situation in which you experienced it from a very >> different developmental stage. One in which the speech sounds as a case >>of >> involution. >> >> Should we find the transcribed speech and perform such analysis? >> >> >> Going now to support the Woman's march here in Victoria BC. >> >> Alfredo >> >> >> >> From lpscholar2@gmail.com Tue Jan 24 08:23:46 2017 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2017 08:23:46 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's "talking" versus "speaking" In-Reply-To: References: <628ebbd3-8b51-8e15-47d0-9164e8352c36@mira.net> <58866d1f.90966b0a.1b7d5.c1c8@mx.google.com> <289C4B7F-0A9A-4A10-BB1F-0619858FFBAA@umn.edu> <1485241782176.85472@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <58877fbe.c49e620a.c7df5.a46e@mx.google.com> Chris, Would it make a difference to orally perform the text out loud and feel the difference from the felt experience of reading the text silently? Different proportions of distance and intimacy in understanding the ?intention-in-action?. Different quality from being a spectator watching the speech on multiple media as spectacle. This goes to Susan?s point of carnival and the women?s march also having a proportion of carnival (along side) the seriousness of the social situation. Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Christopher Schuck Sent: January 24, 2017 7:25 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's "talking" versus "speaking" Another irony that hasn't been mentioned is that this distictive speaking/ talking style flagged by McWhorter made him unusually effective as a campaigner where the goal was to create chaos and premature action, yet would undermine his ability to be an effective (or safe) president and doesn't "fit." This is relevant insofar as it emphasizes the new experience of hearing him speak this way *as president* as opposed to president-wannabe. In the inauguration speech, this person who is known for talking not speaking attempts to speak formally, which creates yet another split between taking that pseudo-formal language literally and taking it ironically. So it is not just the difference between reading him literally and reading him ironically, but that what is formal and what is literal (as well as what is informal and what is indirect, and whether he is a "formal" leader or informal television personality) become tangled up with each other as he transitions from celebrity to this official role.That is one reason why I wonder whether looking at the formal text of this official speech (however fascinating) is such a useful way to explore the perezhivanie of the Trump experience, because it's so uniquely not about the written text. I suspect even many of Trump's supporters were not particularly interested in the speech. On Tuesday, January 24, 2017, Alfredo Jornet Gil > wrote: > Richard, > what this linguist says and you comment on Trump's talk is pretty close to > what I was just writing to Francine in the main "trump's speech" thread > about hearing him literally and hearing him as irony. If you stick to > hearing in the same he seems to treat his recipients, then you may have to > believe that each word conveys an idea and that one word suffices to give > the idea, like "it's true". It seems to be enough. As per your question, > yes, it's a very scary question. It also is very scary that he may say, > "it's true" and so be it. > Alfredo > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of Richard Beach > Sent: 23 January 2017 23:09 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Trump's "talking" versus "speaking" > > In a New York Times op-ed 01/21/opinion/sunday/how-to-listen-to-donald-trump-every-day > -for-years.html>, the linguist, John McWhorter, distinguishes between > Trump?s informal, spontaneous ?talking? versus ?speaking? that involves > employing a more formal register associated with written language. He cites > the example of Trump?s talking: ?Look, having nuclear ? my uncle was a > great professor and scientist and engineer, Dr. John Trump at M.I.T.; good > genes, very good genes, O.K., very smart, the Wharton School of Finance, > very good, very smart ? you know, if you?re a conservative Republican, if I > were a liberal, if, like, O.K. ?? > > > What?s problematic here is that Trump?s off-the-cuff ?talking,? as well as > his use of tweets, can convey messages with problematic uptakes from > others, resulting in taking action without careful thought or consultation > with others. As McWhorter notes: ?All understand that his speech is > structurally ungraceful. It may be harder to grasp that Mr. Trump, as > someone just talking rather than artfully communicating ideas, has no sense > of the tacit understanding that a politician?s utterances are more signals > than statements, vehicles meant to convey larger messages.? > > When one of his hotels is another country is attacked by ?terrorists,? > will Trump, as someone who perceives himself as the prime actor, > spontaneously declare war with little or no consideration of the > consequences of his actions? > > > > Richard Beach, Professor Emeritus of English Education, University of > Minnesota > rbeach@umn.edu > Websites: Digital writing , Media > literacy , Teaching literature > , Identity-focused ELA Teaching < > http://identities.pbworks.com/>, Common Core State Standards < > http://englishccss.pbworks.com/>, Apps for literacy learning < > http://usingipads.pbworks.com/>, Teaching about climate change < > http://climatechangeela.pbworks.com/> > > > > On Jan 23, 2017, at 12:52 PM, lpscholar2@gmail.com wrote: > > > > Andrew, Andy, > > I also want to pursue the example of James Lawson. > > What struck me was his relationship to both parents as formative. > > Moving to Trump?s inauguration, what struck me was the bodily gesture he > was expressing walking down the hallway just prior to speaking. > > This body language that i was reading before he spoke a word. > > I hope some of you watched the Frontline documentary on PBS EXPLORING > both Trump?s and Clinton?s early family life. > > > > Trump?s father was only interested in ?winners? and to come second was > to be a ?loser?. The father sent Trump as a young man to a military academy > that would teach his son how to be a ?winner? a lesson that Trump inhabits > and is incarnating in his every gesture. > > > > His emotional, cognitive, and performative symmetry captured in his > facial expression as he walked forward to give his inaugural address. > > > > In other words, James Lawson, Donald Trump, and Martin Packer?s book > review i see as overlapping themes. > > When we explore ?expression? and ?intentionality? and ?language? i want > to include the family upbringing as formative. > > > > Now as an aside, Simmel would say both James and Donald are inhabiting > (fictions) that INform their experiences, but that may be a leap too far. > Simmel was following the philosopher Vasinger (spelling?) who focused on > how we live our lives (as is) or (as though) but to take this turn would be > for another thread. > > > > > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > From: Andrew Babson > > Sent: January 23, 2017 9:08 AM > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: James Lawson and perezhivanie > > > > Andy, thank you for the timely post, especially as we move forward in the > > shadow of authoritarianism here in the USA. Lawson's example of choosing > > non-violent protest, following Gandhi, is helpful. Consider the > > effectiveness of millions of people last weekend peacefully taking to the > > streets with few if any arrests (side note: we all went as a family here > in > > Philly, it was great). Contrast the Black Bloc member's sucker punch of > > neo-nazi Richard Spencer: people are cheering it, but those same people > > probably realize it's not a scalable strategy. Different tours de force, > > different effects, the gender connotations of which are interesting. > > > > *P **erezhivanie > > *is a new term to me, > which I > > link here to the XMCA blog for those other also unfamiliar with it. It > > seems like a pretty clear gloss of a term I do know well, *Erlebnis, > > *"experience" > > (I dislike the gloss of that Dilthey-an term as "lived" experience...but > > that's for another discussion). > > > > It's fascinating to learn about Lawson's vocational decision-making > > process, and to consider the possible effects of violent and non-violent > > dissent. But perhaps you could clarify for us Andy why you thought > Lawson's > > story was an example of *perezhivanie*? Where's the point of analytical > > traction? If it means more than "experience", how can we apply that > broader > > meaning here? It seems like he had a Pauline metanoia/conversion > > experience. Is that what you mean? > > > > Andrew > > > > ------------------------------------------------ > > Andrew Babson, Ph.D. > > Lecturer > > Graduate School of Education > > University of Pennsylvania > > > > On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 4:40 AM, Andy Blunden wrote: > > > > James Lawson is the Methodist preacher who trained the young members of > the > > SNCC in non-violent action and wrote their constitution. I paste below > and > > attach an excerpt from my book "The Origins of Collective Decision > Making" > > which narrates Lawson's life up until April 1960. Perezhivanie was not > the > > topic under discussion so it is not mentioned in the text, but xmca-ers > > should be able to see it, an example of perezhivanie: > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > > > > > > > James Lawson was born in 1928, in Uniontown, Pennsylvania. His father, > > James Snr., was the grandson of an escaped slave, and a Minister for the > > African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church in New England. > > > > > > > > > > > > Via the Free African Society(FAS) the Methodists had recruited freed > slaves > > in Philadelphiain 1787, but as a result of a racist incident, some left > to > > found the African Methodist Episcopal Church(AMEC). Nonetheless, many > > African Americans stayed with the United Methodist Church. The AMEC split > > started in Philadelphia and the AMEC Zion Church was a split that came > out > > of New York. It was to AMEC Zion, James Lawson was born. > > > > > > > > > > > > However, Lawson returned to The United Methodist Church, created by a > 1939 > > merger of several branches of the Methodist Church, which set up five > > regional ?jurisdictions? of Methodists in the US, organized to maintain > > regionally identity and a sixth, called the ?Central Jurisdiction? which > > combined the Black annual conferences, thus building segregation into the > > constitution of the Church.The Methodists went through a long and painful > > process, carried out in accordance with the Methodist Code of Discipline, > > which mandates the principle of Majority, to re-integrate the white and > > Black, but it was not till after 1964 that Black conferences started to > > merge into white conferences. At the local level, congregations continued > > much as before. So it was within the Black section of the segregated > United > > Methodist Church, that James Lawson became a Methodist. > > > > > > > > > > > > James Snr. was a militant preacher; he packed a 38 pistol and set up > > branches of the NAACP wherever he was assigned to preach. After serving > at > > St. James AMEZ Church in Massillon, Ohio, he transferred to the Lexington > > Annual Conference of the Central Jurisdiction of the United Methodist > > Church. James Snr. was no pacifist and according to Lawson he ?refused to > > take any guff from anyone, particularly on the point of race? and > ?insisted > > that he was going to be treated as a man.? > > > > > > > > > > > > Lawson?s mother, Philane May Cover, on the other hand, was decidedly > > nonviolent. Lawson?s challenge, which was to form his character, was to > > reconcile his father?s militancy with his mother?s nonviolence. Lawson > grew > > up in Massillon. One day, at the age of 10, Lawson was asked by his > mother > > to run an errand: > > > > > > > > > > > > A little white child in an automobile yelled ?nigger? out the opened > > window. I walked over ... and, since I was in a hurry running my mother?s > > errand, I smacked the child and went on my way. When the Lawson kids got > > called ?nigger? on the streets or at school, we usually fought. I don?t > > know where we got that from, except that we figured that it was something > > to fight over. (Lawson, cited in King, 1999) > > > > > > > > > > > > On the return trip home, aware of possible repercussions, Lawson tried to > > find the parents of the offending child, to talk to them, but the car was > > gone. Once home, he told his mother of the incident. Lawson?s mother > > replied, ?Jimmy, what good did that do?? > > > > > > > > > > > > She talked about who I was, the fact of God?s love, that we were a family > > of love and that such an incident could not hurt me, because of who I > was. > > I don?t remember anyone else being around, but a stillness took over my > > being at that moment. It was, as I realized much later on, a mystical > > experience. In a very real way, my life stood still. I realized in that > > stillness that I had changed forever. One of the phrases my mother used > in > > her conversation with me was that ?there must be a better way?. I > > determined, from then on, that I would find the better way. (Lawson, > cited > > in King, 1999, pp. 187-188) > > > > > > > > > > > > He first became acquainted with Gandhi?s experiments in nonviolence as a > > child, thanks to the African-American press which the family discussed > > around the dinner table, and had read Gandhi?s autobiography as a > teenager. > > At Baldwin Wallace College, a liberal arts Methodistcollege in Berea, > Ohio, > > he studied Thoreau, Gandhi and Tolstoy, and the pacifist theologians > > Dietrich Bonhoeffer and Reinhold Niebuhr. At age 19, he became a draft > > resister, refusing service in the Korean War. Executive director of > > Fellowship Of Reconciliation (FOR), A. J. Muste,frequently visited to > > lecture at the College: > > > > > > > > > > > > All of us in history classes were required to hear Muste. I was thrilled. > > He made me realize that I was not alone in my experimentation, that there > > was a world movement, and a national movement. ... He acquainted me with > > the Fellowship Of Reconciliation, which I joined on the spot in 1947. > That > > meant that I got exposed to their book list. > > > > > > > > > > > > After hearing a lecture by A. J. Muste, he joined FOR and CORE. Muste was > > instrumental thereafter in strengthening Lawson?s nonviolent orientation, > > directing him towards Gandhi and later facilitating his entry into the > > sit-in and boycott movement beginning in the South. In the late 1940s and > > early 1950s Lawson had organized sit-ins and protests directed at > > establishments that discriminated against blacks in Massillon, long > before > > the Montgomery bus-boycott. > > > > > > > > > > > > He was also active with the National Conference of Methodist Youth. > > Although a member of a segregated Methodist Church, he found plenty of > > support for his stands against racial discrimination and war from his > white > > colleagues and church fellows. While he was in prison serving thirteen > > months of a two and a half year term for draft resistance in 1952, he was > > re-elected as Vice-President of the NCMY. > > > > > > > > > > > > Wesleyan Methodism was central to Lawson?s outlook. Just as John Wesley > had > > sought to cleanse individuals of iniquity, so could society be purged of > > the social sins of slavery, segregation, poverty, and war.Generations of > > African American Methodists from Harriet Tubman (AMEZ) and Henry M. > Turner > > (AME) in the nineteenth century, to Rosa Parks (AME) and James Farmer > > (MEC), were led to social justice activism by this Methodist heritage. > > > > > > > > > > > > Lawson used his prison time to read and think. Writing from prison in > 1952 > > aged 23 years old and yet to enter the seminary, Lawson said he aspired > to > > emulate ?the life of Jesus, St. Francis, George Fox, Gandhi, Buddha... > and > > other great religious persons.? These figures attached little importance > to > > ?theology but (to their) experience with God.?Further, he noted > ?religious > > failures today are in (the arena of) experience and practice, not > > theology.? When Lawson entered prison, he was a Christian pacifist.He > told > > Mary King however, that his ?first commitment was to work on race,? and > > conscientious objection came second.By the time of his release, he had > > advanced to Gandhian nonviolence. He wondered ?why can?t a mass > non-violent > > revolution be staged throughout the South where the segregation pattern > is > > much like the ?untouchables? of India? Such a movement would have to > start > > with one person who had the Christian vision to make such a revolution a > > reality in his own life.? Gandhian nonviolence became the synthesizing > > factor for Lawson?s religious thinking: the militancy of his father?s > > Methodism and the Christian pacifism that he drew from his mother. > > > > > > > > > > > > Muste arranged for Lawson to visit India after his release from prison > with > > a letter of introduction to activists in the Gandhian movement, and he > > remained in India from May 1953 to 1956, working at Hislop College in > > Nagpur, reading Indian literature and working with Gandhi?s movement. > > Lawson?s practice would remain deeply religious; his nonviolence was > > saturated with the message of Christian love, and blended with principles > > synthesized from a broad range of religious and secular sources, both > > Eastern and Western. His aim was the ?mass education and training of > people > > in the use of nonviolent direct action techniques.? Lawson insisted that > > ?you are fighting a system, not an individual, not a race, or not the > > people of another country, but a system.? > > > > > > > > > > > > He continued his study of pacifism and Gandhian nonviolence at Oberlin > > College, Ohio. While still in India, he had read about Martin Luther King > > and his successful leadership of the Montgomery bus boycott.King?s > lecture > > at Oberlin on February 6, 1957, fortified his long-held intention to work > > in the South for transformative social change. After King?s lecture to a > > packed audience, he and Lawson talked together at dinner.Though Lawson > was > > contemplating study for a Ph.D., King told him ?don?t wait, but come > south > > now!? adding that there was no one else like Lawson.Muste arranged for > FOR > > to hire Lawson as southern field secretary to be stationed at Nashville > in > > January 1958. Upon his arrival, he found that Glenn Smiley, national > field > > director of FOR, had arranged for Lawson to run a full schedule of > > workshops ? including one to take place early that year at the first > annual > > meeting of the SCLC in Columbia, South Carolina. > > > > > > > > > > > > At the SCLC meeting, King made an exuberant introduction of Lawson as > FOR?s > > new regional representative and discussed the organization?s role in > > Montgomery, telling delegates to be sure to attend Lawson?s workshop on > > nonviolence. King took his seat in the first pew, waiting for the > > three-hour session to start: > > > > > > > > > > > > Martin did that at every SCLC meeting as long as he lived. He would ask > me > > to conduct an afternoon workshop, usually two or three hours, and he > would > > arrange for it to be ?at-large? so that everyone could attend, with > nothing > > else to compete. He put it on the schedule himself. A few minutes early, > he > > would show up and sit alone, as an example, in the front row. > > > > > > > > > > > > Back in Nashville, Lawson continued with Monday evening workshops during > > the autumn of 1959 in which he trained the students who were to be the > core > > of the Nashville sit-in movement. As a result of his involvement with the > > sit-ins Lawson was expelled from Vanderbilt, but he enrolled with Boston > > University to finish his degree in theology,while continuing to work with > > the students. Several professors in the School of Theology resigned over > > his expulsion. > > > > > > > > > > > > The techniques that the students deployed were drawn from Lawson?s > > workshops. In 1958 and 1959, Lawson mobilized all that he knew about > > Christian pacifism, Gandhian nonviolence, and Methodist social ministry > and > > blended them into an unprecedented curriculum that influenced the civil > > rights movement in Nashville and beyond. > > > > > > > > > > > > Blending Christianity and interreligious sources, he did not present its > > philosophy and practice as a secular doctrine, but as the essence of > > religion itself. Core to nonviolence was mirroring God?s love for > humankind > > and exhibiting it through concrete relationships of human solidarity and > > community. ?Nonviolence,? Lawson taught, is the aggressive, forgiving, > > patient, long-suffering Christ-like and Christ-commanded love or > good-will > > for all humankind even in the face of tension, fear, hatred, or demonic > > evil.? Moreover, ?it is the readiness to absorb suffering with > forgiveness > > and courage rather than to inflict suffering on others.? > > > > > > > > > > > > Lawson divided his instruction into four modules: how nonviolence reacts, > > training for nonviolence, the virtues of nonviolence, and the methods of > > nonviolence. Practitioners prepared themselves by jettisoning anger, > > hostility and fear thus ?minimizing the effect of an attack,? valuing > love, > > courage, fearlessness, and forgiveness, and pursuing redemptive suffering > > which ?releases unknown elements for good.? Preparation included > meditation > > and prayer, study of the scriptures, practicing nonviolence through > > challenges to segregation in bus transportation and in other public > > facilities.The practice steps included fact-finding, negotiation, > education > > of the community, and various methods of nonviolent direct action > including > > sit-ins, boycotts, strikes, and civil disobedience. Lawson provided an > > extensive bibliography including relevant verses from the Bible, the > > Bhagavad Gita, and from the Chinese philosopher, Mo Ti and the Hebrew > > prophet, Isaiah. > > > > > > > > > > > > The Nashville sit-ins and those led by students in other southern cities > > convinced Ella Baker of the SCLC to call a conference in April, 1960, at > > Shaw University in Raleigh, North Carolina. Out of this meeting emerged > the > > Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee.Lawson delivered an opening > > keynote address that helped to frame SNCC?s nonviolent trajectory.Later, > > Lawson summarized discussions and consensus that emerged out of the > > conference, and his synopsis received the approval of everyone there. > > Lawson?s overall comments said that ?nonviolence as it grows from > > Judaic-Christian tradition seeks a social order of justice permeated by > > love.? > > > > > > > > > > > > It was Lawson who delivered the keynote address and framed SNCC?s > > nonviolent orientation. > > > > > > > > > > > > The whole group, perhaps 120 participants, all in the room, asked me to > > draft a statement. Eventually, three different drafts emerged. The > > Nashville group was cohesive. The extant draft was the third, influenced > by > > the Nashville group, after two earlier conversations. (Interview with > King, > > June 2014) > > > > > > > > > > > > Lawson?s synopsis was approved by the Conference. > > > > > > > > > > > > In a private email message Mary King told me: > > > > > > > > > > > > He [James Lawson] was reading from the FOR booklist from a young age, > but I > > don?t think that he was influenced on notions of Consensus by Quakers, > > because the connection was too abstract. Let me underscore that he says > it > > was for him Methodist origins. (Private email, 15 April 2014) > > > > > > > > > > > > In his interview with Mary King, Lawson confirmed that the origin of > > Consensus in SNCC was the Nashville Central Committee, confirming what > Mary > > King had told me in April. As to the roots Consensus in Lawson?s own > > experience, he emphasized that: > > > > > > > > > > > > It was the Methodist youth and student movements with which I had grown > up, > > and this is how they made decisions. They knew the rules of parliamentary > > procedures, but they wanted to find a common mind. (Interview with King, > > June 2014) > > > > > > > > > > > > The Methodist Church to this very day still mandates Majority decisions, > > but this would never have entailed children voting ? in general > youngsters > > in these organizations were simply told what to do. The Black > congregations > > had operated separately for more than a century, so there was some room > for > > Lawson to develop a consensual model of collaboration in working with > young > > people. It is also possible the Black congregations, like other Black > > Churches in America, drew on other traditions of decision making. > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > Andy Blunden > > > > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > > > > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > > > From hshonerd@gmail.com Tue Jan 24 09:02:02 2017 From: hshonerd@gmail.com (HENRY SHONERD) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2017 10:02:02 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: <1485242844800.97347@iped.uio.no> References: <1485031482970.89461@iped.uio.no> <1485191332785.92884@iped.uio.no> <1485241379454.56697@iped.uio.no> <1485242844800.97347@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: I can?t remember who sourced The Twilight Zone on the chat lately, but it reminded me of the episode of Twilight Zone: The Movie wherein a household is hostage to a weird boy who is able to punish through his fantasies any pushback to his bullying. Does anyone remember that episode? And do they agree there is a frightening resonance? But there is a difference: In the episode, as I recall, no member of the household (except the boy) is a willing hostage. In our real world, the right, individually and collectively, is willingly submitting itself to the bullying. Enabling. How do we talk to them? Henry > On Jan 24, 2017, at 12:27 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > > Another article exploring Trump's age: > http://elpais.com/elpais/2017/01/20/inenglish/1484911522_528712.html?rel=cx_articulo#cxrecs_s > > Alfredo > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil > Sent: 24 January 2017 08:03 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie > > That would be interesting to explore, Mike. You suggest actually asking how people from different ages and demographics and share it here? That sounds doable! > Alfredo > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of mike cole > Sent: 24 January 2017 00:54 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie > > Martin's caution relates to my suggestion that we not restrict the same to > our families or students and friends. People experienced the Trump victory > in different ways. The example from LSV involves kids of three ages. That > still seems an important focus. Our contemporaries are in there 30's + (and > ++). Our students are in latest teens or 20+. High school kids are in the > teens. Middle school kids..... > > It is my strong impression that there are significant age differences in > ones experience of the event that could be elicited pretty easily and > compared in the group across other interesting categories of difference > such as nationality. > > A small, positive, collective effort? > > mike > > On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 9:08 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > wrote: > >> Dear Martin, >> >> thanks for the nuances you introduce. Yes, I agree with you, it is totally >> sensible to hear Trump's words with hope and actually experience >> (perezhivat) them in such a way as to become moving force towards >> transformation. I was only approaching the speech from a developmental >> stages perspective, where, to hear the speech with contempt given the >> speech's formal structure as a type of generalisation, would mean to hear >> them within that stage that Andy very appropriately (in my view) called as >> "magic". Vygotsky (I think) also used this term to refer to a stage in >> child development. >> >> But I do not wish to say that contempt is the only possible quality, and >> so, as you very nicely remark, hope, enthusiasm, empowerment, all these and >> their developmental and historical conditions should be considered as >> possibilities of hearing Trump's speech. >> >> Thanks a lot for the resources/links, I am incorporating them to our joint >> document. >> Alfredo >> >> ________________________________________ >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> on behalf of Martin John Packer >> Sent: 22 January 2017 16:08 >> To: xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie >> >> Hi Alfredo. >> >> I think your proposal is very interesting; that we could explore two >> different ways of hearing and understanding Trump?s words. But if I >> understand you correctly, I don?t agree that ?in the first case, there is >> no hope for change, there is contempt.? I have lived in Michigan and >> Pennsylvania, and in both states industries that were central to the >> economic rise of the working class, auto manufacturing and steel foundries, >> collapsed as a result of globalization. I have seen first hand some of the >> communities that were almost completely destroyed. I believe that people >> who experienced these changes do hear Trump?s words with hope for change, >> and if they have contempt it is for professional politicians who they feel >> speak but do not act. >> >> But perhaps you mean it was a lack of hope that *led* people to Trump: >> >> > donald-trump-manufacturing-jobs-hope/496541/> >> >> The New Yorker has published several articles by George Packer (no >> relation) on the appeal that Trump has to the white working class. For >> example: >> >> > donald-trump-appeals-to-the-white-working-class> >> >> Martin >> >> >> >> >> >> On Jan 21, 2017, at 3:44 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > > wrote: >> >> Dear Helena, Andy, all, >> >> >> Unfortunately, I have not been able to find the time to watch the movie >> Fate of a Man, but I have followed the very interesting analyses and >> conversations about it. I am opening this thread as connexions between >> those analyses, perezhivanie, and current tragic social and political >> situation in the US and elsewhere. This also connects with the article that >> Mike shared on the position of the Learning Sciences with regard to this >> situation (how happy I was to see this initiative!). >> >> >> In particular, I wanted to pick up on Helena's very true comment that "the >> US is going to have to produce some works of scholarship or art, or both, >> that attempt to explain what is happening now here in the US -- for >> example, this afternoon, under President Trump." >> >> >> Yesterday, we saw at home Trump's speech. Although we had followed Trump's >> campaign and its denigrating tenor, it was yesterday, for the first time, >> that my wife and me got this gut feeling of true tragedy, of a real *drama* >> as we heard those empty, but to recover the prior article for discussion, >> hollowed and hollowing words coming out of that mouth. It came upon us that >> there may be lots of people for whom those words are not hollowed, but >> actually encouraging, rich, beautiful. How can you hear that as beauty? >> >> >> So, I was wondering, and in following up with our 2016 MCA Issue 4 >> discussion, whether we could not actually conduct an analysis of the sort >> Marc offers in his article of the perezhivanie. Just as Vygotsky explains >> how 3 different children experience the situation of an alcoholic mother >> differently, could not we perform an analysis ?of that perezhivanie in >> which a person experiences yesterday's situation as one of encouragement, >> of freedom and hope. Would that not be a way to try to understand what is >> going on? This would not be a piece of art, but could be something we could >> do to try to understand and change this situation. >> >> We could then contrast that perezhivanie with the one many of as have, in >> which the situation is experience as a real TRAGEDY. I think in the first >> case, there is no hope for change, there is contempt; in the second, >> hearing those words as hollowed and hollowing require that you live the >> situation as a doubled situation in which you experienced it from a very >> different developmental stage. One in which the speech sounds as a case of >> involution. >> >> Should we find the transcribed speech and perform such analysis? >> >> >> Going now to support the Woman's march here in Victoria BC. >> >> Alfredo >> >> >> >> From Peg.Griffin@att.net Tue Jan 24 09:09:57 2017 From: Peg.Griffin@att.net (Peg Griffin) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2017 12:09:57 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: References: <1485031482970.89461@iped.uio.no> <1485191332785.92884@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <004d01d27664$b19d5110$14d7f330$@att.net> Maybe young Sophie Cruz provides information relevant to these age differences: "I also want to tell the children not to be afraid because we are not alone. There are still many people that have their hearts filled with love and tenderness to snuggle in this path of life. Let's keep together and fight for their rights! God is with us!" Snuggle. https://mic.com/articles/166246/6-year-old-sophie-cruz-child-of-undocumented-parents-advocated-for-immigrants-at-the-womens-march#.hW1TkWzCd -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 6:54 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie Martin's caution relates to my suggestion that we not restrict the same to our families or students and friends. People experienced the Trump victory in different ways. The example from LSV involves kids of three ages. That still seems an important focus. Our contemporaries are in there 30's + (and ++). Our students are in latest teens or 20+. High school kids are in ++the teens. Middle school kids..... It is my strong impression that there are significant age differences in ones experience of the event that could be elicited pretty easily and compared in the group across other interesting categories of difference such as nationality. A small, positive, collective effort? mike On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 9:08 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > Dear Martin, > > thanks for the nuances you introduce. Yes, I agree with you, it is > totally sensible to hear Trump's words with hope and actually > experience > (perezhivat) them in such a way as to become moving force towards > transformation. I was only approaching the speech from a developmental > stages perspective, where, to hear the speech with contempt given the > speech's formal structure as a type of generalisation, would mean to > hear them within that stage that Andy very appropriately (in my view) > called as "magic". Vygotsky (I think) also used this term to refer to > a stage in child development. > > But I do not wish to say that contempt is the only possible quality, > and so, as you very nicely remark, hope, enthusiasm, empowerment, all > these and their developmental and historical conditions should be > considered as possibilities of hearing Trump's speech. > > Thanks a lot for the resources/links, I am incorporating them to our > joint document. > Alfredo > > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of Martin John Packer > > Sent: 22 January 2017 16:08 > To: xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie > > Hi Alfredo. > > I think your proposal is very interesting; that we could explore two > different ways of hearing and understanding Trump?s words. But if I > understand you correctly, I don?t agree that ?in the first case, there > is no hope for change, there is contempt.? I have lived in Michigan > and Pennsylvania, and in both states industries that were central to > the economic rise of the working class, auto manufacturing and steel > foundries, collapsed as a result of globalization. I have seen first > hand some of the communities that were almost completely destroyed. I > believe that people who experienced these changes do hear Trump?s > words with hope for change, and if they have contempt it is for > professional politicians who they feel speak but do not act. > > But perhaps you mean it was a lack of hope that *led* people to Trump: > > donald-trump-manufacturing-jobs-hope/496541/> > > The New Yorker has published several articles by George Packer (no > relation) on the appeal that Trump has to the white working class. For > example: > > donald-trump-appeals-to-the-white-working-class> > > Martin > > > > > > On Jan 21, 2017, at 3:44 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > wrote: > > Dear Helena, Andy, all, > > > Unfortunately, I have not been able to find the time to watch the > movie Fate of a Man, but I have followed the very interesting analyses > and conversations about it. I am opening this thread as connexions > between those analyses, perezhivanie, and current tragic social and > political situation in the US and elsewhere. This also connects with > the article that Mike shared on the position of the Learning Sciences > with regard to this situation (how happy I was to see this initiative!). > > > In particular, I wanted to pick up on Helena's very true comment that > "the US is going to have to produce some works of scholarship or art, > or both, that attempt to explain what is happening now here in the US > -- for example, this afternoon, under President Trump." > > > Yesterday, we saw at home Trump's speech. Although we had followed > Trump's campaign and its denigrating tenor, it was yesterday, for the > first time, that my wife and me got this gut feeling of true tragedy, > of a real *drama* as we heard those empty, but to recover the prior > article for discussion, hollowed and hollowing words coming out of > that mouth. It came upon us that there may be lots of people for whom > those words are not hollowed, but actually encouraging, rich, beautiful. How can you hear that as beauty? > > > So, I was wondering, and in following up with our 2016 MCA Issue 4 > discussion, whether we could not actually conduct an analysis of the > sort Marc offers in his article of the perezhivanie. Just as Vygotsky > explains how 3 different children experience the situation of an > alcoholic mother differently, could not we perform an analysis ?of > that perezhivanie in which a person experiences yesterday's situation > as one of encouragement, of freedom and hope. Would that not be a way > to try to understand what is going on? This would not be a piece of > art, but could be something we could do to try to understand and change this situation. > > We could then contrast that perezhivanie with the one many of as have, > in which the situation is experience as a real TRAGEDY. I think in the > first case, there is no hope for change, there is contempt; in the > second, hearing those words as hollowed and hollowing require that you > live the situation as a doubled situation in which you experienced it > from a very different developmental stage. One in which the speech > sounds as a case of involution. > > Should we find the transcribed speech and perform such analysis? > > > Going now to support the Woman's march here in Victoria BC. > > Alfredo > > > > From helenaworthen@gmail.com Tue Jan 24 09:20:51 2017 From: helenaworthen@gmail.com (Helena Worthen) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2017 09:20:51 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: <008301d275a5$cb210c40$616324c0$@att.net> References: <1485031482970.89461@iped.uio.no> <1485191332785.92884@iped.uio.no> <008301d275a5$cb210c40$616324c0$@att.net> Message-ID: <4879C0B2-24A0-4C3D-9F32-79185ADCC007@gmail.com> Peg, thanks. This is a very good concise 3-point statement of Trump?s vision and strategy. ?Government is the enemy, nationalism is the answer? so blame the "other ? immigrants, Moslems, foreigners, China, reprobate allies, feckless internationalists,? etc. Here?s another 3-point statement: The whole world shares the rising crisis of climate change. The whole world is entangled in neoliberal globalization, which centralizes wealth. In this shared global context, individual nations are responding by moving to the right, each in its own way. France, Brazil, Britain, Austria, Canada, Finland?? This is supposed to ring off Mike?s call for XMCA voices from outside the US to speak up. Helena Worthen helenaworthen@gmail.com Berkeley, CA 94707 Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com > On Jan 23, 2017, at 10:23 AM, Peg Griffin wrote: > > Robert Borosage's take on the speech: > https://ourfuture.org/20170123/trumps-perverse-populism?utm_source=progressi > ve_breakfast&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=pbreak > > -----Original Message----- > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Alfredo Jornet Gil > Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 12:09 PM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie > > Dear Martin, > > thanks for the nuances you introduce. Yes, I agree with you, it is totally > sensible to hear Trump's words with hope and actually experience > (perezhivat) them in such a way as to become moving force towards > transformation. I was only approaching the speech from a developmental > stages perspective, where, to hear the speech with contempt given the > speech's formal structure as a type of generalisation, would mean to hear > them within that stage that Andy very appropriately (in my view) called as > "magic". Vygotsky (I think) also used this term to refer to a stage in child > development. > > But I do not wish to say that contempt is the only possible quality, and so, > as you very nicely remark, hope, enthusiasm, empowerment, all these and > their developmental and historical conditions should be considered as > possibilities of hearing Trump's speech. > > Thanks a lot for the resources/links, I am incorporating them to our joint > document. > Alfredo > > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on > behalf of Martin John Packer > Sent: 22 January 2017 16:08 > To: xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie > > Hi Alfredo. > > I think your proposal is very interesting; that we could explore two > different ways of hearing and understanding Trump's words. But if I > understand you correctly, I don't agree that "in the first case, there is no > hope for change, there is contempt." I have lived in Michigan and > Pennsylvania, and in both states industries that were central to the > economic rise of the working class, auto manufacturing and steel foundries, > collapsed as a result of globalization. I have seen first hand some of the > communities that were almost completely destroyed. I believe that people who > experienced these changes do hear Trump's words with hope for change, and if > they have contempt it is for professional politicians who they feel speak > but do not act. > > But perhaps you mean it was a lack of hope that *led* people to Trump: > > ing-jobs-hope/496541/> > > The New Yorker has published several articles by George Packer (no relation) > on the appeal that Trump has to the white working class. For example: > > e-white-working-class> > > Martin > > > > > > On Jan 21, 2017, at 3:44 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > > wrote: > > Dear Helena, Andy, all, > > > Unfortunately, I have not been able to find the time to watch the movie Fate > of a Man, but I have followed the very interesting analyses and > conversations about it. I am opening this thread as connexions between those > analyses, perezhivanie, and current tragic social and political situation in > the US and elsewhere. This also connects with the article that Mike shared > on the position of the Learning Sciences with regard to this situation (how > happy I was to see this initiative!). > > > In particular, I wanted to pick up on Helena's very true comment that "the > US is going to have to produce some works of scholarship or art, or both, > that attempt to explain what is happening now here in the US -- for example, > this afternoon, under President Trump." > > > Yesterday, we saw at home Trump's speech. Although we had followed Trump's > campaign and its denigrating tenor, it was yesterday, for the first time, > that my wife and me got this gut feeling of true tragedy, of a real *drama* > as we heard those empty, but to recover the prior article for discussion, > hollowed and hollowing words coming out of that mouth. It came upon us that > there may be lots of people for whom those words are not hollowed, but > actually encouraging, rich, beautiful. How can you hear that as beauty? > > > So, I was wondering, and in following up with our 2016 MCA Issue 4 > discussion, whether we could not actually conduct an analysis of the sort > Marc offers in his article of the perezhivanie. Just as Vygotsky explains > how 3 different children experience the situation of an alcoholic mother > differently, could not we perform an analysis ?of that perezhivanie in which > a person experiences yesterday's situation as one of encouragement, of > freedom and hope. Would that not be a way to try to understand what is going > on? This would not be a piece of art, but could be something we could do to > try to understand and change this situation. > > We could then contrast that perezhivanie with the one many of as have, in > which the situation is experience as a real TRAGEDY. I think in the first > case, there is no hope for change, there is contempt; in the second, hearing > those words as hollowed and hollowing require that you live the situation as > a doubled situation in which you experienced it from a very different > developmental stage. One in which the speech sounds as a case of involution. > > Should we find the transcribed speech and perform such analysis? > > > Going now to support the Woman's march here in Victoria BC. > > Alfredo > > > > From glassman.13@osu.edu Tue Jan 24 09:40:06 2017 From: glassman.13@osu.edu (Glassman, Michael) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2017 17:40:06 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism In-Reply-To: <1485241112188.8167@iped.uio.no> References: <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C71964@CIO-KRC-D1MBX04.osuad.osu.edu> <1485073527094.7145@iped.uio.no> <5E5B95EA-374F-48EB-B308-BCE49DA52760@gmail.com> <1485113892233.91870@iped.uio.no> , <2c9faf42-cb69-9860-4b9f-ea0f6f0ca307@mira.net>, <1485241112188.8167@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C77497@CIO-TNC-D1MBX11.osuad.osu.edu> So I am re-reading Bateson, somewhat in light of current happenings and I come across this paragraph near the beginning of Mind and Nature, "There seems to be something like a Gresham's law of cultural evolution according to which the oversimplified will always displace the sophisticated and the vulgar and hateful will always displace the beautiful. And yet the beautiful persists." Wise words for his time and ours. The information in nature will always bring us back around to the beautiful if we let it, but it always seems to slip through our fingers. Maybe another take on the arc of justice. The trouble of course is every time we let the vulgar and hateful displace the stakes seem to become much higher. Michael -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Alfredo Jornet Gil Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2017 1:59 AM To: ablunden@mira.net; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism Francine, I agree analysis is only one tool and I hope we can do much more here and elsewhere. But the overtone window seems to resonate well with our quest for understanding the possibilities/conditions for hearing Trump's voice sound like a pleasant flute or like toilette flush. I think the idea of Irony also adds to the question of perezhivanie and Trump in the sense that different perezhivanie will also imply different forms of generalisation/consciousness. Irony seems to always involve moving a step up in the types of generalisation or metaphor. A good example may be found in considering the "Love Trumps Hate" message that has been going around in the media. Although I am no linguist, I am gonna give it a try: If you were to hear the assertion literally, you may hear an imperative to do love Trump's hate in such a way as to enter into a double bind situation. To find yourself in this situation, you need to stick to the transitive form of the subject (you love) with respect to the object (Trump hate). You kind of have to have faith in this form, respect the integrity of the object and the integrity of the subject each in its own terms, and so you may come to feel confused, or perhaps end up hating just the same way Trump plays he hates. On the other hand, to be able to hear "love trumps hate" as a message of love, as an equivalent (as per Vygotsky's equivalence) for another message that we also have seen these days, "when they go low we go high," then you have to take the relation between subject and object in a higher level of metaphor: you now hear the sentence in a context that modifies both subject and object; hate and love cannot be exclusive opposites. The sentence then is heard as intransitive, love and hate no longer are independent. And most importantly, once you hear the sentence in its intransitive form, love and hate no longer are the same. Similarly, to hear everything Trump said and take it literally takes a very different act of faith that it takes hearing it literally as an irony. Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Larry Smolucha Sent: 24 January 2017 02:35 To: ablunden@mira.net; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism Message from Francine: Helena Worthen was right - I am serious about finding (and creating) new tools for understanding the Trump movement. Analysis is only one tool and there is no insight when it is overused. Figurative, analogical, metaphorical thinking gives us other tools. Recognizing IRONY means getting the punch line in a joke (as Freud explained in Jokes and Their Relation to the Unconscious). Is there a termteson in literature for the reversal that commonly occurs in fairy tales? All that is gold does not glitter, not all those who wander are lost . . . 1) The ironic reversals that are taking place as people change their alignment with political parties remind me of a geophysics phenomena - the reversal of the earth's magnetic field that can happen over hundreds of thousands of years. Both are disorienting. I will give this more thought, but for the moment consider this much. When magnetic fields shift it is not all at once, magnetic currents in the molten layers beneath the earth's solid crust change polarities, sometimes causing a total reversal. Our political parties are commonly referred to as polar opposites but those polarities are not fixed they are fluid. The blue collar working class can shift from the Democratic Party to the Republican. The Black vote can shift to the Republicans, the Democrats don't own it. In the 1950's Russian sympathies were a hallmark of the left, now the left denounces Trumps outreach to the Russians. [A caveat here - this is two dimensional thinking because there are only two poles on one geometric plane.] 2) There is another concept, the Overton Window that is a scale of how radical of a discourse the public will tolerate (also called the window of discourse). The Window opens and closes along a range of discourse from the acceptable to the unthinkable. What discourse resonates with the general public (strikes a chord)? What will they regard as taboo (or not politically correct)? Issues like that. Here are a couple links worth looking at: Donald Trump & The Overton Window --Resetting America's Political www.nationalreview.com/.../donald-trump-overton-window-american-p.. Trump's Win Smashed the 'Overton Window' | LifeZette www.lifezette.com/polizette/trumps-win-smashed-overton-window/ Can any of this be used with the concept of perezhivanie? ________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Andy Blunden Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 9:37 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism "Irony" - good word to introduce here Francine. ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy Andy Blunden's Home Page home.mira.net Andy Blunden's Home Page with links to pages I maintain and mail-to buttons http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making [http://www.brill.com/sites/default/files/styles/large/public/ftp/images/products/295x295/92947.jpg?itok=j5KXqZw3] The Origins of Collective Decision Making | Brill www.brill.com The Origins of Collective Decision Making, identifies three paradigms of collective decision making - Counsel, Majority and Consensus, and discovers their origins ... On 23/01/2017 2:32 PM, Larry Smolucha wrote: > Message from Francine Smolucha: > > > The key to an analysis of the Trump movement is understanding the > > fundamental IRONIES that have rocked American politics. > > > The workers revolution has resulted in the > > workers/unions deserting the Left, the socialists, the Democratic Party. > > Trump is a Capitalist regardless of whether he actually has a Republican ideology. > > The workers' movement has been hijacked by a capitalist. > > > The other great IRONY is that Trump wants to make Russia a U.S. ally (again). > > The Left, the socialists, the Democratic Party are the ones demonizing > Russia - > > what a reversal! > > > Since CHAT derives from Russian psychology (Leontiev and Vygotsky) and the backlash against Trump is also a backlash against all things Russian - this puts CHAT in a particularly awkward position. How can a cultural historical psychology that originated in Russia become the leader in the anti-Trump discourse? or lead an anti-Trump educational movement? You are even extolling a Russian concept PEREZHIVANIE. > > > I think the XMCA needs to examine its own perezhivanie at this time. > > > > > ________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of mike cole > > Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 3:01 PM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Cc: Mariane Hedegaard; Reijo Miettinen; Seth Chaiklin > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. > Nationalism > > Helena et al -- > > An important emphasis in the article for me was on the fact that > although the article focused on the American nationalist movement that > has just pulled of an alt-right coup, similar movements are poised to > take hold in a lot of places in Europe to join the many already > entrenched unsavory governments in other parts of the world. > > The CRADLE center in Helsinki is under very concerted attack and the > right wing government appears, from this distance, to be making great > progress on destroying its legacy. The same process has been in > Denmark for some time, also with apparent success. > > What do our international colleagues who have already felt the hot > breath of right wing nationalism have to offer in terms of strategies > of resistence? > > Back to "what is to be done," that sombre question from an earlier > era. The answer last time did not produce what it promised. > > mike > > mike > > On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 12:22 PM, Helena Worthen > > wrote: > >> Thank you, Alfredo - I gave it a read. >> >> Sure, of course they're right. But I am very disappointed. >> >> I was hoping that the following was only item #1 in a long list of >> "what the 2016 election made apparent": >> >> The 2016 election has made apparent the need for scholarship that >> explicitly defends and furthers the rights and well-being of people >> of color, immigrants, Muslims, women, people who are differently >> abled, LGBTQ communities, and the earth. These are stances that have >> been limited, at least explicitly, in the Learning Sciences. >> >> But the call for inclusion was not just #1, it seems to be the whole >> thing. In other words, it's all about identity -plus the earth, of course. >> While inclusion is necessary, it's not even a start. Yes, research, >> teaching, publishing, promotion, conferences - everything associated >> with teaching and learning has to include everyone as equals (see >> Andy's book) in one way or another - but then what? What are they (we) supposed to do? >> Where does the pretty language touch the ground? >> >> I was listening to a broadcast of the Women's March in DC on Saturday >> morning, and Kamala Harris, who was the California State Attorney >> General and is now a junior Senator from CA, was addressing the >> rally. She said, "People always ask me to talk about women's issues. >> I say, 'Oh, I'm SO glad you're interested in economics!! Let's talk >> about economics." And she ran through a whole set of parallel >> back-and-forths, always pulling identity questions back to wages, jobs, earning, supporting your family, etc etc. >> >> Much as we need to wipe away any barriers to the Learning Sciences >> (and the professions and institutions dedicated to them) due to >> identity, until the Learning Sciences start taking a look at the >> place where most people spend most of their lives - not school, I >> mean - but work, they will be engaging in a soft conversation at the >> edge of the real issue. It's a pleasant conversation but it doesn't >> put a hand on the levers that translate skill and knowledge into rent and groceries. >> >> H >> >> >> Helena Worthen >> helenaworthen@gmail.com >> Berkeley, CA 94707 >> Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com >> >> >> >>> On Jan 22, 2017, at 11:38 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >>> >> wrote: >>> Here it is, >>> >>> http://cognitionandinstruction.com/engagements-the-learning- >> sciences-in-a-new-era-of-u-s-nationalism/ >>> Alfredo >>> ________________________________________ >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>> >> on behalf of Helena Worthen >>> Sent: 22 January 2017 20:24 >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >> Nationalism >>> Someone please re-send the link to this article? I think I'm going >>> to >> want to read it and respond to Mike's question. >>> Thanks - H >>> >>> >>> Helena Worthen >>> helenaworthen@gmail.com >>> Berkeley, CA 94707 >>> Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com >>> >>> >>> >>>> On Jan 22, 2017, at 12:25 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >>>> >> wrote: >>>> Mike, >>>> >>>> thanks a lot for sharing this article. You and Michael, who have >>>> and >> know more history, have spoken in terms of reminiscences. I have >> lived and know less, and the article feels like fresh air. During my >> PhD, I begun to increasingly feel that I had to due something to act >> and respond to the increasing ecological and humanitarian globe >> crises. But how could I do anything if I had children and a PhD to >> finalise?? What could I do that would also be doing my job as >> researcher in a department of education? It was very difficult to >> find anything, partly because almost every academic quest would focus >> on learning, but so little on social development. How many scientific >> articles are dedicated to socio-political questions in the most cited educational journals? I felt very powerless. >>>> To be able to address these questions within my expertise, is a >> challenge partly because contrary to Dewey's hope, educational >> research has only marginally focused on these questions, and yet they >> may be exactly the question that matter to education. What are we >> educating for? Indeed, what is education for? I think we face a >> serious problem when someone (like myself), being an educational >> researchers/scholar, still has to scratch her head wondering <> can I make my profession matter to social change and development?>> Vygotsky would be shocked! >>>> Alfredo >>>> >>>> >>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>> >> on behalf of mike cole >>>> Sent: 19 January 2017 04:51 >>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >> Nationalism >>>> Yes Michael, >>>> >>>> It feels like the world of the later 1930's about the time I was >>>> born as that period came down to me through the prism of a family >>>> of "premature anti fascists." >>>> >>>> For a great re-creation of those times see the highly ambivalent >>>> film by Frank Capra, "meet John Doe." It has American big capital >>>> interconnected with fascism combined with populist collectivism in >>>> a manner that >> points at >>>> the media (as then experienced) as the bad guys in disguise. Happy >> Ending, >>>> Beethoven Ode to Joy and all. >>>> >>>> It's come round again, nastier this time. >>>> >>>> Mike >>>> On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 6:20 PM Glassman, Michael >>>> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Mike >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> It was so interesting to read this note after reading the >>>>> Cognition and Instruction essay. All the way through it I kept >>>>> thinking we have been here before. It reminded me of the >>>>> scholars, especially those who had escaped from Germany, trying to >>>>> make sense of what had happened to >> their >>>>> society during World War II. The foremost in my mind was Lewin. >> Except I >>>>> wonder if he would say the process of transformative action starts >>>>> not >> with >>>>> emergence of quasi-needs, but our willingness and abilities to >>>>> step >> back >>>>> from our quasi-needs and the ways that they drive us, often to >>>>> dysfunctional behaviors that it ultimately destructive to both our >> society >>>>> and to us as individuals. How hard this is to do, we have to keep >> going >>>>> back again and again. The quasi-needs, tribalism, acceptance, >> standing are >>>>> always there. It is how they shape us that is critical. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Michael >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> >>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto: >>>>> xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole >>>>> >>>>> Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 8:31 PM >>>>> >>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>> >>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >>>>> Nationalism >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> In following the perezhivanie thread I encountered the note I >> re-membered. >>>>> And interestingly mis-remembered. A translation into my focus on >>>>> mediational means. He places the starting point of the process of >>>>> transformative action at the emergence of quasi-needs (from Kurt >> Lewin). >>>>> That seems correct to me. The new mediational means emerge under >>>>> environmental presses. Ever functionalist ego need a goal(!). (The >> problem >>>>> with functionalism) In David's words, >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Perhaps the place we should look for "exaptations" that can save >>>>> both >> our >>>>> personalities and our environment is not in our evolved needs, but >>>>> in >> yet >>>>> to be designed quasi-needs. Artificial organs, after all, always >> suggest >>>>> new and ever more artificial functions, like chess and language. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> This point seems worth keeping in mind as we look at where this >>>>> group >> of >>>>> critical scholars who work within the Learning Sciences >>>>> disciplinary framework would like to lead us. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> mike >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>> >> > From Peg.Griffin@att.net Tue Jan 24 10:07:03 2017 From: Peg.Griffin@att.net (Peg Griffin) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2017 13:07:03 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism In-Reply-To: <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C77497@CIO-TNC-D1MBX11.osuad.osu.edu> References: <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C71964@CIO-KRC-D1MBX04.osuad.osu.edu> <1485073527094.7145@iped.uio.no> <5E5B95EA-374F-48EB-B308-BCE49DA52760@gmail.com> <1485113892233.91870@iped.uio.no> , <2c9faf42-cb69-9860-4b9f-ea0f6f0ca307@mira.net>, <1485241112188.8167@iped.uio.no> <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C77497@CIO-TNC-D1MBX11.osuad.osu.edu> Message-ID: <006f01d2766c$ab397260$01ac5720$@att.net> Thanks, Michael. I was looking for a page number and instead found a web address that others might also want: http://www.oikos.org/mind&nature.htm -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Glassman, Michael Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2017 12:40 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism So I am re-reading Bateson, somewhat in light of current happenings and I come across this paragraph near the beginning of Mind and Nature, "There seems to be something like a Gresham's law of cultural evolution according to which the oversimplified will always displace the sophisticated and the vulgar and hateful will always displace the beautiful. And yet the beautiful persists." Wise words for his time and ours. The information in nature will always bring us back around to the beautiful if we let it, but it always seems to slip through our fingers. Maybe another take on the arc of justice. The trouble of course is every time we let the vulgar and hateful displace the stakes seem to become much higher. Michael -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Alfredo Jornet Gil Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2017 1:59 AM To: ablunden@mira.net; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism Francine, I agree analysis is only one tool and I hope we can do much more here and elsewhere. But the overtone window seems to resonate well with our quest for understanding the possibilities/conditions for hearing Trump's voice sound like a pleasant flute or like toilette flush. I think the idea of Irony also adds to the question of perezhivanie and Trump in the sense that different perezhivanie will also imply different forms of generalisation/consciousness. Irony seems to always involve moving a step up in the types of generalisation or metaphor. A good example may be found in considering the "Love Trumps Hate" message that has been going around in the media. Although I am no linguist, I am gonna give it a try: If you were to hear the assertion literally, you may hear an imperative to do love Trump's hate in such a way as to enter into a double bind situation. To find yourself in this situation, you need to stick to the transitive form of the subject (you love) with respect to the object (Trump hate). You kind of have to have faith in this form, respect the integrity of the object and the integrity of the subject each in its own terms, and so you may come to feel confused, or perhaps end up hating just the same way Trump plays he hates. On the other hand, to be able to hear "love trumps hate" as a message of love, as an equivalent (as per Vygotsky's equivalence) for another message that we also have seen these days, "when they go low we go high," then you have to take the relation between subject and object in a higher level of metaphor: you now hear the sentence in a context that modifies both subject and object; hate and love cannot be exclusive opposites. The sentence then is heard as intransitive, love and hate no longer are independent. And most importantly, once you hear the sentence in its intransitive form, love and hate no longer are the same. Similarly, to hear everything Trump said and take it literally takes a very different act of faith that it takes hearing it literally as an irony. Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Larry Smolucha Sent: 24 January 2017 02:35 To: ablunden@mira.net; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism Message from Francine: Helena Worthen was right - I am serious about finding (and creating) new tools for understanding the Trump movement. Analysis is only one tool and there is no insight when it is overused. Figurative, analogical, metaphorical thinking gives us other tools. Recognizing IRONY means getting the punch line in a joke (as Freud explained in Jokes and Their Relation to the Unconscious). Is there a termteson in literature for the reversal that commonly occurs in fairy tales? All that is gold does not glitter, not all those who wander are lost . . . 1) The ironic reversals that are taking place as people change their alignment with political parties remind me of a geophysics phenomena - the reversal of the earth's magnetic field that can happen over hundreds of thousands of years. Both are disorienting. I will give this more thought, but for the moment consider this much. When magnetic fields shift it is not all at once, magnetic currents in the molten layers beneath the earth's solid crust change polarities, sometimes causing a total reversal. Our political parties are commonly referred to as polar opposites but those polarities are not fixed they are fluid. The blue collar working class can shift from the Democratic Party to the Republican. The Black vote can shift to the Republicans, the Democrats don't own it. In the 1950's Russian sympathies were a hallmark of the left, now the left denounces Trumps outreach to the Russians. [A caveat here - this is two dimensional thinking because there are only two poles on one geometric plane.] 2) There is another concept, the Overton Window that is a scale of how radical of a discourse the public will tolerate (also called the window of discourse). The Window opens and closes along a range of discourse from the acceptable to the unthinkable. What discourse resonates with the general public (strikes a chord)? What will they regard as taboo (or not politically correct)? Issues like that. Here are a couple links worth looking at: Donald Trump & The Overton Window --Resetting America's Political www.nationalreview.com/.../donald-trump-overton-window-american-p.. Trump's Win Smashed the 'Overton Window' | LifeZette www.lifezette.com/polizette/trumps-win-smashed-overton-window/ Can any of this be used with the concept of perezhivanie? ________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Andy Blunden Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 9:37 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism "Irony" - good word to introduce here Francine. ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy Andy Blunden's Home Page home.mira.net Andy Blunden's Home Page with links to pages I maintain and mail-to buttons http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making [http://www.brill.com/sites/default/files/styles/large/public/ftp/images/pro ducts/295x295/92947.jpg?itok=j5KXqZw3] The Origins of Collective Decision Making | Brill www.brill.com The Origins of Collective Decision Making, identifies three paradigms of collective decision making - Counsel, Majority and Consensus, and discovers their origins ... On 23/01/2017 2:32 PM, Larry Smolucha wrote: > Message from Francine Smolucha: > > > The key to an analysis of the Trump movement is understanding the > > fundamental IRONIES that have rocked American politics. > > > The workers revolution has resulted in the > > workers/unions deserting the Left, the socialists, the Democratic Party. > > Trump is a Capitalist regardless of whether he actually has a Republican ideology. > > The workers' movement has been hijacked by a capitalist. > > > The other great IRONY is that Trump wants to make Russia a U.S. ally (again). > > The Left, the socialists, the Democratic Party are the ones demonizing > Russia - > > what a reversal! > > > Since CHAT derives from Russian psychology (Leontiev and Vygotsky) and the backlash against Trump is also a backlash against all things Russian - this puts CHAT in a particularly awkward position. How can a cultural historical psychology that originated in Russia become the leader in the anti-Trump discourse? or lead an anti-Trump educational movement? You are even extolling a Russian concept PEREZHIVANIE. > > > I think the XMCA needs to examine its own perezhivanie at this time. > > > > > ________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of mike cole > > Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 3:01 PM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Cc: Mariane Hedegaard; Reijo Miettinen; Seth Chaiklin > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. > Nationalism > > Helena et al -- > > An important emphasis in the article for me was on the fact that > although the article focused on the American nationalist movement that > has just pulled of an alt-right coup, similar movements are poised to > take hold in a lot of places in Europe to join the many already > entrenched unsavory governments in other parts of the world. > > The CRADLE center in Helsinki is under very concerted attack and the > right wing government appears, from this distance, to be making great > progress on destroying its legacy. The same process has been in > Denmark for some time, also with apparent success. > > What do our international colleagues who have already felt the hot > breath of right wing nationalism have to offer in terms of strategies > of resistence? > > Back to "what is to be done," that sombre question from an earlier > era. The answer last time did not produce what it promised. > > mike > > mike > > On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 12:22 PM, Helena Worthen > > wrote: > >> Thank you, Alfredo - I gave it a read. >> >> Sure, of course they're right. But I am very disappointed. >> >> I was hoping that the following was only item #1 in a long list of >> "what the 2016 election made apparent": >> >> The 2016 election has made apparent the need for scholarship that >> explicitly defends and furthers the rights and well-being of people >> of color, immigrants, Muslims, women, people who are differently >> abled, LGBTQ communities, and the earth. These are stances that have >> been limited, at least explicitly, in the Learning Sciences. >> >> But the call for inclusion was not just #1, it seems to be the whole >> thing. In other words, it's all about identity -plus the earth, of course. >> While inclusion is necessary, it's not even a start. Yes, research, >> teaching, publishing, promotion, conferences - everything associated >> with teaching and learning has to include everyone as equals (see >> Andy's book) in one way or another - but then what? What are they (we) supposed to do? >> Where does the pretty language touch the ground? >> >> I was listening to a broadcast of the Women's March in DC on Saturday >> morning, and Kamala Harris, who was the California State Attorney >> General and is now a junior Senator from CA, was addressing the >> rally. She said, "People always ask me to talk about women's issues. >> I say, 'Oh, I'm SO glad you're interested in economics!! Let's talk >> about economics." And she ran through a whole set of parallel >> back-and-forths, always pulling identity questions back to wages, jobs, earning, supporting your family, etc etc. >> >> Much as we need to wipe away any barriers to the Learning Sciences >> (and the professions and institutions dedicated to them) due to >> identity, until the Learning Sciences start taking a look at the >> place where most people spend most of their lives - not school, I >> mean - but work, they will be engaging in a soft conversation at the >> edge of the real issue. It's a pleasant conversation but it doesn't >> put a hand on the levers that translate skill and knowledge into rent and groceries. >> >> H >> >> >> Helena Worthen >> helenaworthen@gmail.com >> Berkeley, CA 94707 >> Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com >> >> >> >>> On Jan 22, 2017, at 11:38 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >>> >> wrote: >>> Here it is, >>> >>> http://cognitionandinstruction.com/engagements-the-learning- >> sciences-in-a-new-era-of-u-s-nationalism/ >>> Alfredo >>> ________________________________________ >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>> >> on behalf of Helena Worthen >>> Sent: 22 January 2017 20:24 >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >> Nationalism >>> Someone please re-send the link to this article? I think I'm going >>> to >> want to read it and respond to Mike's question. >>> Thanks - H >>> >>> >>> Helena Worthen >>> helenaworthen@gmail.com >>> Berkeley, CA 94707 >>> Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com >>> >>> >>> >>>> On Jan 22, 2017, at 12:25 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >>>> >> wrote: >>>> Mike, >>>> >>>> thanks a lot for sharing this article. You and Michael, who have >>>> and >> know more history, have spoken in terms of reminiscences. I have >> lived and know less, and the article feels like fresh air. During my >> PhD, I begun to increasingly feel that I had to due something to act >> and respond to the increasing ecological and humanitarian globe >> crises. But how could I do anything if I had children and a PhD to >> finalise?? What could I do that would also be doing my job as >> researcher in a department of education? It was very difficult to >> find anything, partly because almost every academic quest would focus >> on learning, but so little on social development. How many scientific >> articles are dedicated to socio-political questions in the most cited educational journals? I felt very powerless. >>>> To be able to address these questions within my expertise, is a >> challenge partly because contrary to Dewey's hope, educational >> research has only marginally focused on these questions, and yet they >> may be exactly the question that matter to education. What are we >> educating for? Indeed, what is education for? I think we face a >> serious problem when someone (like myself), being an educational >> researchers/scholar, still has to scratch her head wondering <> can I make my profession matter to social change and development?>> Vygotsky would be shocked! >>>> Alfredo >>>> >>>> >>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>> >> on behalf of mike cole >>>> Sent: 19 January 2017 04:51 >>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >> Nationalism >>>> Yes Michael, >>>> >>>> It feels like the world of the later 1930's about the time I was >>>> born as that period came down to me through the prism of a family >>>> of "premature anti fascists." >>>> >>>> For a great re-creation of those times see the highly ambivalent >>>> film by Frank Capra, "meet John Doe." It has American big capital >>>> interconnected with fascism combined with populist collectivism in >>>> a manner that >> points at >>>> the media (as then experienced) as the bad guys in disguise. Happy >> Ending, >>>> Beethoven Ode to Joy and all. >>>> >>>> It's come round again, nastier this time. >>>> >>>> Mike >>>> On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 6:20 PM Glassman, Michael >>>> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Mike >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> It was so interesting to read this note after reading the >>>>> Cognition and Instruction essay. All the way through it I kept >>>>> thinking we have been here before. It reminded me of the >>>>> scholars, especially those who had escaped from Germany, trying to >>>>> make sense of what had happened to >> their >>>>> society during World War II. The foremost in my mind was Lewin. >> Except I >>>>> wonder if he would say the process of transformative action starts >>>>> not >> with >>>>> emergence of quasi-needs, but our willingness and abilities to >>>>> step >> back >>>>> from our quasi-needs and the ways that they drive us, often to >>>>> dysfunctional behaviors that it ultimately destructive to both our >> society >>>>> and to us as individuals. How hard this is to do, we have to keep >> going >>>>> back again and again. The quasi-needs, tribalism, acceptance, >> standing are >>>>> always there. It is how they shape us that is critical. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Michael >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> >>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto: >>>>> xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole >>>>> >>>>> Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 8:31 PM >>>>> >>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>> >>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >>>>> Nationalism >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> In following the perezhivanie thread I encountered the note I >> re-membered. >>>>> And interestingly mis-remembered. A translation into my focus on >>>>> mediational means. He places the starting point of the process of >>>>> transformative action at the emergence of quasi-needs (from Kurt >> Lewin). >>>>> That seems correct to me. The new mediational means emerge under >>>>> environmental presses. Ever functionalist ego need a goal(!). (The >> problem >>>>> with functionalism) In David's words, >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Perhaps the place we should look for "exaptations" that can save >>>>> both >> our >>>>> personalities and our environment is not in our evolved needs, but >>>>> in >> yet >>>>> to be designed quasi-needs. Artificial organs, after all, always >> suggest >>>>> new and ever more artificial functions, like chess and language. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> This point seems worth keeping in mind as we look at where this >>>>> group >> of >>>>> critical scholars who work within the Learning Sciences >>>>> disciplinary framework would like to lead us. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> mike >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>> >> > From mcole@ucsd.edu Tue Jan 24 10:18:30 2017 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2017 10:18:30 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism In-Reply-To: <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C77497@CIO-TNC-D1MBX11.osuad.osu.edu> References: <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C71964@CIO-KRC-D1MBX04.osuad.osu.edu> <1485073527094.7145@iped.uio.no> <5E5B95EA-374F-48EB-B308-BCE49DA52760@gmail.com> <1485113892233.91870@iped.uio.no> <2c9faf42-cb69-9860-4b9f-ea0f6f0ca307@mira.net> <1485241112188.8167@iped.uio.no> <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C77497@CIO-TNC-D1MBX11.osuad.osu.edu> Message-ID: Hi Michael Nice thought from Bateson. And I see that Peg has just posted a link to the book. Its certainly a keeper. But it does not speak to forms of action that people in our current circumstances. Some of my colleagues argue that it is essential for academics in these times to eschew politics in any visible form and to focus energy on the academic work precisely in order combat over simplification that threatens human life. The basic starting point of the LS/US Nationalism paper, as I see it, is that claim that the threat of nationalist/populism is GLOBAL and that it poses huge challenges to LS researchers. So we might not want to get too caught up in examining Trump/US version of this problem without considering the rest of the world and its history. The 20th Century provided at least two clear examples of what happens when this configuration of nationalism/populism arises in modern times - two wars to end all wars. If we are in fact returning to the 1930's in this regard, we are doing so in an unparalleled set of circumstances for homo sapiens. So as professionals/citizens, are there forms of action, lines of research, that might be proposed that would nurture the beautiful in circumstances that do not involve high levels of radiation and mass destruction? Is tending to our intellectual gardens the direction to go? Or are forms of action of the sort proposed by the authors the right direction? And if the latter, what do we know from past experience that might guide our thinking? They set out to open the discussion in a major journal. Seems like the task here is to see what this group might possibly add to their attempts to strategize the future based on our collective experience. Mike PS- Seems like Alfredo's perezhivanie project, as an exercise in international collaboration to both test a basic theoretical claim of Vygotsky's and to so collectively, might combine the academic and the political just a little. And just a little might be a lot. On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 9:40 AM, Glassman, Michael wrote: > So I am re-reading Bateson, somewhat in light of current happenings and I > come across this paragraph near the beginning of Mind and Nature, > > "There seems to be something like a Gresham's law of cultural evolution > according to which the oversimplified will always displace the > sophisticated and the vulgar and hateful will always displace the > beautiful. And yet the beautiful persists." > > Wise words for his time and ours. The information in nature will always > bring us back around to the beautiful if we let it, but it always seems to > slip through our fingers. Maybe another take on the arc of justice. The > trouble of course is every time we let the vulgar and hateful displace the > stakes seem to become much higher. > > Michael > > -----Original Message----- > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ > mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Alfredo Jornet Gil > Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2017 1:59 AM > To: ablunden@mira.net; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity < > xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism > > Francine, > > I agree analysis is only one tool and I hope we can do much more here and > elsewhere. But the overtone window seems to resonate well with our quest > for understanding the possibilities/conditions for hearing Trump's voice > sound like a pleasant flute or like toilette flush. > > I think the idea of Irony also adds to the question of perezhivanie and > Trump in the sense that different perezhivanie will also imply different > forms of generalisation/consciousness. Irony seems to always involve moving > a step up in the types of generalisation or metaphor. > > A good example may be found in considering the "Love Trumps Hate" message > that has been going around in the media. Although I am no linguist, I am > gonna give it a try: If you were to hear the assertion literally, you may > hear an imperative to do love Trump's hate in such a way as to enter into a > double bind situation. To find yourself in this situation, you need to > stick to the transitive form of the subject (you love) with respect to the > object (Trump hate). You kind of have to have faith in this form, respect > the integrity of the object and the integrity of the subject each in its > own terms, and so you may come to feel confused, or perhaps end up hating > just the same way Trump plays he hates. > > On the other hand, to be able to hear "love trumps hate" as a message of > love, as an equivalent (as per Vygotsky's equivalence) for another message > that we also have seen these days, "when they go low we go high," then you > have to take the relation between subject and object in a higher level of > metaphor: you now hear the sentence in a context that modifies both subject > and object; hate and love cannot be exclusive opposites. The sentence then > is heard as intransitive, love and hate no longer are independent. And most > importantly, once you hear the sentence in its intransitive form, love and > hate no longer are the same. > > Similarly, to hear everything Trump said and take it literally takes a > very different act of faith that it takes hearing it literally as an irony. > Alfredo > > > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of Larry Smolucha > Sent: 24 January 2017 02:35 > To: ablunden@mira.net; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism > > Message from Francine: > > > Helena Worthen was right - I am serious about finding (and creating) new > tools for understanding the Trump movement. Analysis is only one tool and > there is no insight when it is overused. Figurative, analogical, > metaphorical thinking gives us other tools. Recognizing IRONY means getting > the punch line in a joke (as Freud > > explained in Jokes and Their Relation to the Unconscious). > > > Is there a termteson in literature for the reversal that commonly occurs > in fairy tales? > > All that is gold does not glitter, not all those who wander are lost . . . > > > 1) The ironic reversals that are taking place as people change their > alignment with > > political parties remind me of a geophysics phenomena - the reversal of > the earth's magnetic field that can happen over hundreds of thousands of > years. Both are disorienting. I will give this more thought, but for the > moment consider this much. When magnetic fields shift it is not all at > once, magnetic currents in the molten layers beneath the earth's solid > crust change polarities, sometimes causing a total > > reversal. Our political parties are commonly referred to as polar > opposites but those > > polarities are not fixed they are fluid. The blue collar working class can > shift from the Democratic Party to the Republican. The Black vote can shift > to the Republicans, the Democrats don't own it. In the 1950's Russian > sympathies were a hallmark of the left, now the left denounces Trumps > outreach to the Russians. [A caveat here - this is two dimensional thinking > because there are only two poles on one geometric plane.] > > > 2) There is another concept, the Overton Window that is a scale of how > radical of a discourse the public will tolerate (also called the window of > discourse). The Window > > opens and closes along a range of discourse from the acceptable to the > unthinkable. What discourse resonates with the general public (strikes a > chord)? What will they regard as taboo (or not politically correct)? Issues > like that. > > > Here are a couple links worth looking at: > > > Donald Trump & The Overton Window --Resetting America's Political < > http://www.nationalreview.com/article/428200/donald- > trump-overton-window-american-political-debate> > www.nationalreview.com/.../donald-trump-overton-window-american-p< > http://www.nationalreview.com/.../donald-trump-overton-window-american-p > >.. > > > > Trump's Win Smashed the 'Overton Window' | LifeZette lifezette.com/polizette/trumps-win-smashed-overton-window/> > www.lifezette.com/polizette/trumps-win-smashed-overton-window/ > > > > Can any of this be used with the concept of perezhivanie? > > ________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of Andy Blunden > Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 9:37 PM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism > > "Irony" - good word to introduce here Francine. > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Andy Blunden > http://home.mira.net/~andy > Andy Blunden's Home Page home.mira.net Andy > Blunden's Home Page with links to pages I maintain and mail-to buttons > > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > [http://www.brill.com/sites/default/files/styles/large/ > public/ftp/images/products/295x295/92947.jpg?itok=j5KXqZw3]< > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making> > > The Origins of Collective Decision Making | Brill products/book/origins-collective-decision-making> > www.brill.com > The Origins of Collective Decision Making, identifies three paradigms of > collective decision making - Counsel, Majority and Consensus, and discovers > their origins ... > > > > On 23/01/2017 2:32 PM, Larry Smolucha wrote: > > Message from Francine Smolucha: > > > > > > The key to an analysis of the Trump movement is understanding the > > > > fundamental IRONIES that have rocked American politics. > > > > > > The workers revolution has resulted in the > > > > workers/unions deserting the Left, the socialists, the Democratic Party. > > > > Trump is a Capitalist regardless of whether he actually has a Republican > ideology. > > > > The workers' movement has been hijacked by a capitalist. > > > > > > The other great IRONY is that Trump wants to make Russia a U.S. ally > (again). > > > > The Left, the socialists, the Democratic Party are the ones demonizing > > Russia - > > > > what a reversal! > > > > > > Since CHAT derives from Russian psychology (Leontiev and Vygotsky) and > the backlash against Trump is also a backlash against all things Russian - > this puts CHAT in a particularly awkward position. How can a cultural > historical psychology that originated in Russia become the leader in the > anti-Trump discourse? or lead an anti-Trump educational movement? You are > even extolling a Russian concept PEREZHIVANIE. > > > > > > I think the XMCA needs to examine its own perezhivanie at this time. > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > on behalf of mike cole > > > > Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 3:01 PM > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Cc: Mariane Hedegaard; Reijo Miettinen; Seth Chaiklin > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. > > Nationalism > > > > Helena et al -- > > > > An important emphasis in the article for me was on the fact that > > although the article focused on the American nationalist movement that > > has just pulled of an alt-right coup, similar movements are poised to > > take hold in a lot of places in Europe to join the many already > > entrenched unsavory governments in other parts of the world. > > > > The CRADLE center in Helsinki is under very concerted attack and the > > right wing government appears, from this distance, to be making great > > progress on destroying its legacy. The same process has been in > > Denmark for some time, also with apparent success. > > > > What do our international colleagues who have already felt the hot > > breath of right wing nationalism have to offer in terms of strategies > > of resistence? > > > > Back to "what is to be done," that sombre question from an earlier > > era. The answer last time did not produce what it promised. > > > > mike > > > > mike > > > > On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 12:22 PM, Helena Worthen > > > > wrote: > > > >> Thank you, Alfredo - I gave it a read. > >> > >> Sure, of course they're right. But I am very disappointed. > >> > >> I was hoping that the following was only item #1 in a long list of > >> "what the 2016 election made apparent": > >> > >> The 2016 election has made apparent the need for scholarship that > >> explicitly defends and furthers the rights and well-being of people > >> of color, immigrants, Muslims, women, people who are differently > >> abled, LGBTQ communities, and the earth. These are stances that have > >> been limited, at least explicitly, in the Learning Sciences. > >> > >> But the call for inclusion was not just #1, it seems to be the whole > >> thing. In other words, it's all about identity -plus the earth, of > course. > >> While inclusion is necessary, it's not even a start. Yes, research, > >> teaching, publishing, promotion, conferences - everything associated > >> with teaching and learning has to include everyone as equals (see > >> Andy's book) in one way or another - but then what? What are they (we) > supposed to do? > >> Where does the pretty language touch the ground? > >> > >> I was listening to a broadcast of the Women's March in DC on Saturday > >> morning, and Kamala Harris, who was the California State Attorney > >> General and is now a junior Senator from CA, was addressing the > >> rally. She said, "People always ask me to talk about women's issues. > >> I say, 'Oh, I'm SO glad you're interested in economics!! Let's talk > >> about economics." And she ran through a whole set of parallel > >> back-and-forths, always pulling identity questions back to wages, jobs, > earning, supporting your family, etc etc. > >> > >> Much as we need to wipe away any barriers to the Learning Sciences > >> (and the professions and institutions dedicated to them) due to > >> identity, until the Learning Sciences start taking a look at the > >> place where most people spend most of their lives - not school, I > >> mean - but work, they will be engaging in a soft conversation at the > >> edge of the real issue. It's a pleasant conversation but it doesn't > >> put a hand on the levers that translate skill and knowledge into rent > and groceries. > >> > >> H > >> > >> > >> Helena Worthen > >> helenaworthen@gmail.com > >> Berkeley, CA 94707 > >> Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com > >> > >> > >> > >>> On Jan 22, 2017, at 11:38 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > >>> > >> wrote: > >>> Here it is, > >>> > >>> http://cognitionandinstruction.com/engagements-the-learning- > >> sciences-in-a-new-era-of-u-s-nationalism/ > >>> Alfredo > >>> ________________________________________ > >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > >>> > >> on behalf of Helena Worthen > >>> Sent: 22 January 2017 20:24 > >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. > >> Nationalism > >>> Someone please re-send the link to this article? I think I'm going > >>> to > >> want to read it and respond to Mike's question. > >>> Thanks - H > >>> > >>> > >>> Helena Worthen > >>> helenaworthen@gmail.com > >>> Berkeley, CA 94707 > >>> Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>> On Jan 22, 2017, at 12:25 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > >>>> > >> wrote: > >>>> Mike, > >>>> > >>>> thanks a lot for sharing this article. You and Michael, who have > >>>> and > >> know more history, have spoken in terms of reminiscences. I have > >> lived and know less, and the article feels like fresh air. During my > >> PhD, I begun to increasingly feel that I had to due something to act > >> and respond to the increasing ecological and humanitarian globe > >> crises. But how could I do anything if I had children and a PhD to > >> finalise?? What could I do that would also be doing my job as > >> researcher in a department of education? It was very difficult to > >> find anything, partly because almost every academic quest would focus > >> on learning, but so little on social development. How many scientific > >> articles are dedicated to socio-political questions in the most cited > educational journals? I felt very powerless. > >>>> To be able to address these questions within my expertise, is a > >> challenge partly because contrary to Dewey's hope, educational > >> research has only marginally focused on these questions, and yet they > >> may be exactly the question that matter to education. What are we > >> educating for? Indeed, what is education for? I think we face a > >> serious problem when someone (like myself), being an educational > >> researchers/scholar, still has to scratch her head wondering < >> can I make my profession matter to social change and development?>> > Vygotsky would be shocked! > >>>> Alfredo > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > >>>> > >> on behalf of mike cole > >>>> Sent: 19 January 2017 04:51 > >>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. > >> Nationalism > >>>> Yes Michael, > >>>> > >>>> It feels like the world of the later 1930's about the time I was > >>>> born as that period came down to me through the prism of a family > >>>> of "premature anti fascists." > >>>> > >>>> For a great re-creation of those times see the highly ambivalent > >>>> film by Frank Capra, "meet John Doe." It has American big capital > >>>> interconnected with fascism combined with populist collectivism in > >>>> a manner that > >> points at > >>>> the media (as then experienced) as the bad guys in disguise. Happy > >> Ending, > >>>> Beethoven Ode to Joy and all. > >>>> > >>>> It's come round again, nastier this time. > >>>> > >>>> Mike > >>>> On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 6:20 PM Glassman, Michael > >>>> > >>>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> Mike > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> It was so interesting to read this note after reading the > >>>>> Cognition and Instruction essay. All the way through it I kept > >>>>> thinking we have been here before. It reminded me of the > >>>>> scholars, especially those who had escaped from Germany, trying to > >>>>> make sense of what had happened to > >> their > >>>>> society during World War II. The foremost in my mind was Lewin. > >> Except I > >>>>> wonder if he would say the process of transformative action starts > >>>>> not > >> with > >>>>> emergence of quasi-needs, but our willingness and abilities to > >>>>> step > >> back > >>>>> from our quasi-needs and the ways that they drive us, often to > >>>>> dysfunctional behaviors that it ultimately destructive to both our > >> society > >>>>> and to us as individuals. How hard this is to do, we have to keep > >> going > >>>>> back again and again. The quasi-needs, tribalism, acceptance, > >> standing are > >>>>> always there. It is how they shape us that is critical. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Michael > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>>> > >>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto: > >>>>> xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole > >>>>> > >>>>> Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 8:31 PM > >>>>> > >>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > >>>>> > >>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. > >>>>> Nationalism > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> In following the perezhivanie thread I encountered the note I > >> re-membered. > >>>>> And interestingly mis-remembered. A translation into my focus on > >>>>> mediational means. He places the starting point of the process of > >>>>> transformative action at the emergence of quasi-needs (from Kurt > >> Lewin). > >>>>> That seems correct to me. The new mediational means emerge under > >>>>> environmental presses. Ever functionalist ego need a goal(!). (The > >> problem > >>>>> with functionalism) In David's words, > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Perhaps the place we should look for "exaptations" that can save > >>>>> both > >> our > >>>>> personalities and our environment is not in our evolved needs, but > >>>>> in > >> yet > >>>>> to be designed quasi-needs. Artificial organs, after all, always > >> suggest > >>>>> new and ever more artificial functions, like chess and language. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> This point seems worth keeping in mind as we look at where this > >>>>> group > >> of > >>>>> critical scholars who work within the Learning Sciences > >>>>> disciplinary framework would like to lead us. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> mike > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>> > >> > > > > > From julian.williams@manchester.ac.uk Tue Jan 24 10:38:16 2017 From: julian.williams@manchester.ac.uk (Julian Williams) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2017 18:38:16 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism In-Reply-To: <8004DEFF-7DEE-4D14-8B25-721A97DE1384@gmail.com> References: <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C71964@CIO-KRC-D1MBX04.osuad.osu.edu> <1485073527094.7145@iped.uio.no> <5E5B95EA-374F-48EB-B308-BCE49DA52760@gmail.com> <1485113892233.91870@iped.uio.no> <7BD412C4-D775-4D3A-9992-68ACACFB188C@gmail.com> <8004DEFF-7DEE-4D14-8B25-721A97DE1384@gmail.com> Message-ID: Helena, yes that was it 'Pride'! The second part of the question you posed: I lazily used 'transposition' and its not Bourdieu's word: he argues that every cultural field has a power structure that is to a large degree homologous to THE FIELD OF POWER whose basis is largely that of economic capital, albeit that there is some 'autonomous' structure of cultural capital in the field that implies there is 'work' to be done in transforming economic capital into cultural capital and vice versa (you can't simply 'buy' the papacy or the presidential palace, but money plus other capitals might do the trick). I wrote about this a bit in a recent MCA paper (Choudry & Williams 2016?). In this view then the academic field(s) of power might be revealed as being a 'transposed' (if you forgive my short-hand for Bourdieu's perspective) version of that of the Field of Power at large, which is in turn transposed into the gender politics field that the women marchers/LGBT activists are engaged in. The right kind of social analysis is supposed to help the gay pride marchers to recognise that they are on the same side as the striking miners; failures to get this right and make this visible is the main reason why Trump and Co can win, and why Trumps may be even a necessary risk for the ruling class to break up the resistance to their domination in tough times (i.e. The Davos crowd would rather do it the Clintons' way, but in hard times fascism may be needed to culturally dispossess the already dispossessed so they can be crushed). Now I go to the first part of your question: I like the way you put it here - and it points to a weakness in Bourdieu's reflexive sociology (he sees it as the job of the sociologist-activist to raise consciousness; while Id say with Freire that it is all our jobs). It is true that even though I should be expected (as a well-paid and comfortably middle-classed professional) to side with conservatism, I find myself culturally disposed to side with the oppressed, e.g. supporting Momentum and the Labour left. The oppressed can have many allies on this basis as well as those who actually are economically and politically crushed. But then I am torn: there are many things that I 'have to do' to maintain a position of power in the academic field that are downright exploitative and oppressive. So in my academic work I may (at least sometimes) be part of the problem rather than the solution. I think what the Cognition & Instruction authors were suggesting was that the Learning sciences could be more 'part of the solution' if they develop a progressive perspective/agenda for their LS research? e.g. Critiquing the 'what works' type of domination of the field. Im OK with that. Hope this makes some sense and I didn't 'lose the momentum' of the thread. julian On 24/01/2017 04:29, "xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Helena Worthen" wrote: >Julian, the movie you?re thinking of is Pride. > >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pride_(2014_film) > >Are you suggesting stepping from looking at and studying identity groups >to ?coming out? as being a member of one, and then in full feather of >one?s identity, relating to the stranger across the aisle? > >But could you please explain what this means: ??..whose cultural capital >in his analysis is a transposition of the dominant economic, capitalist >class.? What does ?transposition? mean here? > >Thanks ? > > >Helena Worthen >helenaworthen@gmail.com >Berkeley, CA 94707 >Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com > > > >> On Jan 23, 2017, at 10:49 AM, Julian Williams >> wrote: >> >> Dear Helena and all >> >> The victories of the right in the US and Europe surely cannot be >>explained >> only by cultural identity issues, and not only by the disaffection of >>the >> workers with their traditional (-ly hopeless social democratic) parties, >> though these are important elements of the situation that are making the >> far right a possible option for capital. >> >> Surely we have to look at the global failure of capitalism: the reasons >> are essentially economic. Our rulers seem ever more desperate to manage >>a >> rate of profit that will satisfy capital and it seems a small portion of >> them are prepared to back the far right as an option on the political >> field if necessary. Not yet a significant minority of the Davos class, >> because they still need to be convinced that the traditional order >>cannot >> be made to work, but the Murdoch's and the UKIP/ Tory petit bourgeois >> backbone are nearly there already: Trump himself is pretty much there, >>as >> is Le Pen et al, .. >> >> Within this context, and more if/when another 2008 crash hits, the >>fascist >> strategy will grow more attractive as the rightist parties attract more >> disaffected workers, non-workers and petit bourgeois. All the >> cultural-ideological elements of fascism and nationalism are there in >>the >> Uk and France/Netherlands etc just as bad as in Trumpland. (Hey Trump >> didn't even get the majority vote - on any democratic conception he has >>no >> right to have been declared a winner?. Unless we can declare 'Remain' a >> victory because its 48% vote is represented in our parliament by a >> majority of the representatives?) >> >> What can 'we' do? Only to keep trying to clarify it, keep telling it as >>it >> is and might be. What part a conceptualisation of perezhivanie has in >>this >> I don't know - but it might be worth re-reading 'The struggle against >> fascism in Germany' again (not being ironic). The lesson then/there was >>to >> block with Social Democracy and labour unions/parties while explaining >>its >> failures, helping their support to move left as well as showing there is >> an alternative to the alternative (here we have Corbyn and momentum; the >> US have Bernie and ?). >> >> But maybe this strategy is not enough? What else? I think there are >> important interventions also in the cultural fields and so identity is >>an >> issue for capital. I wrote a bit about this from Bourdieu's perspective? >> what progressives in every field have in common is that they resist the >> dominant powers in their cultural field - whose cultural capital in his >> analysis is a transposition of the dominant economic, capitalist class. >> That?s what LGBT, underprivileged groups, national/ethnic minorities, >>etc >> everywhere have in common, if we can be helped to see it? like that film >> of the gay rights activists from London who marched to South Wales to >> support the miners strike? and the miners who in returned joined a gay >> rights march in London? what was that called? >> >> Julian. >> >> >> >> On 23/01/2017 17:55, "xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of >>Helena >> Worthen" > helenaworthen@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Well, yes. Good question: How? I take it Francine is not asking this >>> ironically: she really wants us to figure out how. >>> >>> The challenge is to answer the question. >>> >>> I don?t think any of us have a quick answer, but it certainly is a >>> question that is within our collective knowledge to address. >>> >>> H >>> >>> Helena Worthen >>> helenaworthen@gmail.com >>> Berkeley, CA 94707 >>> Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com >>> >>> >>> >>>> On Jan 22, 2017, at 7:32 PM, Larry Smolucha >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Message from Francine Smolucha: >>>> >>>> >>>> The key to an analysis of the Trump movement is understanding the >>>> >>>> fundamental IRONIES that have rocked American politics. >>>> >>>> >>>> The workers revolution has resulted in the >>>> >>>> workers/unions deserting the Left, the socialists, the Democratic >>>>Party. >>>> >>>> Trump is a Capitalist regardless of whether he actually has a >>>> Republican ideology. >>>> >>>> The workers' movement has been hijacked by a capitalist. >>>> >>>> >>>> The other great IRONY is that Trump wants to make Russia a U.S. ally >>>> (again). >>>> >>>> The Left, the socialists, the Democratic Party are the ones demonizing >>>> Russia - >>>> >>>> what a reversal! >>>> >>>> >>>> Since CHAT derives from Russian psychology (Leontiev and Vygotsky) and >>>> the backlash against Trump is also a backlash against all things >>>>Russian >>>> - this puts CHAT in a particularly awkward position. How can a >>>>cultural >>>> historical psychology that originated in Russia become the leader in >>>>the >>>> anti-Trump discourse? or lead an anti-Trump educational movement? You >>>> are even extolling a Russian concept PEREZHIVANIE. >>>> >>>> >>>> I think the XMCA needs to examine its own perezhivanie at this time. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ________________________________ >>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>> >>>> on behalf of mike cole >>>> Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 3:01 PM >>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>> Cc: Mariane Hedegaard; Reijo Miettinen; Seth Chaiklin >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >>>> Nationalism >>>> >>>> Helena et al -- >>>> >>>> An important emphasis in the article for me was on the fact that >>>> although >>>> the article focused on the American nationalist movement that has just >>>> pulled of an alt-right coup, similar movements are poised to take hold >>>> in a >>>> lot of places in Europe to join the many already entrenched unsavory >>>> governments in other parts of the world. >>>> >>>> The CRADLE center in Helsinki is under very concerted attack and the >>>> right >>>> wing government appears, from this distance, to be making great >>>> progress on >>>> destroying its legacy. The same process has been in Denmark for some >>>> time, >>>> also with apparent success. >>>> >>>> What do our international colleagues who have already felt the hot >>>> breath >>>> of right wing nationalism have to offer in terms of strategies of >>>> resistence? >>>> >>>> Back to "what is to be done," that sombre question from an earlier >>>>era. >>>> The >>>> answer last time did not produce what it promised. >>>> >>>> mike >>>> >>>> mike >>>> >>>> On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 12:22 PM, Helena Worthen >>>> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Thank you, Alfredo - I gave it a read. >>>>> >>>>> Sure, of course they?re right. But I am very disappointed. >>>>> >>>>> I was hoping that the following was only item #1 in a long list of >>>>> "what >>>>> the 2016 election made apparent": >>>>> >>>>> The 2016 election has made apparent the need for scholarship that >>>>> explicitly defends and furthers the rights and well-being of people >>>>>of >>>>> color, immigrants, Muslims, women, people who are differently abled, >>>>> LGBTQ >>>>> communities, and the earth. These are stances that have been limited, >>>>> at >>>>> least explicitly, in the Learning Sciences. >>>>> >>>>> But the call for inclusion was not just #1, it seems to be the whole >>>>> thing. In other words, it?s all about identity ?plus the earth, of >>>>> course. >>>>> While inclusion is necessary, it?s not even a start. Yes, research, >>>>> teaching, publishing, promotion, conferences ? everything associated >>>>> with >>>>> teaching and learning has to include everyone as equals (see Andy?s >>>>> book) >>>>> in one way or another ? but then what? What are they (we) supposed to >>>>> do? >>>>> Where does the pretty language touch the ground? >>>>> >>>>> I was listening to a broadcast of the Women?s March in DC on Saturday >>>>> morning, and Kamala Harris, who was the California State Attorney >>>>> General >>>>> and is now a junior Senator from CA, was addressing the rally. She >>>>> said, >>>>> ?People always ask me to talk about women?s issues. I say, ?Oh, I?m >>>>>SO >>>>> glad >>>>> you?re interested in economics!! Let?s talk about economics.? And >>>>>she >>>>> ran >>>>> through a whole set of parallel back-and-forths, always pulling >>>>> identity >>>>> questions back to wages, jobs, earning, supporting your family, etc >>>>> etc. >>>>> >>>>> Much as we need to wipe away any barriers to the Learning Sciences >>>>>(and >>>>> the professions and institutions dedicated to them) due to identity, >>>>> until >>>>> the Learning Sciences start taking a look at the place where most >>>>> people >>>>> spend most of their lives ? not school, I mean ? but work, they will >>>>>be >>>>> engaging in a soft conversation at the edge of the real issue. It?s a >>>>> pleasant conversation but it doesn?t put a hand on the levers that >>>>> translate skill and knowledge into rent and groceries. >>>>> >>>>> H >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Helena Worthen >>>>> helenaworthen@gmail.com >>>>> Berkeley, CA 94707 >>>>> Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> On Jan 22, 2017, at 11:38 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >>>>>> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Here it is, >>>>>> >>>>>> http://cognitionandinstruction.com/engagements-the-learning- >>>>> sciences-in-a-new-era-of-u-s-nationalism/ >>>>>> >>>>>> Alfredo >>>>>> ________________________________________ >>>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>>> >>>>> on behalf of Helena Worthen >>>>>> Sent: 22 January 2017 20:24 >>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >>>>> Nationalism >>>>>> >>>>>> Someone please re-send the link to this article? I think I?m going >>>>>>to >>>>> want to read it and respond to Mike?s question. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks ? H >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Helena Worthen >>>>>> helenaworthen@gmail.com >>>>>> Berkeley, CA 94707 >>>>>> Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Jan 22, 2017, at 12:25 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >>>>>>> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Mike, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> thanks a lot for sharing this article. You and Michael, who have >>>>>>>and >>>>> know more history, have spoken in terms of reminiscences. I have >>>>>lived >>>>> and >>>>> know less, and the article feels like fresh air. During my PhD, I >>>>> begun to >>>>> increasingly feel that I had to due something to act and respond to >>>>>the >>>>> increasing ecological and humanitarian globe crises. But how could I >>>>>do >>>>> anything if I had children and a PhD to finalise?? What could I do >>>>>that >>>>> would also be doing my job as researcher in a department of >>>>>education? >>>>> It >>>>> was very difficult to find anything, partly because almost every >>>>> academic >>>>> quest would focus on learning, but so little on social development. >>>>>How >>>>> many scientific articles are dedicated to socio-political questions >>>>>in >>>>> the >>>>> most cited educational journals? I felt very powerless. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> To be able to address these questions within my expertise, is a >>>>> challenge partly because contrary to Dewey's hope, educational >>>>> research has >>>>> only marginally focused on these questions, and yet they may be >>>>> exactly the >>>>> question that matter to education. What are we educating for? Indeed, >>>>> what >>>>> is education for? I think we face a serious problem when someone >>>>>(like >>>>> myself), being an educational researchers/scholar, still has to >>>>> scratch her >>>>> head wondering <>>>> and >>>>> development?>> Vygotsky would be shocked! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Alfredo >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>>>> >>>>> on behalf of mike cole >>>>>>> Sent: 19 January 2017 04:51 >>>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >>>>> Nationalism >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Yes Michael, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It feels like the world of the later 1930's about the time I was >>>>>>> born as >>>>>>> that period came down to me through the prism of a family of >>>>>>> "premature >>>>>>> anti fascists." >>>>>>> >>>>>>> For a great re-creation of those times see the highly ambivalent >>>>>>> film by >>>>>>> Frank Capra, "meet John Doe." It has American big capital >>>>>>> interconnected >>>>>>> with fascism combined with populist collectivism in a manner that >>>>> points at >>>>>>> the media (as then experienced) as the bad guys in disguise. Happy >>>>> Ending, >>>>>>> Beethoven Ode to Joy and all. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It's come round again, nastier this time. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Mike >>>>>>> On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 6:20 PM Glassman, Michael >>>>>>> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Mike >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> It was so interesting to read this note after reading the >>>>>>>>Cognition >>>>>>>> and >>>>>>>> Instruction essay. All the way through it I kept thinking we have >>>>>>>> been >>>>>>>> here before. It reminded me of the scholars, especially those who >>>>>>>> had >>>>>>>> escaped from Germany, trying to make sense of what had happened to >>>>> their >>>>>>>> society during World War II. The foremost in my mind was Lewin. >>>>> Except I >>>>>>>> wonder if he would say the process of transformative action starts >>>>>>>> not >>>>> with >>>>>>>> emergence of quasi-needs, but our willingness and abilities to >>>>>>>>step >>>>> back >>>>>>>> from our quasi-needs and the ways that they drive us, often to >>>>>>>> dysfunctional behaviors that it ultimately destructive to both our >>>>> society >>>>>>>> and to us as individuals. How hard this is to do, we have to keep >>>>> going >>>>>>>> back again and again. The quasi-needs, tribalism, acceptance, >>>>> standing are >>>>>>>> always there. It is how they shape us that is critical. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Michael >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto: >>>>>>>> xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 8:31 PM >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >>>>>>>> Nationalism >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> In following the perezhivanie thread I encountered the note I >>>>> re-membered. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> And interestingly mis-remembered. A translation into my focus on >>>>>>>> mediational means. He places the starting point of the process of >>>>>>>> transformative action at the emergence of quasi-needs (from Kurt >>>>> Lewin). >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> That seems correct to me. The new mediational means emerge under >>>>>>>> environmental presses. Ever functionalist ego need a goal(!). (The >>>>> problem >>>>>>>> with functionalism) In David's words, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Perhaps the place we should look for "exaptations" that can save >>>>>>>> both >>>>> our >>>>>>>> personalities and our environment is not in our evolved needs, but >>>>>>>> in >>>>> yet >>>>>>>> to be designed quasi-needs. Artificial organs, after all, always >>>>> suggest >>>>>>>> new and ever more artificial functions, like chess and language. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> This point seems worth keeping in mind as we look at where this >>>>>>>> group >>>>> of >>>>>>>> critical scholars who work within the Learning Sciences >>>>>>>>disciplinary >>>>>>>> framework would like to lead us. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> mike >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>> >>> >> >> > > From Peg.Griffin@att.net Tue Jan 24 11:43:50 2017 From: Peg.Griffin@att.net (Peg Griffin) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2017 14:43:50 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism In-Reply-To: References: <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C71964@CIO-KRC-D1MBX04.osuad.osu.edu> <1485073527094.7145@iped.uio.no> <5E5B95EA-374F-48EB-B308-BCE49DA52760@gmail.com> <1485113892233.91870@iped.uio.no> <2c9faf42-cb69-9860-4b9f-ea0f6f0ca307@mira.net> <1485241112188.8167@iped.uio.no> <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C77497@CIO-TNC-D1MBX11.osuad.osu.edu> Message-ID: <009001d2767a$3091b9b0$91b52d10$@att.net> Global makes me think of Cambridge Analytica: Mercer (father and daughter) bought them first for Ted Cruz then gave them to Trump later last spring. They are not our US version of pollsters. They are a political modeling "psychographics" group that have worked and won a lot of nationalist/populist campaigns in Europe (including Brexit). In the US they identified the power of a focus on "unlikely voters" and they fine-tuned the messaging content and form with them in mind. Since "likely voter" voter suppression efforts had been handled disgustingly well state by state, the unlikely voters power could grow. Other candidate teams in the US focused more and more on "likely voters," and ... Either/both abstract analysis and action by people trained as psychologists might give Cambridge Analytica a run for their (oops, Mercer's) money, right? What do I know? I'm not a trained psychologist! And I'm not even sure about the series comma dispute that apparently divides Cambridge and Oxford! (Yes, Cambridge Analytica refers to that Cambridge not the one near Boston MA, and the Mercers also bought Bannon and Conway first for Cruz and later for Trump.) Peg -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2017 1:19 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism Hi Michael Nice thought from Bateson. And I see that Peg has just posted a link to the book. Its certainly a keeper. But it does not speak to forms of action that people in our current circumstances. Some of my colleagues argue that it is essential for academics in these times to eschew politics in any visible form and to focus energy on the academic work precisely in order combat over simplification that threatens human life. The basic starting point of the LS/US Nationalism paper, as I see it, is that claim that the threat of nationalist/populism is GLOBAL and that it poses huge challenges to LS researchers. So we might not want to get too caught up in examining Trump/US version of this problem without considering the rest of the world and its history. The 20th Century provided at least two clear examples of what happens when this configuration of nationalism/populism arises in modern times - two wars to end all wars. If we are in fact returning to the 1930's in this regard, we are doing so in an unparalleled set of circumstances for homo sapiens. So as professionals/citizens, are there forms of action, lines of research, that might be proposed that would nurture the beautiful in circumstances that do not involve high levels of radiation and mass destruction? Is tending to our intellectual gardens the direction to go? Or are forms of action of the sort proposed by the authors the right direction? And if the latter, what do we know from past experience that might guide our thinking? They set out to open the discussion in a major journal. Seems like the task here is to see what this group might possibly add to their attempts to strategize the future based on our collective experience. Mike PS- Seems like Alfredo's perezhivanie project, as an exercise in international collaboration to both test a basic theoretical claim of Vygotsky's and to so collectively, might combine the academic and the political just a little. And just a little might be a lot. On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 9:40 AM, Glassman, Michael wrote: > So I am re-reading Bateson, somewhat in light of current happenings > and I come across this paragraph near the beginning of Mind and > Nature, > > "There seems to be something like a Gresham's law of cultural > evolution according to which the oversimplified will always displace > the sophisticated and the vulgar and hateful will always displace the > beautiful. And yet the beautiful persists." > > Wise words for his time and ours. The information in nature will > always bring us back around to the beautiful if we let it, but it > always seems to slip through our fingers. Maybe another take on the > arc of justice. The trouble of course is every time we let the vulgar > and hateful displace the stakes seem to become much higher. > > Michael > > -----Original Message----- > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ > mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Alfredo Jornet Gil > Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2017 1:59 AM > To: ablunden@mira.net; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity < > xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. > Nationalism > > Francine, > > I agree analysis is only one tool and I hope we can do much more here > and elsewhere. But the overtone window seems to resonate well with our > quest for understanding the possibilities/conditions for hearing > Trump's voice sound like a pleasant flute or like toilette flush. > > I think the idea of Irony also adds to the question of perezhivanie > and Trump in the sense that different perezhivanie will also imply > different forms of generalisation/consciousness. Irony seems to always > involve moving a step up in the types of generalisation or metaphor. > > A good example may be found in considering the "Love Trumps Hate" > message that has been going around in the media. Although I am no > linguist, I am gonna give it a try: If you were to hear the assertion > literally, you may hear an imperative to do love Trump's hate in such > a way as to enter into a double bind situation. To find yourself in > this situation, you need to stick to the transitive form of the > subject (you love) with respect to the object (Trump hate). You kind > of have to have faith in this form, respect the integrity of the > object and the integrity of the subject each in its own terms, and so > you may come to feel confused, or perhaps end up hating just the same way Trump plays he hates. > > On the other hand, to be able to hear "love trumps hate" as a message > of love, as an equivalent (as per Vygotsky's equivalence) for another > message that we also have seen these days, "when they go low we go > high," then you have to take the relation between subject and object > in a higher level of > metaphor: you now hear the sentence in a context that modifies both > subject and object; hate and love cannot be exclusive opposites. The > sentence then is heard as intransitive, love and hate no longer are > independent. And most importantly, once you hear the sentence in its > intransitive form, love and hate no longer are the same. > > Similarly, to hear everything Trump said and take it literally takes a > very different act of faith that it takes hearing it literally as an irony. > Alfredo > > > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of Larry Smolucha > > Sent: 24 January 2017 02:35 > To: ablunden@mira.net; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. > Nationalism > > Message from Francine: > > > Helena Worthen was right - I am serious about finding (and creating) > new tools for understanding the Trump movement. Analysis is only one > tool and there is no insight when it is overused. Figurative, > analogical, metaphorical thinking gives us other tools. Recognizing > IRONY means getting the punch line in a joke (as Freud > > explained in Jokes and Their Relation to the Unconscious). > > > Is there a termteson in literature for the reversal that commonly > occurs in fairy tales? > > All that is gold does not glitter, not all those who wander are lost . . . > > > 1) The ironic reversals that are taking place as people change their > alignment with > > political parties remind me of a geophysics phenomena - the reversal > of the earth's magnetic field that can happen over hundreds of > thousands of years. Both are disorienting. I will give this more > thought, but for the moment consider this much. When magnetic fields > shift it is not all at once, magnetic currents in the molten layers > beneath the earth's solid crust change polarities, sometimes causing a > total > > reversal. Our political parties are commonly referred to as polar > opposites but those > > polarities are not fixed they are fluid. The blue collar working class > can shift from the Democratic Party to the Republican. The Black vote > can shift to the Republicans, the Democrats don't own it. In the > 1950's Russian sympathies were a hallmark of the left, now the left > denounces Trumps outreach to the Russians. [A caveat here - this is > two dimensional thinking because there are only two poles on one > geometric plane.] > > > 2) There is another concept, the Overton Window that is a scale of how > radical of a discourse the public will tolerate (also called the > window of discourse). The Window > > opens and closes along a range of discourse from the acceptable to the > unthinkable. What discourse resonates with the general public (strikes > a chord)? What will they regard as taboo (or not politically correct)? > Issues like that. > > > Here are a couple links worth looking at: > > > Donald Trump & The Overton Window --Resetting America's Political < > http://www.nationalreview.com/article/428200/donald- > trump-overton-window-american-political-debate> > www.nationalreview.com/.../donald-trump-overton-window-american-p< > http://www.nationalreview.com/.../donald-trump-overton-window-american > -p > >.. > > > > Trump's Win Smashed the 'Overton Window' | LifeZette lifezette.com/polizette/trumps-win-smashed-overton-window/> > www.lifezette.com/polizette/trumps-win-smashed-overton-window/ > > > > Can any of this be used with the concept of perezhivanie? > > ________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of Andy Blunden > > Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 9:37 PM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism > > "Irony" - good word to introduce here Francine. > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Andy Blunden > http://home.mira.net/~andy > Andy Blunden's Home Page home.mira.net > Andy Blunden's Home Page with links to pages I maintain and mail-to > buttons > > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > [http://www.brill.com/sites/default/files/styles/large/ > public/ftp/images/products/295x295/92947.jpg?itok=j5KXqZw3]< > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making> > > The Origins of Collective Decision Making | > Brill products/book/origins-collective-decision-making> > www.brill.com > The Origins of Collective Decision Making, identifies three paradigms > of collective decision making - Counsel, Majority and Consensus, and > discovers their origins ... > > > > On 23/01/2017 2:32 PM, Larry Smolucha wrote: > > Message from Francine Smolucha: > > > > > > The key to an analysis of the Trump movement is understanding the > > > > fundamental IRONIES that have rocked American politics. > > > > > > The workers revolution has resulted in the > > > > workers/unions deserting the Left, the socialists, the Democratic Party. > > > > Trump is a Capitalist regardless of whether he actually has a > > Republican > ideology. > > > > The workers' movement has been hijacked by a capitalist. > > > > > > The other great IRONY is that Trump wants to make Russia a U.S. ally > (again). > > > > The Left, the socialists, the Democratic Party are the ones > > demonizing Russia - > > > > what a reversal! > > > > > > Since CHAT derives from Russian psychology (Leontiev and Vygotsky) > > and > the backlash against Trump is also a backlash against all things > Russian - this puts CHAT in a particularly awkward position. How can a > cultural historical psychology that originated in Russia become the > leader in the anti-Trump discourse? or lead an anti-Trump educational > movement? You are even extolling a Russian concept PEREZHIVANIE. > > > > > > I think the XMCA needs to examine its own perezhivanie at this time. > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > on behalf of mike cole > > > > Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 3:01 PM > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Cc: Mariane Hedegaard; Reijo Miettinen; Seth Chaiklin > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. > > Nationalism > > > > Helena et al -- > > > > An important emphasis in the article for me was on the fact that > > although the article focused on the American nationalist movement > > that has just pulled of an alt-right coup, similar movements are > > poised to take hold in a lot of places in Europe to join the many > > already entrenched unsavory governments in other parts of the world. > > > > The CRADLE center in Helsinki is under very concerted attack and the > > right wing government appears, from this distance, to be making > > great progress on destroying its legacy. The same process has been > > in Denmark for some time, also with apparent success. > > > > What do our international colleagues who have already felt the hot > > breath of right wing nationalism have to offer in terms of > > strategies of resistence? > > > > Back to "what is to be done," that sombre question from an earlier > > era. The answer last time did not produce what it promised. > > > > mike > > > > mike > > > > On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 12:22 PM, Helena Worthen > > > > wrote: > > > >> Thank you, Alfredo - I gave it a read. > >> > >> Sure, of course they're right. But I am very disappointed. > >> > >> I was hoping that the following was only item #1 in a long list of > >> "what the 2016 election made apparent": > >> > >> The 2016 election has made apparent the need for scholarship that > >> explicitly defends and furthers the rights and well-being of people > >> of color, immigrants, Muslims, women, people who are differently > >> abled, LGBTQ communities, and the earth. These are stances that > >> have been limited, at least explicitly, in the Learning Sciences. > >> > >> But the call for inclusion was not just #1, it seems to be the > >> whole thing. In other words, it's all about identity -plus the > >> earth, of > course. > >> While inclusion is necessary, it's not even a start. Yes, research, > >> teaching, publishing, promotion, conferences - everything > >> associated with teaching and learning has to include everyone as > >> equals (see Andy's book) in one way or another - but then what? > >> What are they (we) > supposed to do? > >> Where does the pretty language touch the ground? > >> > >> I was listening to a broadcast of the Women's March in DC on > >> Saturday morning, and Kamala Harris, who was the California State > >> Attorney General and is now a junior Senator from CA, was > >> addressing the rally. She said, "People always ask me to talk about women's issues. > >> I say, 'Oh, I'm SO glad you're interested in economics!! Let's talk > >> about economics." And she ran through a whole set of parallel > >> back-and-forths, always pulling identity questions back to wages, > >> jobs, > earning, supporting your family, etc etc. > >> > >> Much as we need to wipe away any barriers to the Learning Sciences > >> (and the professions and institutions dedicated to them) due to > >> identity, until the Learning Sciences start taking a look at the > >> place where most people spend most of their lives - not school, I > >> mean - but work, they will be engaging in a soft conversation at > >> the edge of the real issue. It's a pleasant conversation but it > >> doesn't put a hand on the levers that translate skill and knowledge > >> into rent > and groceries. > >> > >> H > >> > >> > >> Helena Worthen > >> helenaworthen@gmail.com > >> Berkeley, CA 94707 > >> Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com > >> > >> > >> > >>> On Jan 22, 2017, at 11:38 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > >>> > >> wrote: > >>> Here it is, > >>> > >>> http://cognitionandinstruction.com/engagements-the-learning- > >> sciences-in-a-new-era-of-u-s-nationalism/ > >>> Alfredo > >>> ________________________________________ > >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > >>> > >> on behalf of Helena Worthen > >>> Sent: 22 January 2017 20:24 > >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. > >> Nationalism > >>> Someone please re-send the link to this article? I think I'm > >>> going to > >> want to read it and respond to Mike's question. > >>> Thanks - H > >>> > >>> > >>> Helena Worthen > >>> helenaworthen@gmail.com > >>> Berkeley, CA 94707 > >>> Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>> On Jan 22, 2017, at 12:25 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > >>>> > >> wrote: > >>>> Mike, > >>>> > >>>> thanks a lot for sharing this article. You and Michael, who have > >>>> and > >> know more history, have spoken in terms of reminiscences. I have > >> lived and know less, and the article feels like fresh air. During > >> my PhD, I begun to increasingly feel that I had to due something to > >> act and respond to the increasing ecological and humanitarian globe > >> crises. But how could I do anything if I had children and a PhD to > >> finalise?? What could I do that would also be doing my job as > >> researcher in a department of education? It was very difficult to > >> find anything, partly because almost every academic quest would > >> focus on learning, but so little on social development. How many > >> scientific articles are dedicated to socio-political questions in > >> the most cited > educational journals? I felt very powerless. > >>>> To be able to address these questions within my expertise, is a > >> challenge partly because contrary to Dewey's hope, educational > >> research has only marginally focused on these questions, and yet > >> they may be exactly the question that matter to education. What are > >> we educating for? Indeed, what is education for? I think we face a > >> serious problem when someone (like myself), being an educational > >> researchers/scholar, still has to scratch her head wondering < >> can I make my profession matter to social change and development?>> > Vygotsky would be shocked! > >>>> Alfredo > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > >>>> > >> on behalf of mike cole > >>>> Sent: 19 January 2017 04:51 > >>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. > >> Nationalism > >>>> Yes Michael, > >>>> > >>>> It feels like the world of the later 1930's about the time I was > >>>> born as that period came down to me through the prism of a family > >>>> of "premature anti fascists." > >>>> > >>>> For a great re-creation of those times see the highly ambivalent > >>>> film by Frank Capra, "meet John Doe." It has American big capital > >>>> interconnected with fascism combined with populist collectivism > >>>> in a manner that > >> points at > >>>> the media (as then experienced) as the bad guys in disguise. > >>>> Happy > >> Ending, > >>>> Beethoven Ode to Joy and all. > >>>> > >>>> It's come round again, nastier this time. > >>>> > >>>> Mike > >>>> On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 6:20 PM Glassman, Michael > >>>> > >>>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> Mike > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> It was so interesting to read this note after reading the > >>>>> Cognition and Instruction essay. All the way through it I kept > >>>>> thinking we have been here before. It reminded me of the > >>>>> scholars, especially those who had escaped from Germany, trying > >>>>> to make sense of what had happened to > >> their > >>>>> society during World War II. The foremost in my mind was Lewin. > >> Except I > >>>>> wonder if he would say the process of transformative action > >>>>> starts not > >> with > >>>>> emergence of quasi-needs, but our willingness and abilities to > >>>>> step > >> back > >>>>> from our quasi-needs and the ways that they drive us, often to > >>>>> dysfunctional behaviors that it ultimately destructive to both > >>>>> our > >> society > >>>>> and to us as individuals. How hard this is to do, we have to > >>>>> keep > >> going > >>>>> back again and again. The quasi-needs, tribalism, acceptance, > >> standing are > >>>>> always there. It is how they shape us that is critical. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Michael > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>>> > >>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto: > >>>>> xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole > >>>>> > >>>>> Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 8:31 PM > >>>>> > >>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > >>>>> > >>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. > >>>>> Nationalism > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> In following the perezhivanie thread I encountered the note I > >> re-membered. > >>>>> And interestingly mis-remembered. A translation into my focus on > >>>>> mediational means. He places the starting point of the process > >>>>> of transformative action at the emergence of quasi-needs (from > >>>>> Kurt > >> Lewin). > >>>>> That seems correct to me. The new mediational means emerge under > >>>>> environmental presses. Ever functionalist ego need a goal(!). > >>>>> (The > >> problem > >>>>> with functionalism) In David's words, > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Perhaps the place we should look for "exaptations" that can save > >>>>> both > >> our > >>>>> personalities and our environment is not in our evolved needs, > >>>>> but in > >> yet > >>>>> to be designed quasi-needs. Artificial organs, after all, always > >> suggest > >>>>> new and ever more artificial functions, like chess and language. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> This point seems worth keeping in mind as we look at where this > >>>>> group > >> of > >>>>> critical scholars who work within the Learning Sciences > >>>>> disciplinary framework would like to lead us. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> mike > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>> > >> > > > > > From glassman.13@osu.edu Tue Jan 24 12:50:20 2017 From: glassman.13@osu.edu (Glassman, Michael) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2017 20:50:20 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism In-Reply-To: References: <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C71964@CIO-KRC-D1MBX04.osuad.osu.edu> <1485073527094.7145@iped.uio.no> <5E5B95EA-374F-48EB-B308-BCE49DA52760@gmail.com> <1485113892233.91870@iped.uio.no> <2c9faf42-cb69-9860-4b9f-ea0f6f0ca307@mira.net> <1485241112188.8167@iped.uio.no> <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C77497@CIO-TNC-D1MBX11.osuad.osu.edu> Message-ID: <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C7753A@CIO-TNC-D1MBX11.osuad.osu.edu> Hi Mike, Peg, Alfredo, all, I don't know where the saying comes from but I think of, "Problems are global but solutions are local." A couple of lists I have been on have been pushing for instance for people to run for local office, school boards and town councils. You start with change of those things you can change. LS and education in general can perhaps change the trajectory of education. Sometimes I don't know where my biases end and my quest for solutions start but perhaps as a field we should not so much tend our garden as look to redesign our garden, fewer flowers and more winter vegetables. Maybe people could move journals towards acceptance of more emancipatory types of methods like participatory action research. Maybe we could spend more time on the dangers of human design - one of the reasons I am reading Bateson. Maybe we could move away from talking about how this or that educational technique will achieve a certain outcome and include how it promotes democratic decision making. Maybe a greater wariness of PISA and local standardized tests. I know that this has been done to a point, including by people on this list. But perhaps a push to make it more mainstream. Maybe these aren't the right approaches, but at least an emphasis on taking a really close look at who we are, the role education has played in where we are, and how we might re-imagine it. Maybe better than railing at the machine. Change what we can. But it also means everybody really having skin in the game (I actually don't like that saying but can't think of anything else that expresses the same thing). Michael -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2017 1:19 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism Hi Michael Nice thought from Bateson. And I see that Peg has just posted a link to the book. Its certainly a keeper. But it does not speak to forms of action that people in our current circumstances. Some of my colleagues argue that it is essential for academics in these times to eschew politics in any visible form and to focus energy on the academic work precisely in order combat over simplification that threatens human life. The basic starting point of the LS/US Nationalism paper, as I see it, is that claim that the threat of nationalist/populism is GLOBAL and that it poses huge challenges to LS researchers. So we might not want to get too caught up in examining Trump/US version of this problem without considering the rest of the world and its history. The 20th Century provided at least two clear examples of what happens when this configuration of nationalism/populism arises in modern times - two wars to end all wars. If we are in fact returning to the 1930's in this regard, we are doing so in an unparalleled set of circumstances for homo sapiens. So as professionals/citizens, are there forms of action, lines of research, that might be proposed that would nurture the beautiful in circumstances that do not involve high levels of radiation and mass destruction? Is tending to our intellectual gardens the direction to go? Or are forms of action of the sort proposed by the authors the right direction? And if the latter, what do we know from past experience that might guide our thinking? They set out to open the discussion in a major journal. Seems like the task here is to see what this group might possibly add to their attempts to strategize the future based on our collective experience. Mike PS- Seems like Alfredo's perezhivanie project, as an exercise in international collaboration to both test a basic theoretical claim of Vygotsky's and to so collectively, might combine the academic and the political just a little. And just a little might be a lot. On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 9:40 AM, Glassman, Michael wrote: > So I am re-reading Bateson, somewhat in light of current happenings > and I come across this paragraph near the beginning of Mind and > Nature, > > "There seems to be something like a Gresham's law of cultural > evolution according to which the oversimplified will always displace > the sophisticated and the vulgar and hateful will always displace the > beautiful. And yet the beautiful persists." > > Wise words for his time and ours. The information in nature will > always bring us back around to the beautiful if we let it, but it > always seems to slip through our fingers. Maybe another take on the > arc of justice. The trouble of course is every time we let the vulgar > and hateful displace the stakes seem to become much higher. > > Michael > > -----Original Message----- > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ > mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Alfredo Jornet Gil > Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2017 1:59 AM > To: ablunden@mira.net; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity < > xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. > Nationalism > > Francine, > > I agree analysis is only one tool and I hope we can do much more here > and elsewhere. But the overtone window seems to resonate well with our > quest for understanding the possibilities/conditions for hearing > Trump's voice sound like a pleasant flute or like toilette flush. > > I think the idea of Irony also adds to the question of perezhivanie > and Trump in the sense that different perezhivanie will also imply > different forms of generalisation/consciousness. Irony seems to always > involve moving a step up in the types of generalisation or metaphor. > > A good example may be found in considering the "Love Trumps Hate" > message that has been going around in the media. Although I am no > linguist, I am gonna give it a try: If you were to hear the assertion > literally, you may hear an imperative to do love Trump's hate in such > a way as to enter into a double bind situation. To find yourself in > this situation, you need to stick to the transitive form of the > subject (you love) with respect to the object (Trump hate). You kind > of have to have faith in this form, respect the integrity of the > object and the integrity of the subject each in its own terms, and so > you may come to feel confused, or perhaps end up hating just the same way Trump plays he hates. > > On the other hand, to be able to hear "love trumps hate" as a message > of love, as an equivalent (as per Vygotsky's equivalence) for another > message that we also have seen these days, "when they go low we go > high," then you have to take the relation between subject and object > in a higher level of > metaphor: you now hear the sentence in a context that modifies both > subject and object; hate and love cannot be exclusive opposites. The > sentence then is heard as intransitive, love and hate no longer are > independent. And most importantly, once you hear the sentence in its > intransitive form, love and hate no longer are the same. > > Similarly, to hear everything Trump said and take it literally takes a > very different act of faith that it takes hearing it literally as an irony. > Alfredo > > > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of Larry Smolucha > > Sent: 24 January 2017 02:35 > To: ablunden@mira.net; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. > Nationalism > > Message from Francine: > > > Helena Worthen was right - I am serious about finding (and creating) > new tools for understanding the Trump movement. Analysis is only one > tool and there is no insight when it is overused. Figurative, > analogical, metaphorical thinking gives us other tools. Recognizing > IRONY means getting the punch line in a joke (as Freud > > explained in Jokes and Their Relation to the Unconscious). > > > Is there a termteson in literature for the reversal that commonly > occurs in fairy tales? > > All that is gold does not glitter, not all those who wander are lost . . . > > > 1) The ironic reversals that are taking place as people change their > alignment with > > political parties remind me of a geophysics phenomena - the reversal > of the earth's magnetic field that can happen over hundreds of > thousands of years. Both are disorienting. I will give this more > thought, but for the moment consider this much. When magnetic fields > shift it is not all at once, magnetic currents in the molten layers > beneath the earth's solid crust change polarities, sometimes causing a > total > > reversal. Our political parties are commonly referred to as polar > opposites but those > > polarities are not fixed they are fluid. The blue collar working class > can shift from the Democratic Party to the Republican. The Black vote > can shift to the Republicans, the Democrats don't own it. In the > 1950's Russian sympathies were a hallmark of the left, now the left > denounces Trumps outreach to the Russians. [A caveat here - this is > two dimensional thinking because there are only two poles on one > geometric plane.] > > > 2) There is another concept, the Overton Window that is a scale of how > radical of a discourse the public will tolerate (also called the > window of discourse). The Window > > opens and closes along a range of discourse from the acceptable to the > unthinkable. What discourse resonates with the general public (strikes > a chord)? What will they regard as taboo (or not politically correct)? > Issues like that. > > > Here are a couple links worth looking at: > > > Donald Trump & The Overton Window --Resetting America's Political < > http://www.nationalreview.com/article/428200/donald- > trump-overton-window-american-political-debate> > www.nationalreview.com/.../donald-trump-overton-window-american-p< > http://www.nationalreview.com/.../donald-trump-overton-window-american > -p > >.. > > > > Trump's Win Smashed the 'Overton Window' | LifeZette lifezette.com/polizette/trumps-win-smashed-overton-window/> > www.lifezette.com/polizette/trumps-win-smashed-overton-window/ > > > > Can any of this be used with the concept of perezhivanie? > > ________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of Andy Blunden > > Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 9:37 PM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism > > "Irony" - good word to introduce here Francine. > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Andy Blunden > http://home.mira.net/~andy > Andy Blunden's Home Page home.mira.net > Andy Blunden's Home Page with links to pages I maintain and mail-to > buttons > > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > [http://www.brill.com/sites/default/files/styles/large/ > public/ftp/images/products/295x295/92947.jpg?itok=j5KXqZw3]< > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making> > > The Origins of Collective Decision Making | > Brill products/book/origins-collective-decision-making> > www.brill.com > The Origins of Collective Decision Making, identifies three paradigms > of collective decision making - Counsel, Majority and Consensus, and > discovers their origins ... > > > > On 23/01/2017 2:32 PM, Larry Smolucha wrote: > > Message from Francine Smolucha: > > > > > > The key to an analysis of the Trump movement is understanding the > > > > fundamental IRONIES that have rocked American politics. > > > > > > The workers revolution has resulted in the > > > > workers/unions deserting the Left, the socialists, the Democratic Party. > > > > Trump is a Capitalist regardless of whether he actually has a > > Republican > ideology. > > > > The workers' movement has been hijacked by a capitalist. > > > > > > The other great IRONY is that Trump wants to make Russia a U.S. ally > (again). > > > > The Left, the socialists, the Democratic Party are the ones > > demonizing Russia - > > > > what a reversal! > > > > > > Since CHAT derives from Russian psychology (Leontiev and Vygotsky) > > and > the backlash against Trump is also a backlash against all things > Russian - this puts CHAT in a particularly awkward position. How can a > cultural historical psychology that originated in Russia become the > leader in the anti-Trump discourse? or lead an anti-Trump educational > movement? You are even extolling a Russian concept PEREZHIVANIE. > > > > > > I think the XMCA needs to examine its own perezhivanie at this time. > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > on behalf of mike cole > > > > Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 3:01 PM > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Cc: Mariane Hedegaard; Reijo Miettinen; Seth Chaiklin > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. > > Nationalism > > > > Helena et al -- > > > > An important emphasis in the article for me was on the fact that > > although the article focused on the American nationalist movement > > that has just pulled of an alt-right coup, similar movements are > > poised to take hold in a lot of places in Europe to join the many > > already entrenched unsavory governments in other parts of the world. > > > > The CRADLE center in Helsinki is under very concerted attack and the > > right wing government appears, from this distance, to be making > > great progress on destroying its legacy. The same process has been > > in Denmark for some time, also with apparent success. > > > > What do our international colleagues who have already felt the hot > > breath of right wing nationalism have to offer in terms of > > strategies of resistence? > > > > Back to "what is to be done," that sombre question from an earlier > > era. The answer last time did not produce what it promised. > > > > mike > > > > mike > > > > On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 12:22 PM, Helena Worthen > > > > wrote: > > > >> Thank you, Alfredo - I gave it a read. > >> > >> Sure, of course they're right. But I am very disappointed. > >> > >> I was hoping that the following was only item #1 in a long list of > >> "what the 2016 election made apparent": > >> > >> The 2016 election has made apparent the need for scholarship that > >> explicitly defends and furthers the rights and well-being of people > >> of color, immigrants, Muslims, women, people who are differently > >> abled, LGBTQ communities, and the earth. These are stances that > >> have been limited, at least explicitly, in the Learning Sciences. > >> > >> But the call for inclusion was not just #1, it seems to be the > >> whole thing. In other words, it's all about identity -plus the > >> earth, of > course. > >> While inclusion is necessary, it's not even a start. Yes, research, > >> teaching, publishing, promotion, conferences - everything > >> associated with teaching and learning has to include everyone as > >> equals (see Andy's book) in one way or another - but then what? > >> What are they (we) > supposed to do? > >> Where does the pretty language touch the ground? > >> > >> I was listening to a broadcast of the Women's March in DC on > >> Saturday morning, and Kamala Harris, who was the California State > >> Attorney General and is now a junior Senator from CA, was > >> addressing the rally. She said, "People always ask me to talk about women's issues. > >> I say, 'Oh, I'm SO glad you're interested in economics!! Let's talk > >> about economics." And she ran through a whole set of parallel > >> back-and-forths, always pulling identity questions back to wages, > >> jobs, > earning, supporting your family, etc etc. > >> > >> Much as we need to wipe away any barriers to the Learning Sciences > >> (and the professions and institutions dedicated to them) due to > >> identity, until the Learning Sciences start taking a look at the > >> place where most people spend most of their lives - not school, I > >> mean - but work, they will be engaging in a soft conversation at > >> the edge of the real issue. It's a pleasant conversation but it > >> doesn't put a hand on the levers that translate skill and knowledge > >> into rent > and groceries. > >> > >> H > >> > >> > >> Helena Worthen > >> helenaworthen@gmail.com > >> Berkeley, CA 94707 > >> Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com > >> > >> > >> > >>> On Jan 22, 2017, at 11:38 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > >>> > >> wrote: > >>> Here it is, > >>> > >>> http://cognitionandinstruction.com/engagements-the-learning- > >> sciences-in-a-new-era-of-u-s-nationalism/ > >>> Alfredo > >>> ________________________________________ > >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > >>> > >> on behalf of Helena Worthen > >>> Sent: 22 January 2017 20:24 > >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. > >> Nationalism > >>> Someone please re-send the link to this article? I think I'm > >>> going to > >> want to read it and respond to Mike's question. > >>> Thanks - H > >>> > >>> > >>> Helena Worthen > >>> helenaworthen@gmail.com > >>> Berkeley, CA 94707 > >>> Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>> On Jan 22, 2017, at 12:25 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > >>>> > >> wrote: > >>>> Mike, > >>>> > >>>> thanks a lot for sharing this article. You and Michael, who have > >>>> and > >> know more history, have spoken in terms of reminiscences. I have > >> lived and know less, and the article feels like fresh air. During > >> my PhD, I begun to increasingly feel that I had to due something to > >> act and respond to the increasing ecological and humanitarian globe > >> crises. But how could I do anything if I had children and a PhD to > >> finalise?? What could I do that would also be doing my job as > >> researcher in a department of education? It was very difficult to > >> find anything, partly because almost every academic quest would > >> focus on learning, but so little on social development. How many > >> scientific articles are dedicated to socio-political questions in > >> the most cited > educational journals? I felt very powerless. > >>>> To be able to address these questions within my expertise, is a > >> challenge partly because contrary to Dewey's hope, educational > >> research has only marginally focused on these questions, and yet > >> they may be exactly the question that matter to education. What are > >> we educating for? Indeed, what is education for? I think we face a > >> serious problem when someone (like myself), being an educational > >> researchers/scholar, still has to scratch her head wondering < >> can I make my profession matter to social change and development?>> > Vygotsky would be shocked! > >>>> Alfredo > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > >>>> > >> on behalf of mike cole > >>>> Sent: 19 January 2017 04:51 > >>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. > >> Nationalism > >>>> Yes Michael, > >>>> > >>>> It feels like the world of the later 1930's about the time I was > >>>> born as that period came down to me through the prism of a family > >>>> of "premature anti fascists." > >>>> > >>>> For a great re-creation of those times see the highly ambivalent > >>>> film by Frank Capra, "meet John Doe." It has American big capital > >>>> interconnected with fascism combined with populist collectivism > >>>> in a manner that > >> points at > >>>> the media (as then experienced) as the bad guys in disguise. > >>>> Happy > >> Ending, > >>>> Beethoven Ode to Joy and all. > >>>> > >>>> It's come round again, nastier this time. > >>>> > >>>> Mike > >>>> On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 6:20 PM Glassman, Michael > >>>> > >>>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> Mike > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> It was so interesting to read this note after reading the > >>>>> Cognition and Instruction essay. All the way through it I kept > >>>>> thinking we have been here before. It reminded me of the > >>>>> scholars, especially those who had escaped from Germany, trying > >>>>> to make sense of what had happened to > >> their > >>>>> society during World War II. The foremost in my mind was Lewin. > >> Except I > >>>>> wonder if he would say the process of transformative action > >>>>> starts not > >> with > >>>>> emergence of quasi-needs, but our willingness and abilities to > >>>>> step > >> back > >>>>> from our quasi-needs and the ways that they drive us, often to > >>>>> dysfunctional behaviors that it ultimately destructive to both > >>>>> our > >> society > >>>>> and to us as individuals. How hard this is to do, we have to > >>>>> keep > >> going > >>>>> back again and again. The quasi-needs, tribalism, acceptance, > >> standing are > >>>>> always there. It is how they shape us that is critical. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Michael > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>>> > >>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto: > >>>>> xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole > >>>>> > >>>>> Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 8:31 PM > >>>>> > >>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > >>>>> > >>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. > >>>>> Nationalism > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> In following the perezhivanie thread I encountered the note I > >> re-membered. > >>>>> And interestingly mis-remembered. A translation into my focus on > >>>>> mediational means. He places the starting point of the process > >>>>> of transformative action at the emergence of quasi-needs (from > >>>>> Kurt > >> Lewin). > >>>>> That seems correct to me. The new mediational means emerge under > >>>>> environmental presses. Ever functionalist ego need a goal(!). > >>>>> (The > >> problem > >>>>> with functionalism) In David's words, > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Perhaps the place we should look for "exaptations" that can save > >>>>> both > >> our > >>>>> personalities and our environment is not in our evolved needs, > >>>>> but in > >> yet > >>>>> to be designed quasi-needs. Artificial organs, after all, always > >> suggest > >>>>> new and ever more artificial functions, like chess and language. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> This point seems worth keeping in mind as we look at where this > >>>>> group > >> of > >>>>> critical scholars who work within the Learning Sciences > >>>>> disciplinary framework would like to lead us. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> mike > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>> > >> > > > > > From helenaworthen@gmail.com Tue Jan 24 12:58:57 2017 From: helenaworthen@gmail.com (Helena Worthen) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2017 12:58:57 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism In-Reply-To: References: <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C71964@CIO-KRC-D1MBX04.osuad.osu.edu> <1485073527094.7145@iped.uio.no> <5E5B95EA-374F-48EB-B308-BCE49DA52760@gmail.com> <1485113892233.91870@iped.uio.no> <2c9faf42-cb69-9860-4b9f-ea0f6f0ca307@mira.net> <1485241112188.8167@iped.uio.no> <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C77497@CIO-TNC-D1MBX11.osuad.osu.edu> Message-ID: Just in time, I have been gifted with a way to "ascend (out of this discussion) to the concrete." Mike mentions "forms of action" and says some colleagues are saying "focus energy on academic work." Faculty committee work is part of academic work. I just got a phone call from a colleague who teaches at California State University and who is, with me and others, on an advisory committee convened to revive the moribund Labor Studies Program at Laney, a community college in Oakland, near where I live. Everyone is probably aware that Labor Studies programs are target practice for right-wingers. If you're not aware, you aren't surprised. So the program at Laney has been shrinking for years. The idea now is to revive it by joining it with the Community Studies Program, which is an umbrella Ethnic Studies program. This makes sense, right? Latino Studies, Black Studies, Gender Studies, Women's Studies, Asian Studies and Labor Studies intuitively seem to belong together. They address people who are likely to be working for a living. So our advisory committee will meet Thursday night and the big issue is this: A core required course is going to be "Community and Labor Organizing." This course already exists in the Community Studies program. If it is submitted to the Academic Senate un-changed, it will speed through approval and be offered in Fall 2017. It will also count for transfer to the State University and UC systems. The catch is that as written, it has to be taught by someone with an advanced Ethnic Studies degree. The easy thing to do is to shrug and let it through without changing it. But an Ethnic Studies degree does not prepare someone to teach labor organizing. First, there are a lot of technical issues that come up in labor organizing. The tricks and traps of labor legislation are just the beginning. Second, although you might think that labor unions and community based organizations (CBOs) are natural allies, they have a very hard time working with each other in practice because of the way authority runs through them. Someone with only a degree in Ethnic Studies will not know this stuff. But it's not just a matter of the content of the course. Letting the course go to approval as is would eliminate the possibility that any of the program faculty who come our of labor (who usually have degrees in Philosophy, History, Political Science) would be able to teach that class. So, is this worth the fight? It looks, on the surface, like a tempest in a teapot. But it's a concrete example of a moment when you can put the teeth of economic justice into the mouth of (block that metaphor). I will go to the meeting Thursday night arguing in favor re-writing the course description to allow faculty who do not have a degree in Ethnic Studies to teach this course. I will say that it's worth losing a semester because there is something bigger at stake here. This is also academic work. Helena Worthen helenaworthen@gmail.com Vietnam blog: helenaworthen.wordpress.com On Jan 24, 2017, at 10:18 AM, mike cole wrote: > Hi Michael > > Nice thought from Bateson. And I see that Peg has just posted a link > to the book. Its certainly a keeper. > > But it does not speak to forms of action that people in our current > circumstances. Some of my colleagues argue that it is essential for > academics in these times to eschew politics in any visible form and > to focus energy on the academic work precisely in order combat over > simplification that threatens human life. > > The basic starting point of the LS/US Nationalism paper, as I see it, is > that claim that the threat of nationalist/populism is GLOBAL and that it > poses huge challenges to LS researchers. So we might not want to get too > caught up in examining Trump/US version of this problem without considering > the rest of the world and its history. The 20th Century provided at least > two clear examples of what happens when this configuration of > nationalism/populism arises in modern times - two wars to end all wars. If > we are in fact returning to the 1930's in this regard, we are doing so in > an unparalleled set of circumstances for homo sapiens. > > So as professionals/citizens, are there forms of action, lines of research, > that might be proposed that would nurture the beautiful in circumstances > that do not involve high levels of radiation and mass destruction? Is > tending to our intellectual gardens the direction to go? Or are forms of > action of the sort proposed by the authors the right direction? And if the > latter, what do we know from past experience that might guide our thinking? > They set out to open the discussion in a major journal. > > Seems like the task here is to see what this group might possibly add to > their attempts to strategize the future based on our collective experience. > > Mike > > PS- Seems like Alfredo's perezhivanie project, as an exercise in > international collaboration to both test a basic theoretical claim of > Vygotsky's and to so collectively, might combine the academic and the > political just a little. And just a little might be a lot. > > > On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 9:40 AM, Glassman, Michael > wrote: > >> So I am re-reading Bateson, somewhat in light of current happenings and I >> come across this paragraph near the beginning of Mind and Nature, >> >> "There seems to be something like a Gresham's law of cultural evolution >> according to which the oversimplified will always displace the >> sophisticated and the vulgar and hateful will always displace the >> beautiful. And yet the beautiful persists." >> >> Wise words for his time and ours. The information in nature will always >> bring us back around to the beautiful if we let it, but it always seems to >> slip through our fingers. Maybe another take on the arc of justice. The >> trouble of course is every time we let the vulgar and hateful displace the >> stakes seem to become much higher. >> >> Michael >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ >> mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Alfredo Jornet Gil >> Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2017 1:59 AM >> To: ablunden@mira.net; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity < >> xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu> >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism >> >> Francine, >> >> I agree analysis is only one tool and I hope we can do much more here and >> elsewhere. But the overtone window seems to resonate well with our quest >> for understanding the possibilities/conditions for hearing Trump's voice >> sound like a pleasant flute or like toilette flush. >> >> I think the idea of Irony also adds to the question of perezhivanie and >> Trump in the sense that different perezhivanie will also imply different >> forms of generalisation/consciousness. Irony seems to always involve moving >> a step up in the types of generalisation or metaphor. >> >> A good example may be found in considering the "Love Trumps Hate" message >> that has been going around in the media. Although I am no linguist, I am >> gonna give it a try: If you were to hear the assertion literally, you may >> hear an imperative to do love Trump's hate in such a way as to enter into a >> double bind situation. To find yourself in this situation, you need to >> stick to the transitive form of the subject (you love) with respect to the >> object (Trump hate). You kind of have to have faith in this form, respect >> the integrity of the object and the integrity of the subject each in its >> own terms, and so you may come to feel confused, or perhaps end up hating >> just the same way Trump plays he hates. >> >> On the other hand, to be able to hear "love trumps hate" as a message of >> love, as an equivalent (as per Vygotsky's equivalence) for another message >> that we also have seen these days, "when they go low we go high," then you >> have to take the relation between subject and object in a higher level of >> metaphor: you now hear the sentence in a context that modifies both subject >> and object; hate and love cannot be exclusive opposites. The sentence then >> is heard as intransitive, love and hate no longer are independent. And most >> importantly, once you hear the sentence in its intransitive form, love and >> hate no longer are the same. >> >> Similarly, to hear everything Trump said and take it literally takes a >> very different act of faith that it takes hearing it literally as an irony. >> Alfredo >> >> >> ________________________________________ >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> on behalf of Larry Smolucha >> Sent: 24 January 2017 02:35 >> To: ablunden@mira.net; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism >> >> Message from Francine: >> >> >> Helena Worthen was right - I am serious about finding (and creating) new >> tools for understanding the Trump movement. Analysis is only one tool and >> there is no insight when it is overused. Figurative, analogical, >> metaphorical thinking gives us other tools. Recognizing IRONY means getting >> the punch line in a joke (as Freud >> >> explained in Jokes and Their Relation to the Unconscious). >> >> >> Is there a termteson in literature for the reversal that commonly occurs >> in fairy tales? >> >> All that is gold does not glitter, not all those who wander are lost . . . >> >> >> 1) The ironic reversals that are taking place as people change their >> alignment with >> >> political parties remind me of a geophysics phenomena - the reversal of >> the earth's magnetic field that can happen over hundreds of thousands of >> years. Both are disorienting. I will give this more thought, but for the >> moment consider this much. When magnetic fields shift it is not all at >> once, magnetic currents in the molten layers beneath the earth's solid >> crust change polarities, sometimes causing a total >> >> reversal. Our political parties are commonly referred to as polar >> opposites but those >> >> polarities are not fixed they are fluid. The blue collar working class can >> shift from the Democratic Party to the Republican. The Black vote can shift >> to the Republicans, the Democrats don't own it. In the 1950's Russian >> sympathies were a hallmark of the left, now the left denounces Trumps >> outreach to the Russians. [A caveat here - this is two dimensional thinking >> because there are only two poles on one geometric plane.] >> >> >> 2) There is another concept, the Overton Window that is a scale of how >> radical of a discourse the public will tolerate (also called the window of >> discourse). The Window >> >> opens and closes along a range of discourse from the acceptable to the >> unthinkable. What discourse resonates with the general public (strikes a >> chord)? What will they regard as taboo (or not politically correct)? Issues >> like that. >> >> >> Here are a couple links worth looking at: >> >> >> Donald Trump & The Overton Window --Resetting America's Political < >> http://www.nationalreview.com/article/428200/donald- >> trump-overton-window-american-political-debate> >> www.nationalreview.com/.../donald-trump-overton-window-american-p< >> http://www.nationalreview.com/.../donald-trump-overton-window-american-p >>> .. >> >> >> >> Trump's Win Smashed the 'Overton Window' | LifeZette> lifezette.com/polizette/trumps-win-smashed-overton-window/> >> www.lifezette.com/polizette/trumps-win-smashed-overton-window/ >> >> >> >> Can any of this be used with the concept of perezhivanie? >> >> ________________________________ >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> on behalf of Andy Blunden >> Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 9:37 PM >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism >> >> "Irony" - good word to introduce here Francine. >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------ >> Andy Blunden >> http://home.mira.net/~andy >> Andy Blunden's Home Page home.mira.net Andy >> Blunden's Home Page with links to pages I maintain and mail-to buttons >> >> >> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making >> [http://www.brill.com/sites/default/files/styles/large/ >> public/ftp/images/products/295x295/92947.jpg?itok=j5KXqZw3]< >> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making> >> >> The Origins of Collective Decision Making | Brill> products/book/origins-collective-decision-making> >> www.brill.com >> The Origins of Collective Decision Making, identifies three paradigms of >> collective decision making - Counsel, Majority and Consensus, and discovers >> their origins ... >> >> >> >> On 23/01/2017 2:32 PM, Larry Smolucha wrote: >>> Message from Francine Smolucha: >>> >>> >>> The key to an analysis of the Trump movement is understanding the >>> >>> fundamental IRONIES that have rocked American politics. >>> >>> >>> The workers revolution has resulted in the >>> >>> workers/unions deserting the Left, the socialists, the Democratic Party. >>> >>> Trump is a Capitalist regardless of whether he actually has a Republican >> ideology. >>> >>> The workers' movement has been hijacked by a capitalist. >>> >>> >>> The other great IRONY is that Trump wants to make Russia a U.S. ally >> (again). >>> >>> The Left, the socialists, the Democratic Party are the ones demonizing >>> Russia - >>> >>> what a reversal! >>> >>> >>> Since CHAT derives from Russian psychology (Leontiev and Vygotsky) and >> the backlash against Trump is also a backlash against all things Russian - >> this puts CHAT in a particularly awkward position. How can a cultural >> historical psychology that originated in Russia become the leader in the >> anti-Trump discourse? or lead an anti-Trump educational movement? You are >> even extolling a Russian concept PEREZHIVANIE. >>> >>> >>> I think the XMCA needs to examine its own perezhivanie at this time. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ________________________________ >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>> on behalf of mike cole >>> >>> Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 3:01 PM >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>> Cc: Mariane Hedegaard; Reijo Miettinen; Seth Chaiklin >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >>> Nationalism >>> >>> Helena et al -- >>> >>> An important emphasis in the article for me was on the fact that >>> although the article focused on the American nationalist movement that >>> has just pulled of an alt-right coup, similar movements are poised to >>> take hold in a lot of places in Europe to join the many already >>> entrenched unsavory governments in other parts of the world. >>> >>> The CRADLE center in Helsinki is under very concerted attack and the >>> right wing government appears, from this distance, to be making great >>> progress on destroying its legacy. The same process has been in >>> Denmark for some time, also with apparent success. >>> >>> What do our international colleagues who have already felt the hot >>> breath of right wing nationalism have to offer in terms of strategies >>> of resistence? >>> >>> Back to "what is to be done," that sombre question from an earlier >>> era. The answer last time did not produce what it promised. >>> >>> mike >>> >>> mike >>> >>> On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 12:22 PM, Helena Worthen >>> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Thank you, Alfredo - I gave it a read. >>>> >>>> Sure, of course they're right. But I am very disappointed. >>>> >>>> I was hoping that the following was only item #1 in a long list of >>>> "what the 2016 election made apparent": >>>> >>>> The 2016 election has made apparent the need for scholarship that >>>> explicitly defends and furthers the rights and well-being of people >>>> of color, immigrants, Muslims, women, people who are differently >>>> abled, LGBTQ communities, and the earth. These are stances that have >>>> been limited, at least explicitly, in the Learning Sciences. >>>> >>>> But the call for inclusion was not just #1, it seems to be the whole >>>> thing. In other words, it's all about identity -plus the earth, of >> course. >>>> While inclusion is necessary, it's not even a start. Yes, research, >>>> teaching, publishing, promotion, conferences - everything associated >>>> with teaching and learning has to include everyone as equals (see >>>> Andy's book) in one way or another - but then what? What are they (we) >> supposed to do? >>>> Where does the pretty language touch the ground? >>>> >>>> I was listening to a broadcast of the Women's March in DC on Saturday >>>> morning, and Kamala Harris, who was the California State Attorney >>>> General and is now a junior Senator from CA, was addressing the >>>> rally. She said, "People always ask me to talk about women's issues. >>>> I say, 'Oh, I'm SO glad you're interested in economics!! Let's talk >>>> about economics." And she ran through a whole set of parallel >>>> back-and-forths, always pulling identity questions back to wages, jobs, >> earning, supporting your family, etc etc. >>>> >>>> Much as we need to wipe away any barriers to the Learning Sciences >>>> (and the professions and institutions dedicated to them) due to >>>> identity, until the Learning Sciences start taking a look at the >>>> place where most people spend most of their lives - not school, I >>>> mean - but work, they will be engaging in a soft conversation at the >>>> edge of the real issue. It's a pleasant conversation but it doesn't >>>> put a hand on the levers that translate skill and knowledge into rent >> and groceries. >>>> >>>> H >>>> >>>> >>>> Helena Worthen >>>> helenaworthen@gmail.com >>>> Berkeley, CA 94707 >>>> Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> On Jan 22, 2017, at 11:38 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >>>>> >>>> wrote: >>>>> Here it is, >>>>> >>>>> http://cognitionandinstruction.com/engagements-the-learning- >>>> sciences-in-a-new-era-of-u-s-nationalism/ >>>>> Alfredo >>>>> ________________________________________ >>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>> >>>> on behalf of Helena Worthen >>>>> Sent: 22 January 2017 20:24 >>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >>>> Nationalism >>>>> Someone please re-send the link to this article? I think I'm going >>>>> to >>>> want to read it and respond to Mike's question. >>>>> Thanks - H >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Helena Worthen >>>>> helenaworthen@gmail.com >>>>> Berkeley, CA 94707 >>>>> Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> On Jan 22, 2017, at 12:25 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >>>>>> >>>> wrote: >>>>>> Mike, >>>>>> >>>>>> thanks a lot for sharing this article. You and Michael, who have >>>>>> and >>>> know more history, have spoken in terms of reminiscences. I have >>>> lived and know less, and the article feels like fresh air. During my >>>> PhD, I begun to increasingly feel that I had to due something to act >>>> and respond to the increasing ecological and humanitarian globe >>>> crises. But how could I do anything if I had children and a PhD to >>>> finalise?? What could I do that would also be doing my job as >>>> researcher in a department of education? It was very difficult to >>>> find anything, partly because almost every academic quest would focus >>>> on learning, but so little on social development. How many scientific >>>> articles are dedicated to socio-political questions in the most cited >> educational journals? I felt very powerless. >>>>>> To be able to address these questions within my expertise, is a >>>> challenge partly because contrary to Dewey's hope, educational >>>> research has only marginally focused on these questions, and yet they >>>> may be exactly the question that matter to education. What are we >>>> educating for? Indeed, what is education for? I think we face a >>>> serious problem when someone (like myself), being an educational >>>> researchers/scholar, still has to scratch her head wondering <>>> can I make my profession matter to social change and development?>> >> Vygotsky would be shocked! >>>>>> Alfredo >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>>> >>>> on behalf of mike cole >>>>>> Sent: 19 January 2017 04:51 >>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >>>> Nationalism >>>>>> Yes Michael, >>>>>> >>>>>> It feels like the world of the later 1930's about the time I was >>>>>> born as that period came down to me through the prism of a family >>>>>> of "premature anti fascists." >>>>>> >>>>>> For a great re-creation of those times see the highly ambivalent >>>>>> film by Frank Capra, "meet John Doe." It has American big capital >>>>>> interconnected with fascism combined with populist collectivism in >>>>>> a manner that >>>> points at >>>>>> the media (as then experienced) as the bad guys in disguise. Happy >>>> Ending, >>>>>> Beethoven Ode to Joy and all. >>>>>> >>>>>> It's come round again, nastier this time. >>>>>> >>>>>> Mike >>>>>> On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 6:20 PM Glassman, Michael >>>>>> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Mike >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It was so interesting to read this note after reading the >>>>>>> Cognition and Instruction essay. All the way through it I kept >>>>>>> thinking we have been here before. It reminded me of the >>>>>>> scholars, especially those who had escaped from Germany, trying to >>>>>>> make sense of what had happened to >>>> their >>>>>>> society during World War II. The foremost in my mind was Lewin. >>>> Except I >>>>>>> wonder if he would say the process of transformative action starts >>>>>>> not >>>> with >>>>>>> emergence of quasi-needs, but our willingness and abilities to >>>>>>> step >>>> back >>>>>>> from our quasi-needs and the ways that they drive us, often to >>>>>>> dysfunctional behaviors that it ultimately destructive to both our >>>> society >>>>>>> and to us as individuals. How hard this is to do, we have to keep >>>> going >>>>>>> back again and again. The quasi-needs, tribalism, acceptance, >>>> standing are >>>>>>> always there. It is how they shape us that is critical. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Michael >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto: >>>>>>> xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 8:31 PM >>>>>>> >>>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >>>>>>> Nationalism >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> In following the perezhivanie thread I encountered the note I >>>> re-membered. >>>>>>> And interestingly mis-remembered. A translation into my focus on >>>>>>> mediational means. He places the starting point of the process of >>>>>>> transformative action at the emergence of quasi-needs (from Kurt >>>> Lewin). >>>>>>> That seems correct to me. The new mediational means emerge under >>>>>>> environmental presses. Ever functionalist ego need a goal(!). (The >>>> problem >>>>>>> with functionalism) In David's words, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Perhaps the place we should look for "exaptations" that can save >>>>>>> both >>>> our >>>>>>> personalities and our environment is not in our evolved needs, but >>>>>>> in >>>> yet >>>>>>> to be designed quasi-needs. Artificial organs, after all, always >>>> suggest >>>>>>> new and ever more artificial functions, like chess and language. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This point seems worth keeping in mind as we look at where this >>>>>>> group >>>> of >>>>>>> critical scholars who work within the Learning Sciences >>>>>>> disciplinary framework would like to lead us. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> mike >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >> >> From shirinvossoughi@gmail.com Tue Jan 24 13:10:15 2017 From: shirinvossoughi@gmail.com (Shirin Vossoughi) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2017 15:10:15 -0600 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism In-Reply-To: References: <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C71964@CIO-KRC-D1MBX04.osuad.osu.edu> <1485073527094.7145@iped.uio.no> <5E5B95EA-374F-48EB-B308-BCE49DA52760@gmail.com> <1485113892233.91870@iped.uio.no> <2c9faf42-cb69-9860-4b9f-ea0f6f0ca307@mira.net> <1485241112188.8167@iped.uio.no> <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C77497@CIO-TNC-D1MBX11.osuad.osu.edu> Message-ID: Helena This was very interesting to hear about one question: this strikes me as a big assumption "Someone with only a degree in Ethnic Studies will not know this stuff." Would it be fruitful to look for someone with a strong background in Ethnic studies AND labor organizing within such a position? Sounds like a generative opening Shirin On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 2:58 PM, Helena Worthen wrote: > Just in time, I have been gifted with a way to "ascend (out of this > discussion) to the concrete." > > Mike mentions "forms of action" and says some colleagues are saying "focus > energy on academic work." Faculty committee work is part of academic work. > > I just got a phone call from a colleague who teaches at California State > University and who is, with me and others, on an advisory committee > convened to revive the moribund Labor Studies Program at Laney, a community > college in Oakland, near where I live. > > Everyone is probably aware that Labor Studies programs are target practice > for right-wingers. If you're not aware, you aren't surprised. So the > program at Laney has been shrinking for years. The idea now is to revive it > by joining it with the Community Studies Program, which is an umbrella > Ethnic Studies program. This makes sense, right? Latino Studies, Black > Studies, Gender Studies, Women's Studies, Asian Studies and Labor Studies > intuitively seem to belong together. They address people who are likely to > be working for a living. > > So our advisory committee will meet Thursday night and the big issue is > this: A core required course is going to be "Community and Labor > Organizing." This course already exists in the Community Studies program. > If it is submitted to the Academic Senate un-changed, it will speed through > approval and be offered in Fall 2017. It will also count for transfer to > the State University and UC systems. > > The catch is that as written, it has to be taught by someone with an > advanced Ethnic Studies degree. > > The easy thing to do is to shrug and let it through without changing it. > But an Ethnic Studies degree does not prepare someone to teach labor > organizing. First, there are a lot of technical issues that come up in > labor organizing. The tricks and traps of labor legislation are just the > beginning. Second, although you might think that labor unions and community > based organizations (CBOs) are natural allies, they have a very hard time > working with each other in practice because of the way authority runs > through them. Someone with only a degree in Ethnic Studies will not know > this stuff. > > But it's not just a matter of the content of the course. Letting the > course go to approval as is would eliminate the possibility that any of the > program faculty who come our of labor (who usually have degrees in > Philosophy, History, Political Science) would be able to teach that class. > > So, is this worth the fight? It looks, on the surface, like a tempest in a > teapot. But it's a concrete example of a moment when you can put the teeth > of economic justice into the mouth of (block that metaphor). > > I will go to the meeting Thursday night arguing in favor re-writing the > course description to allow faculty who do not have a degree in Ethnic > Studies to teach this course. I will say that it's worth losing a semester > because there is something bigger at stake here. This is also academic > work. > > > Helena Worthen > helenaworthen@gmail.com > Vietnam blog: helenaworthen.wordpress.com > > On Jan 24, 2017, at 10:18 AM, mike cole wrote: > > > Hi Michael > > > > Nice thought from Bateson. And I see that Peg has just posted a link > > to the book. Its certainly a keeper. > > > > But it does not speak to forms of action that people in our current > > circumstances. Some of my colleagues argue that it is essential for > > academics in these times to eschew politics in any visible form and > > to focus energy on the academic work precisely in order combat over > > simplification that threatens human life. > > > > The basic starting point of the LS/US Nationalism paper, as I see it, is > > that claim that the threat of nationalist/populism is GLOBAL and that it > > poses huge challenges to LS researchers. So we might not want to get too > > caught up in examining Trump/US version of this problem without > considering > > the rest of the world and its history. The 20th Century provided at least > > two clear examples of what happens when this configuration of > > nationalism/populism arises in modern times - two wars to end all wars. > If > > we are in fact returning to the 1930's in this regard, we are doing so in > > an unparalleled set of circumstances for homo sapiens. > > > > So as professionals/citizens, are there forms of action, lines of > research, > > that might be proposed that would nurture the beautiful in circumstances > > that do not involve high levels of radiation and mass destruction? Is > > tending to our intellectual gardens the direction to go? Or are forms of > > action of the sort proposed by the authors the right direction? And if > the > > latter, what do we know from past experience that might guide our > thinking? > > They set out to open the discussion in a major journal. > > > > Seems like the task here is to see what this group might possibly add to > > their attempts to strategize the future based on our collective > experience. > > > > Mike > > > > PS- Seems like Alfredo's perezhivanie project, as an exercise in > > international collaboration to both test a basic theoretical claim of > > Vygotsky's and to so collectively, might combine the academic and the > > political just a little. And just a little might be a lot. > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 9:40 AM, Glassman, Michael > > wrote: > > > >> So I am re-reading Bateson, somewhat in light of current happenings and > I > >> come across this paragraph near the beginning of Mind and Nature, > >> > >> "There seems to be something like a Gresham's law of cultural evolution > >> according to which the oversimplified will always displace the > >> sophisticated and the vulgar and hateful will always displace the > >> beautiful. And yet the beautiful persists." > >> > >> Wise words for his time and ours. The information in nature will always > >> bring us back around to the beautiful if we let it, but it always seems > to > >> slip through our fingers. Maybe another take on the arc of justice. > The > >> trouble of course is every time we let the vulgar and hateful displace > the > >> stakes seem to become much higher. > >> > >> Michael > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ > >> mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Alfredo Jornet Gil > >> Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2017 1:59 AM > >> To: ablunden@mira.net; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity < > >> xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu> > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. > Nationalism > >> > >> Francine, > >> > >> I agree analysis is only one tool and I hope we can do much more here > and > >> elsewhere. But the overtone window seems to resonate well with our quest > >> for understanding the possibilities/conditions for hearing Trump's voice > >> sound like a pleasant flute or like toilette flush. > >> > >> I think the idea of Irony also adds to the question of perezhivanie and > >> Trump in the sense that different perezhivanie will also imply different > >> forms of generalisation/consciousness. Irony seems to always involve > moving > >> a step up in the types of generalisation or metaphor. > >> > >> A good example may be found in considering the "Love Trumps Hate" > message > >> that has been going around in the media. Although I am no linguist, I am > >> gonna give it a try: If you were to hear the assertion literally, you > may > >> hear an imperative to do love Trump's hate in such a way as to enter > into a > >> double bind situation. To find yourself in this situation, you need to > >> stick to the transitive form of the subject (you love) with respect to > the > >> object (Trump hate). You kind of have to have faith in this form, > respect > >> the integrity of the object and the integrity of the subject each in its > >> own terms, and so you may come to feel confused, or perhaps end up > hating > >> just the same way Trump plays he hates. > >> > >> On the other hand, to be able to hear "love trumps hate" as a message of > >> love, as an equivalent (as per Vygotsky's equivalence) for another > message > >> that we also have seen these days, "when they go low we go high," then > you > >> have to take the relation between subject and object in a higher level > of > >> metaphor: you now hear the sentence in a context that modifies both > subject > >> and object; hate and love cannot be exclusive opposites. The sentence > then > >> is heard as intransitive, love and hate no longer are independent. And > most > >> importantly, once you hear the sentence in its intransitive form, love > and > >> hate no longer are the same. > >> > >> Similarly, to hear everything Trump said and take it literally takes a > >> very different act of faith that it takes hearing it literally as an > irony. > >> Alfredo > >> > >> > >> ________________________________________ > >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > >> on behalf of Larry Smolucha > >> Sent: 24 January 2017 02:35 > >> To: ablunden@mira.net; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. > Nationalism > >> > >> Message from Francine: > >> > >> > >> Helena Worthen was right - I am serious about finding (and creating) new > >> tools for understanding the Trump movement. Analysis is only one tool > and > >> there is no insight when it is overused. Figurative, analogical, > >> metaphorical thinking gives us other tools. Recognizing IRONY means > getting > >> the punch line in a joke (as Freud > >> > >> explained in Jokes and Their Relation to the Unconscious). > >> > >> > >> Is there a termteson in literature for the reversal that commonly occurs > >> in fairy tales? > >> > >> All that is gold does not glitter, not all those who wander are lost . > . . > >> > >> > >> 1) The ironic reversals that are taking place as people change their > >> alignment with > >> > >> political parties remind me of a geophysics phenomena - the reversal of > >> the earth's magnetic field that can happen over hundreds of thousands of > >> years. Both are disorienting. I will give this more thought, but for the > >> moment consider this much. When magnetic fields shift it is not all at > >> once, magnetic currents in the molten layers beneath the earth's solid > >> crust change polarities, sometimes causing a total > >> > >> reversal. Our political parties are commonly referred to as polar > >> opposites but those > >> > >> polarities are not fixed they are fluid. The blue collar working class > can > >> shift from the Democratic Party to the Republican. The Black vote can > shift > >> to the Republicans, the Democrats don't own it. In the 1950's Russian > >> sympathies were a hallmark of the left, now the left denounces Trumps > >> outreach to the Russians. [A caveat here - this is two dimensional > thinking > >> because there are only two poles on one geometric plane.] > >> > >> > >> 2) There is another concept, the Overton Window that is a scale of how > >> radical of a discourse the public will tolerate (also called the window > of > >> discourse). The Window > >> > >> opens and closes along a range of discourse from the acceptable to the > >> unthinkable. What discourse resonates with the general public (strikes a > >> chord)? What will they regard as taboo (or not politically correct)? > Issues > >> like that. > >> > >> > >> Here are a couple links worth looking at: > >> > >> > >> Donald Trump & The Overton Window --Resetting America's Political < > >> http://www.nationalreview.com/article/428200/donald- > >> trump-overton-window-american-political-debate> > >> www.nationalreview.com/.../donald-trump-overton-window-american-p< > >> http://www.nationalreview.com/.../donald-trump-overton- > window-american-p > >>> .. > >> > >> > >> > >> Trump's Win Smashed the 'Overton Window' | LifeZette >> lifezette.com/polizette/trumps-win-smashed-overton-window/> > >> www.lifezette.com/polizette/trumps-win-smashed-overton-window/ > >> > >> > >> > >> Can any of this be used with the concept of perezhivanie? > >> > >> ________________________________ > >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > >> on behalf of Andy Blunden > >> Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 9:37 PM > >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism > >> > >> "Irony" - good word to introduce here Francine. > >> > >> ------------------------------------------------------------ > >> Andy Blunden > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy > >> Andy Blunden's Home Page home.mira.net Andy > >> Blunden's Home Page with links to pages I maintain and mail-to buttons > >> > >> > >> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > >> [http://www.brill.com/sites/default/files/styles/large/ > >> public/ftp/images/products/295x295/92947.jpg?itok=j5KXqZw3]< > >> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making> > >> > >> The Origins of Collective Decision Making | Brill >> products/book/origins-collective-decision-making> > >> www.brill.com > >> The Origins of Collective Decision Making, identifies three paradigms of > >> collective decision making - Counsel, Majority and Consensus, and > discovers > >> their origins ... > >> > >> > >> > >> On 23/01/2017 2:32 PM, Larry Smolucha wrote: > >>> Message from Francine Smolucha: > >>> > >>> > >>> The key to an analysis of the Trump movement is understanding the > >>> > >>> fundamental IRONIES that have rocked American politics. > >>> > >>> > >>> The workers revolution has resulted in the > >>> > >>> workers/unions deserting the Left, the socialists, the Democratic > Party. > >>> > >>> Trump is a Capitalist regardless of whether he actually has a > Republican > >> ideology. > >>> > >>> The workers' movement has been hijacked by a capitalist. > >>> > >>> > >>> The other great IRONY is that Trump wants to make Russia a U.S. ally > >> (again). > >>> > >>> The Left, the socialists, the Democratic Party are the ones demonizing > >>> Russia - > >>> > >>> what a reversal! > >>> > >>> > >>> Since CHAT derives from Russian psychology (Leontiev and Vygotsky) and > >> the backlash against Trump is also a backlash against all things > Russian - > >> this puts CHAT in a particularly awkward position. How can a cultural > >> historical psychology that originated in Russia become the leader in the > >> anti-Trump discourse? or lead an anti-Trump educational movement? You > are > >> even extolling a Russian concept PEREZHIVANIE. > >>> > >>> > >>> I think the XMCA needs to examine its own perezhivanie at this time. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> ________________________________ > >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > >>> on behalf of mike cole > >>> > >>> Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 3:01 PM > >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > >>> Cc: Mariane Hedegaard; Reijo Miettinen; Seth Chaiklin > >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. > >>> Nationalism > >>> > >>> Helena et al -- > >>> > >>> An important emphasis in the article for me was on the fact that > >>> although the article focused on the American nationalist movement that > >>> has just pulled of an alt-right coup, similar movements are poised to > >>> take hold in a lot of places in Europe to join the many already > >>> entrenched unsavory governments in other parts of the world. > >>> > >>> The CRADLE center in Helsinki is under very concerted attack and the > >>> right wing government appears, from this distance, to be making great > >>> progress on destroying its legacy. The same process has been in > >>> Denmark for some time, also with apparent success. > >>> > >>> What do our international colleagues who have already felt the hot > >>> breath of right wing nationalism have to offer in terms of strategies > >>> of resistence? > >>> > >>> Back to "what is to be done," that sombre question from an earlier > >>> era. The answer last time did not produce what it promised. > >>> > >>> mike > >>> > >>> mike > >>> > >>> On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 12:22 PM, Helena Worthen > >>> > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>>> Thank you, Alfredo - I gave it a read. > >>>> > >>>> Sure, of course they're right. But I am very disappointed. > >>>> > >>>> I was hoping that the following was only item #1 in a long list of > >>>> "what the 2016 election made apparent": > >>>> > >>>> The 2016 election has made apparent the need for scholarship that > >>>> explicitly defends and furthers the rights and well-being of people > >>>> of color, immigrants, Muslims, women, people who are differently > >>>> abled, LGBTQ communities, and the earth. These are stances that have > >>>> been limited, at least explicitly, in the Learning Sciences. > >>>> > >>>> But the call for inclusion was not just #1, it seems to be the whole > >>>> thing. In other words, it's all about identity -plus the earth, of > >> course. > >>>> While inclusion is necessary, it's not even a start. Yes, research, > >>>> teaching, publishing, promotion, conferences - everything associated > >>>> with teaching and learning has to include everyone as equals (see > >>>> Andy's book) in one way or another - but then what? What are they (we) > >> supposed to do? > >>>> Where does the pretty language touch the ground? > >>>> > >>>> I was listening to a broadcast of the Women's March in DC on Saturday > >>>> morning, and Kamala Harris, who was the California State Attorney > >>>> General and is now a junior Senator from CA, was addressing the > >>>> rally. She said, "People always ask me to talk about women's issues. > >>>> I say, 'Oh, I'm SO glad you're interested in economics!! Let's talk > >>>> about economics." And she ran through a whole set of parallel > >>>> back-and-forths, always pulling identity questions back to wages, > jobs, > >> earning, supporting your family, etc etc. > >>>> > >>>> Much as we need to wipe away any barriers to the Learning Sciences > >>>> (and the professions and institutions dedicated to them) due to > >>>> identity, until the Learning Sciences start taking a look at the > >>>> place where most people spend most of their lives - not school, I > >>>> mean - but work, they will be engaging in a soft conversation at the > >>>> edge of the real issue. It's a pleasant conversation but it doesn't > >>>> put a hand on the levers that translate skill and knowledge into rent > >> and groceries. > >>>> > >>>> H > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Helena Worthen > >>>> helenaworthen@gmail.com > >>>> Berkeley, CA 94707 > >>>> Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> On Jan 22, 2017, at 11:38 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > >>>>> > >>>> wrote: > >>>>> Here it is, > >>>>> > >>>>> http://cognitionandinstruction.com/engagements-the-learning- > >>>> sciences-in-a-new-era-of-u-s-nationalism/ > >>>>> Alfredo > >>>>> ________________________________________ > >>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > >>>>> > >>>> on behalf of Helena Worthen > >>>>> Sent: 22 January 2017 20:24 > >>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > >>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. > >>>> Nationalism > >>>>> Someone please re-send the link to this article? I think I'm going > >>>>> to > >>>> want to read it and respond to Mike's question. > >>>>> Thanks - H > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Helena Worthen > >>>>> helenaworthen@gmail.com > >>>>> Berkeley, CA 94707 > >>>>> Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>> On Jan 22, 2017, at 12:25 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > >>>>>> > >>>> wrote: > >>>>>> Mike, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> thanks a lot for sharing this article. You and Michael, who have > >>>>>> and > >>>> know more history, have spoken in terms of reminiscences. I have > >>>> lived and know less, and the article feels like fresh air. During my > >>>> PhD, I begun to increasingly feel that I had to due something to act > >>>> and respond to the increasing ecological and humanitarian globe > >>>> crises. But how could I do anything if I had children and a PhD to > >>>> finalise?? What could I do that would also be doing my job as > >>>> researcher in a department of education? It was very difficult to > >>>> find anything, partly because almost every academic quest would focus > >>>> on learning, but so little on social development. How many scientific > >>>> articles are dedicated to socio-political questions in the most cited > >> educational journals? I felt very powerless. > >>>>>> To be able to address these questions within my expertise, is a > >>>> challenge partly because contrary to Dewey's hope, educational > >>>> research has only marginally focused on these questions, and yet they > >>>> may be exactly the question that matter to education. What are we > >>>> educating for? Indeed, what is education for? I think we face a > >>>> serious problem when someone (like myself), being an educational > >>>> researchers/scholar, still has to scratch her head wondering < >>>> can I make my profession matter to social change and development?>> > >> Vygotsky would be shocked! > >>>>>> Alfredo > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > >>>>>> > >>>> on behalf of mike cole > >>>>>> Sent: 19 January 2017 04:51 > >>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > >>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. > >>>> Nationalism > >>>>>> Yes Michael, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> It feels like the world of the later 1930's about the time I was > >>>>>> born as that period came down to me through the prism of a family > >>>>>> of "premature anti fascists." > >>>>>> > >>>>>> For a great re-creation of those times see the highly ambivalent > >>>>>> film by Frank Capra, "meet John Doe." It has American big capital > >>>>>> interconnected with fascism combined with populist collectivism in > >>>>>> a manner that > >>>> points at > >>>>>> the media (as then experienced) as the bad guys in disguise. Happy > >>>> Ending, > >>>>>> Beethoven Ode to Joy and all. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> It's come round again, nastier this time. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Mike > >>>>>> On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 6:20 PM Glassman, Michael > >>>>>> > >>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> Mike > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> It was so interesting to read this note after reading the > >>>>>>> Cognition and Instruction essay. All the way through it I kept > >>>>>>> thinking we have been here before. It reminded me of the > >>>>>>> scholars, especially those who had escaped from Germany, trying to > >>>>>>> make sense of what had happened to > >>>> their > >>>>>>> society during World War II. The foremost in my mind was Lewin. > >>>> Except I > >>>>>>> wonder if he would say the process of transformative action starts > >>>>>>> not > >>>> with > >>>>>>> emergence of quasi-needs, but our willingness and abilities to > >>>>>>> step > >>>> back > >>>>>>> from our quasi-needs and the ways that they drive us, often to > >>>>>>> dysfunctional behaviors that it ultimately destructive to both our > >>>> society > >>>>>>> and to us as individuals. How hard this is to do, we have to keep > >>>> going > >>>>>>> back again and again. The quasi-needs, tribalism, acceptance, > >>>> standing are > >>>>>>> always there. It is how they shape us that is critical. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Michael > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto: > >>>>>>> xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 8:31 PM > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. > >>>>>>> Nationalism > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> In following the perezhivanie thread I encountered the note I > >>>> re-membered. > >>>>>>> And interestingly mis-remembered. A translation into my focus on > >>>>>>> mediational means. He places the starting point of the process of > >>>>>>> transformative action at the emergence of quasi-needs (from Kurt > >>>> Lewin). > >>>>>>> That seems correct to me. The new mediational means emerge under > >>>>>>> environmental presses. Ever functionalist ego need a goal(!). (The > >>>> problem > >>>>>>> with functionalism) In David's words, > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Perhaps the place we should look for "exaptations" that can save > >>>>>>> both > >>>> our > >>>>>>> personalities and our environment is not in our evolved needs, but > >>>>>>> in > >>>> yet > >>>>>>> to be designed quasi-needs. Artificial organs, after all, always > >>>> suggest > >>>>>>> new and ever more artificial functions, like chess and language. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> This point seems worth keeping in mind as we look at where this > >>>>>>> group > >>>> of > >>>>>>> critical scholars who work within the Learning Sciences > >>>>>>> disciplinary framework would like to lead us. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> mike > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>> > >> > >> > >> > > > From helenaworthen@gmail.com Tue Jan 24 13:54:03 2017 From: helenaworthen@gmail.com (Helena Worthen) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2017 13:54:03 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism In-Reply-To: References: <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C71964@CIO-KRC-D1MBX04.osuad.osu.edu> <1485073527094.7145@iped.uio.no> <5E5B95EA-374F-48EB-B308-BCE49DA52760@gmail.com> <1485113892233.91870@iped.uio.no> <2c9faf42-cb69-9860-4b9f-ea0f6f0ca307@mira.net> <1485241112188.8167@iped.uio.no> <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C77497@CIO-TNC-D1MBX11.osuad.osu.edu> Message-ID: <7F7191DE-736A-4383-8BC9-45AA90EFB08D@gmail.com> Shirin - A person like that would be great, and there are some around although not already in the pool. I should have made the word ?only? stronger. It works the other way, too ? someone with ?only? labor background is not ?necessarily? (I?m trying to back off) going to know anything about community organizing. They are different and their differences have lots of history, also worth knowing. We don?t want either tradition to get slighted. Don?t get me started!! I just wanted to say that this is a discussion worth having, and a fight worth joining. :) Helena Worthen helenaworthen@gmail.com Berkeley, CA 94707 Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com > On Jan 24, 2017, at 1:10 PM, Shirin Vossoughi wrote: > > Helena > This was very interesting to hear about > one question: > this strikes me as a big assumption "Someone with only a degree in Ethnic > Studies will not know this stuff." > Would it be fruitful to look for someone with a strong background in Ethnic > studies AND labor organizing within such a position? > Sounds like a generative opening > Shirin > > On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 2:58 PM, Helena Worthen > wrote: > >> Just in time, I have been gifted with a way to "ascend (out of this >> discussion) to the concrete." >> >> Mike mentions "forms of action" and says some colleagues are saying "focus >> energy on academic work." Faculty committee work is part of academic work. >> >> I just got a phone call from a colleague who teaches at California State >> University and who is, with me and others, on an advisory committee >> convened to revive the moribund Labor Studies Program at Laney, a community >> college in Oakland, near where I live. >> >> Everyone is probably aware that Labor Studies programs are target practice >> for right-wingers. If you're not aware, you aren't surprised. So the >> program at Laney has been shrinking for years. The idea now is to revive it >> by joining it with the Community Studies Program, which is an umbrella >> Ethnic Studies program. This makes sense, right? Latino Studies, Black >> Studies, Gender Studies, Women's Studies, Asian Studies and Labor Studies >> intuitively seem to belong together. They address people who are likely to >> be working for a living. >> >> So our advisory committee will meet Thursday night and the big issue is >> this: A core required course is going to be "Community and Labor >> Organizing." This course already exists in the Community Studies program. >> If it is submitted to the Academic Senate un-changed, it will speed through >> approval and be offered in Fall 2017. It will also count for transfer to >> the State University and UC systems. >> >> The catch is that as written, it has to be taught by someone with an >> advanced Ethnic Studies degree. >> >> The easy thing to do is to shrug and let it through without changing it. >> But an Ethnic Studies degree does not prepare someone to teach labor >> organizing. First, there are a lot of technical issues that come up in >> labor organizing. The tricks and traps of labor legislation are just the >> beginning. Second, although you might think that labor unions and community >> based organizations (CBOs) are natural allies, they have a very hard time >> working with each other in practice because of the way authority runs >> through them. Someone with only a degree in Ethnic Studies will not know >> this stuff. >> >> But it's not just a matter of the content of the course. Letting the >> course go to approval as is would eliminate the possibility that any of the >> program faculty who come our of labor (who usually have degrees in >> Philosophy, History, Political Science) would be able to teach that class. >> >> So, is this worth the fight? It looks, on the surface, like a tempest in a >> teapot. But it's a concrete example of a moment when you can put the teeth >> of economic justice into the mouth of (block that metaphor). >> >> I will go to the meeting Thursday night arguing in favor re-writing the >> course description to allow faculty who do not have a degree in Ethnic >> Studies to teach this course. I will say that it's worth losing a semester >> because there is something bigger at stake here. This is also academic >> work. >> >> >> Helena Worthen >> helenaworthen@gmail.com >> Vietnam blog: helenaworthen.wordpress.com >> >> On Jan 24, 2017, at 10:18 AM, mike cole wrote: >> >>> Hi Michael >>> >>> Nice thought from Bateson. And I see that Peg has just posted a link >>> to the book. Its certainly a keeper. >>> >>> But it does not speak to forms of action that people in our current >>> circumstances. Some of my colleagues argue that it is essential for >>> academics in these times to eschew politics in any visible form and >>> to focus energy on the academic work precisely in order combat over >>> simplification that threatens human life. >>> >>> The basic starting point of the LS/US Nationalism paper, as I see it, is >>> that claim that the threat of nationalist/populism is GLOBAL and that it >>> poses huge challenges to LS researchers. So we might not want to get too >>> caught up in examining Trump/US version of this problem without >> considering >>> the rest of the world and its history. The 20th Century provided at least >>> two clear examples of what happens when this configuration of >>> nationalism/populism arises in modern times - two wars to end all wars. >> If >>> we are in fact returning to the 1930's in this regard, we are doing so in >>> an unparalleled set of circumstances for homo sapiens. >>> >>> So as professionals/citizens, are there forms of action, lines of >> research, >>> that might be proposed that would nurture the beautiful in circumstances >>> that do not involve high levels of radiation and mass destruction? Is >>> tending to our intellectual gardens the direction to go? Or are forms of >>> action of the sort proposed by the authors the right direction? And if >> the >>> latter, what do we know from past experience that might guide our >> thinking? >>> They set out to open the discussion in a major journal. >>> >>> Seems like the task here is to see what this group might possibly add to >>> their attempts to strategize the future based on our collective >> experience. >>> >>> Mike >>> >>> PS- Seems like Alfredo's perezhivanie project, as an exercise in >>> international collaboration to both test a basic theoretical claim of >>> Vygotsky's and to so collectively, might combine the academic and the >>> political just a little. And just a little might be a lot. >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 9:40 AM, Glassman, Michael >>> wrote: >>> >>>> So I am re-reading Bateson, somewhat in light of current happenings and >> I >>>> come across this paragraph near the beginning of Mind and Nature, >>>> >>>> "There seems to be something like a Gresham's law of cultural evolution >>>> according to which the oversimplified will always displace the >>>> sophisticated and the vulgar and hateful will always displace the >>>> beautiful. And yet the beautiful persists." >>>> >>>> Wise words for his time and ours. The information in nature will always >>>> bring us back around to the beautiful if we let it, but it always seems >> to >>>> slip through our fingers. Maybe another take on the arc of justice. >> The >>>> trouble of course is every time we let the vulgar and hateful displace >> the >>>> stakes seem to become much higher. >>>> >>>> Michael >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ >>>> mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Alfredo Jornet Gil >>>> Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2017 1:59 AM >>>> To: ablunden@mira.net; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity < >>>> xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu> >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >> Nationalism >>>> >>>> Francine, >>>> >>>> I agree analysis is only one tool and I hope we can do much more here >> and >>>> elsewhere. But the overtone window seems to resonate well with our quest >>>> for understanding the possibilities/conditions for hearing Trump's voice >>>> sound like a pleasant flute or like toilette flush. >>>> >>>> I think the idea of Irony also adds to the question of perezhivanie and >>>> Trump in the sense that different perezhivanie will also imply different >>>> forms of generalisation/consciousness. Irony seems to always involve >> moving >>>> a step up in the types of generalisation or metaphor. >>>> >>>> A good example may be found in considering the "Love Trumps Hate" >> message >>>> that has been going around in the media. Although I am no linguist, I am >>>> gonna give it a try: If you were to hear the assertion literally, you >> may >>>> hear an imperative to do love Trump's hate in such a way as to enter >> into a >>>> double bind situation. To find yourself in this situation, you need to >>>> stick to the transitive form of the subject (you love) with respect to >> the >>>> object (Trump hate). You kind of have to have faith in this form, >> respect >>>> the integrity of the object and the integrity of the subject each in its >>>> own terms, and so you may come to feel confused, or perhaps end up >> hating >>>> just the same way Trump plays he hates. >>>> >>>> On the other hand, to be able to hear "love trumps hate" as a message of >>>> love, as an equivalent (as per Vygotsky's equivalence) for another >> message >>>> that we also have seen these days, "when they go low we go high," then >> you >>>> have to take the relation between subject and object in a higher level >> of >>>> metaphor: you now hear the sentence in a context that modifies both >> subject >>>> and object; hate and love cannot be exclusive opposites. The sentence >> then >>>> is heard as intransitive, love and hate no longer are independent. And >> most >>>> importantly, once you hear the sentence in its intransitive form, love >> and >>>> hate no longer are the same. >>>> >>>> Similarly, to hear everything Trump said and take it literally takes a >>>> very different act of faith that it takes hearing it literally as an >> irony. >>>> Alfredo >>>> >>>> >>>> ________________________________________ >>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>> on behalf of Larry Smolucha >>>> Sent: 24 January 2017 02:35 >>>> To: ablunden@mira.net; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >> Nationalism >>>> >>>> Message from Francine: >>>> >>>> >>>> Helena Worthen was right - I am serious about finding (and creating) new >>>> tools for understanding the Trump movement. Analysis is only one tool >> and >>>> there is no insight when it is overused. Figurative, analogical, >>>> metaphorical thinking gives us other tools. Recognizing IRONY means >> getting >>>> the punch line in a joke (as Freud >>>> >>>> explained in Jokes and Their Relation to the Unconscious). >>>> >>>> >>>> Is there a termteson in literature for the reversal that commonly occurs >>>> in fairy tales? >>>> >>>> All that is gold does not glitter, not all those who wander are lost . >> . . >>>> >>>> >>>> 1) The ironic reversals that are taking place as people change their >>>> alignment with >>>> >>>> political parties remind me of a geophysics phenomena - the reversal of >>>> the earth's magnetic field that can happen over hundreds of thousands of >>>> years. Both are disorienting. I will give this more thought, but for the >>>> moment consider this much. When magnetic fields shift it is not all at >>>> once, magnetic currents in the molten layers beneath the earth's solid >>>> crust change polarities, sometimes causing a total >>>> >>>> reversal. Our political parties are commonly referred to as polar >>>> opposites but those >>>> >>>> polarities are not fixed they are fluid. The blue collar working class >> can >>>> shift from the Democratic Party to the Republican. The Black vote can >> shift >>>> to the Republicans, the Democrats don't own it. In the 1950's Russian >>>> sympathies were a hallmark of the left, now the left denounces Trumps >>>> outreach to the Russians. [A caveat here - this is two dimensional >> thinking >>>> because there are only two poles on one geometric plane.] >>>> >>>> >>>> 2) There is another concept, the Overton Window that is a scale of how >>>> radical of a discourse the public will tolerate (also called the window >> of >>>> discourse). The Window >>>> >>>> opens and closes along a range of discourse from the acceptable to the >>>> unthinkable. What discourse resonates with the general public (strikes a >>>> chord)? What will they regard as taboo (or not politically correct)? >> Issues >>>> like that. >>>> >>>> >>>> Here are a couple links worth looking at: >>>> >>>> >>>> Donald Trump & The Overton Window --Resetting America's Political < >>>> http://www.nationalreview.com/article/428200/donald- >>>> trump-overton-window-american-political-debate> >>>> www.nationalreview.com/.../donald-trump-overton-window-american-p< >>>> http://www.nationalreview.com/.../donald-trump-overton- >> window-american-p >>>>> .. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Trump's Win Smashed the 'Overton Window' | LifeZette>>> lifezette.com/polizette/trumps-win-smashed-overton-window/> >>>> www.lifezette.com/polizette/trumps-win-smashed-overton-window/ >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Can any of this be used with the concept of perezhivanie? >>>> >>>> ________________________________ >>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>> on behalf of Andy Blunden >>>> Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 9:37 PM >>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism >>>> >>>> "Irony" - good word to introduce here Francine. >>>> >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>> Andy Blunden >>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy >>>> Andy Blunden's Home Page home.mira.net Andy >>>> Blunden's Home Page with links to pages I maintain and mail-to buttons >>>> >>>> >>>> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making >>>> [http://www.brill.com/sites/default/files/styles/large/ >>>> public/ftp/images/products/295x295/92947.jpg?itok=j5KXqZw3]< >>>> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making> >>>> >>>> The Origins of Collective Decision Making | Brill>>> products/book/origins-collective-decision-making> >>>> www.brill.com >>>> The Origins of Collective Decision Making, identifies three paradigms of >>>> collective decision making - Counsel, Majority and Consensus, and >> discovers >>>> their origins ... >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 23/01/2017 2:32 PM, Larry Smolucha wrote: >>>>> Message from Francine Smolucha: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> The key to an analysis of the Trump movement is understanding the >>>>> >>>>> fundamental IRONIES that have rocked American politics. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> The workers revolution has resulted in the >>>>> >>>>> workers/unions deserting the Left, the socialists, the Democratic >> Party. >>>>> >>>>> Trump is a Capitalist regardless of whether he actually has a >> Republican >>>> ideology. >>>>> >>>>> The workers' movement has been hijacked by a capitalist. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> The other great IRONY is that Trump wants to make Russia a U.S. ally >>>> (again). >>>>> >>>>> The Left, the socialists, the Democratic Party are the ones demonizing >>>>> Russia - >>>>> >>>>> what a reversal! >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Since CHAT derives from Russian psychology (Leontiev and Vygotsky) and >>>> the backlash against Trump is also a backlash against all things >> Russian - >>>> this puts CHAT in a particularly awkward position. How can a cultural >>>> historical psychology that originated in Russia become the leader in the >>>> anti-Trump discourse? or lead an anti-Trump educational movement? You >> are >>>> even extolling a Russian concept PEREZHIVANIE. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I think the XMCA needs to examine its own perezhivanie at this time. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ________________________________ >>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>> on behalf of mike cole >>>>> >>>>> Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 3:01 PM >>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>> Cc: Mariane Hedegaard; Reijo Miettinen; Seth Chaiklin >>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >>>>> Nationalism >>>>> >>>>> Helena et al -- >>>>> >>>>> An important emphasis in the article for me was on the fact that >>>>> although the article focused on the American nationalist movement that >>>>> has just pulled of an alt-right coup, similar movements are poised to >>>>> take hold in a lot of places in Europe to join the many already >>>>> entrenched unsavory governments in other parts of the world. >>>>> >>>>> The CRADLE center in Helsinki is under very concerted attack and the >>>>> right wing government appears, from this distance, to be making great >>>>> progress on destroying its legacy. The same process has been in >>>>> Denmark for some time, also with apparent success. >>>>> >>>>> What do our international colleagues who have already felt the hot >>>>> breath of right wing nationalism have to offer in terms of strategies >>>>> of resistence? >>>>> >>>>> Back to "what is to be done," that sombre question from an earlier >>>>> era. The answer last time did not produce what it promised. >>>>> >>>>> mike >>>>> >>>>> mike >>>>> >>>>> On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 12:22 PM, Helena Worthen >>>>> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Thank you, Alfredo - I gave it a read. >>>>>> >>>>>> Sure, of course they're right. But I am very disappointed. >>>>>> >>>>>> I was hoping that the following was only item #1 in a long list of >>>>>> "what the 2016 election made apparent": >>>>>> >>>>>> The 2016 election has made apparent the need for scholarship that >>>>>> explicitly defends and furthers the rights and well-being of people >>>>>> of color, immigrants, Muslims, women, people who are differently >>>>>> abled, LGBTQ communities, and the earth. These are stances that have >>>>>> been limited, at least explicitly, in the Learning Sciences. >>>>>> >>>>>> But the call for inclusion was not just #1, it seems to be the whole >>>>>> thing. In other words, it's all about identity -plus the earth, of >>>> course. >>>>>> While inclusion is necessary, it's not even a start. Yes, research, >>>>>> teaching, publishing, promotion, conferences - everything associated >>>>>> with teaching and learning has to include everyone as equals (see >>>>>> Andy's book) in one way or another - but then what? What are they (we) >>>> supposed to do? >>>>>> Where does the pretty language touch the ground? >>>>>> >>>>>> I was listening to a broadcast of the Women's March in DC on Saturday >>>>>> morning, and Kamala Harris, who was the California State Attorney >>>>>> General and is now a junior Senator from CA, was addressing the >>>>>> rally. She said, "People always ask me to talk about women's issues. >>>>>> I say, 'Oh, I'm SO glad you're interested in economics!! Let's talk >>>>>> about economics." And she ran through a whole set of parallel >>>>>> back-and-forths, always pulling identity questions back to wages, >> jobs, >>>> earning, supporting your family, etc etc. >>>>>> >>>>>> Much as we need to wipe away any barriers to the Learning Sciences >>>>>> (and the professions and institutions dedicated to them) due to >>>>>> identity, until the Learning Sciences start taking a look at the >>>>>> place where most people spend most of their lives - not school, I >>>>>> mean - but work, they will be engaging in a soft conversation at the >>>>>> edge of the real issue. It's a pleasant conversation but it doesn't >>>>>> put a hand on the levers that translate skill and knowledge into rent >>>> and groceries. >>>>>> >>>>>> H >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Helena Worthen >>>>>> helenaworthen@gmail.com >>>>>> Berkeley, CA 94707 >>>>>> Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Jan 22, 2017, at 11:38 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >>>>>>> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> Here it is, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> http://cognitionandinstruction.com/engagements-the-learning- >>>>>> sciences-in-a-new-era-of-u-s-nationalism/ >>>>>>> Alfredo >>>>>>> ________________________________________ >>>>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>>>> >>>>>> on behalf of Helena Worthen >>>>>>> Sent: 22 January 2017 20:24 >>>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >>>>>> Nationalism >>>>>>> Someone please re-send the link to this article? I think I'm going >>>>>>> to >>>>>> want to read it and respond to Mike's question. >>>>>>> Thanks - H >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Helena Worthen >>>>>>> helenaworthen@gmail.com >>>>>>> Berkeley, CA 94707 >>>>>>> Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Jan 22, 2017, at 12:25 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >>>>>>>> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> Mike, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> thanks a lot for sharing this article. You and Michael, who have >>>>>>>> and >>>>>> know more history, have spoken in terms of reminiscences. I have >>>>>> lived and know less, and the article feels like fresh air. During my >>>>>> PhD, I begun to increasingly feel that I had to due something to act >>>>>> and respond to the increasing ecological and humanitarian globe >>>>>> crises. But how could I do anything if I had children and a PhD to >>>>>> finalise?? What could I do that would also be doing my job as >>>>>> researcher in a department of education? It was very difficult to >>>>>> find anything, partly because almost every academic quest would focus >>>>>> on learning, but so little on social development. How many scientific >>>>>> articles are dedicated to socio-political questions in the most cited >>>> educational journals? I felt very powerless. >>>>>>>> To be able to address these questions within my expertise, is a >>>>>> challenge partly because contrary to Dewey's hope, educational >>>>>> research has only marginally focused on these questions, and yet they >>>>>> may be exactly the question that matter to education. What are we >>>>>> educating for? Indeed, what is education for? I think we face a >>>>>> serious problem when someone (like myself), being an educational >>>>>> researchers/scholar, still has to scratch her head wondering <>>>>> can I make my profession matter to social change and development?>> >>>> Vygotsky would be shocked! >>>>>>>> Alfredo >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>>>>> >>>>>> on behalf of mike cole >>>>>>>> Sent: 19 January 2017 04:51 >>>>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >>>>>> Nationalism >>>>>>>> Yes Michael, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> It feels like the world of the later 1930's about the time I was >>>>>>>> born as that period came down to me through the prism of a family >>>>>>>> of "premature anti fascists." >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> For a great re-creation of those times see the highly ambivalent >>>>>>>> film by Frank Capra, "meet John Doe." It has American big capital >>>>>>>> interconnected with fascism combined with populist collectivism in >>>>>>>> a manner that >>>>>> points at >>>>>>>> the media (as then experienced) as the bad guys in disguise. Happy >>>>>> Ending, >>>>>>>> Beethoven Ode to Joy and all. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> It's come round again, nastier this time. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Mike >>>>>>>> On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 6:20 PM Glassman, Michael >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Mike >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> It was so interesting to read this note after reading the >>>>>>>>> Cognition and Instruction essay. All the way through it I kept >>>>>>>>> thinking we have been here before. It reminded me of the >>>>>>>>> scholars, especially those who had escaped from Germany, trying to >>>>>>>>> make sense of what had happened to >>>>>> their >>>>>>>>> society during World War II. The foremost in my mind was Lewin. >>>>>> Except I >>>>>>>>> wonder if he would say the process of transformative action starts >>>>>>>>> not >>>>>> with >>>>>>>>> emergence of quasi-needs, but our willingness and abilities to >>>>>>>>> step >>>>>> back >>>>>>>>> from our quasi-needs and the ways that they drive us, often to >>>>>>>>> dysfunctional behaviors that it ultimately destructive to both our >>>>>> society >>>>>>>>> and to us as individuals. How hard this is to do, we have to keep >>>>>> going >>>>>>>>> back again and again. The quasi-needs, tribalism, acceptance, >>>>>> standing are >>>>>>>>> always there. It is how they shape us that is critical. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Michael >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto: >>>>>>>>> xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 8:31 PM >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >>>>>>>>> Nationalism >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> In following the perezhivanie thread I encountered the note I >>>>>> re-membered. >>>>>>>>> And interestingly mis-remembered. A translation into my focus on >>>>>>>>> mediational means. He places the starting point of the process of >>>>>>>>> transformative action at the emergence of quasi-needs (from Kurt >>>>>> Lewin). >>>>>>>>> That seems correct to me. The new mediational means emerge under >>>>>>>>> environmental presses. Ever functionalist ego need a goal(!). (The >>>>>> problem >>>>>>>>> with functionalism) In David's words, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Perhaps the place we should look for "exaptations" that can save >>>>>>>>> both >>>>>> our >>>>>>>>> personalities and our environment is not in our evolved needs, but >>>>>>>>> in >>>>>> yet >>>>>>>>> to be designed quasi-needs. Artificial organs, after all, always >>>>>> suggest >>>>>>>>> new and ever more artificial functions, like chess and language. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> This point seems worth keeping in mind as we look at where this >>>>>>>>> group >>>>>> of >>>>>>>>> critical scholars who work within the Learning Sciences >>>>>>>>> disciplinary framework would like to lead us. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> mike >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> From mpacker@uniandes.edu.co Tue Jan 24 14:02:06 2017 From: mpacker@uniandes.edu.co (Martin John Packer) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2017 22:02:06 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism In-Reply-To: <7F7191DE-736A-4383-8BC9-45AA90EFB08D@gmail.com> References: <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C71964@CIO-KRC-D1MBX04.osuad.osu.edu> <1485073527094.7145@iped.uio.no> <5E5B95EA-374F-48EB-B308-BCE49DA52760@gmail.com> <1485113892233.91870@iped.uio.no> <2c9faf42-cb69-9860-4b9f-ea0f6f0ca307@mira.net> <1485241112188.8167@iped.uio.no> <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C77497@CIO-TNC-D1MBX11.osuad.osu.edu> <7F7191DE-736A-4383-8BC9-45AA90EFB08D@gmail.com> Message-ID: <56C2CD58-6910-4874-8EF4-FF20357CE249@uniandes.edu.co> And Laney College is (or it was when I knew it) a great place! Martin > On Jan 24, 2017, at 4:54 PM, Helena Worthen wrote: > > Shirin - A person like that would be great, and there are some around although not already in the pool. I should have made the word ?only? stronger. It works the other way, too ? someone with ?only? labor background is not ?necessarily? (I?m trying to back off) going to know anything about community organizing. They are different and their differences have lots of history, also worth knowing. > > We don?t want either tradition to get slighted. > > Don?t get me started!! I just wanted to say that this is a discussion worth having, and a fight worth joining. > > :) > Helena Worthen > helenaworthen@gmail.com > Berkeley, CA 94707 > Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com > > > >> On Jan 24, 2017, at 1:10 PM, Shirin Vossoughi wrote: >> >> Helena >> This was very interesting to hear about >> one question: >> this strikes me as a big assumption "Someone with only a degree in Ethnic >> Studies will not know this stuff." >> Would it be fruitful to look for someone with a strong background in Ethnic >> studies AND labor organizing within such a position? >> Sounds like a generative opening >> Shirin >> >> On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 2:58 PM, Helena Worthen >> wrote: >> >>> Just in time, I have been gifted with a way to "ascend (out of this >>> discussion) to the concrete." >>> >>> Mike mentions "forms of action" and says some colleagues are saying "focus >>> energy on academic work." Faculty committee work is part of academic work. >>> >>> I just got a phone call from a colleague who teaches at California State >>> University and who is, with me and others, on an advisory committee >>> convened to revive the moribund Labor Studies Program at Laney, a community >>> college in Oakland, near where I live. >>> >>> Everyone is probably aware that Labor Studies programs are target practice >>> for right-wingers. If you're not aware, you aren't surprised. So the >>> program at Laney has been shrinking for years. The idea now is to revive it >>> by joining it with the Community Studies Program, which is an umbrella >>> Ethnic Studies program. This makes sense, right? Latino Studies, Black >>> Studies, Gender Studies, Women's Studies, Asian Studies and Labor Studies >>> intuitively seem to belong together. They address people who are likely to >>> be working for a living. >>> >>> So our advisory committee will meet Thursday night and the big issue is >>> this: A core required course is going to be "Community and Labor >>> Organizing." This course already exists in the Community Studies program. >>> If it is submitted to the Academic Senate un-changed, it will speed through >>> approval and be offered in Fall 2017. It will also count for transfer to >>> the State University and UC systems. >>> >>> The catch is that as written, it has to be taught by someone with an >>> advanced Ethnic Studies degree. >>> >>> The easy thing to do is to shrug and let it through without changing it. >>> But an Ethnic Studies degree does not prepare someone to teach labor >>> organizing. First, there are a lot of technical issues that come up in >>> labor organizing. The tricks and traps of labor legislation are just the >>> beginning. Second, although you might think that labor unions and community >>> based organizations (CBOs) are natural allies, they have a very hard time >>> working with each other in practice because of the way authority runs >>> through them. Someone with only a degree in Ethnic Studies will not know >>> this stuff. >>> >>> But it's not just a matter of the content of the course. Letting the >>> course go to approval as is would eliminate the possibility that any of the >>> program faculty who come our of labor (who usually have degrees in >>> Philosophy, History, Political Science) would be able to teach that class. >>> >>> So, is this worth the fight? It looks, on the surface, like a tempest in a >>> teapot. But it's a concrete example of a moment when you can put the teeth >>> of economic justice into the mouth of (block that metaphor). >>> >>> I will go to the meeting Thursday night arguing in favor re-writing the >>> course description to allow faculty who do not have a degree in Ethnic >>> Studies to teach this course. I will say that it's worth losing a semester >>> because there is something bigger at stake here. This is also academic >>> work. >>> >>> >>> Helena Worthen >>> helenaworthen@gmail.com >>> Vietnam blog: helenaworthen.wordpress.com >>> >>> On Jan 24, 2017, at 10:18 AM, mike cole wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Michael >>>> >>>> Nice thought from Bateson. And I see that Peg has just posted a link >>>> to the book. Its certainly a keeper. >>>> >>>> But it does not speak to forms of action that people in our current >>>> circumstances. Some of my colleagues argue that it is essential for >>>> academics in these times to eschew politics in any visible form and >>>> to focus energy on the academic work precisely in order combat over >>>> simplification that threatens human life. >>>> >>>> The basic starting point of the LS/US Nationalism paper, as I see it, is >>>> that claim that the threat of nationalist/populism is GLOBAL and that it >>>> poses huge challenges to LS researchers. So we might not want to get too >>>> caught up in examining Trump/US version of this problem without >>> considering >>>> the rest of the world and its history. The 20th Century provided at least >>>> two clear examples of what happens when this configuration of >>>> nationalism/populism arises in modern times - two wars to end all wars. >>> If >>>> we are in fact returning to the 1930's in this regard, we are doing so in >>>> an unparalleled set of circumstances for homo sapiens. >>>> >>>> So as professionals/citizens, are there forms of action, lines of >>> research, >>>> that might be proposed that would nurture the beautiful in circumstances >>>> that do not involve high levels of radiation and mass destruction? Is >>>> tending to our intellectual gardens the direction to go? Or are forms of >>>> action of the sort proposed by the authors the right direction? And if >>> the >>>> latter, what do we know from past experience that might guide our >>> thinking? >>>> They set out to open the discussion in a major journal. >>>> >>>> Seems like the task here is to see what this group might possibly add to >>>> their attempts to strategize the future based on our collective >>> experience. >>>> >>>> Mike >>>> >>>> PS- Seems like Alfredo's perezhivanie project, as an exercise in >>>> international collaboration to both test a basic theoretical claim of >>>> Vygotsky's and to so collectively, might combine the academic and the >>>> political just a little. And just a little might be a lot. >>>> >>>> >>>> On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 9:40 AM, Glassman, Michael >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> So I am re-reading Bateson, somewhat in light of current happenings and >>> I >>>>> come across this paragraph near the beginning of Mind and Nature, >>>>> >>>>> "There seems to be something like a Gresham's law of cultural evolution >>>>> according to which the oversimplified will always displace the >>>>> sophisticated and the vulgar and hateful will always displace the >>>>> beautiful. And yet the beautiful persists." >>>>> >>>>> Wise words for his time and ours. The information in nature will always >>>>> bring us back around to the beautiful if we let it, but it always seems >>> to >>>>> slip through our fingers. Maybe another take on the arc of justice. >>> The >>>>> trouble of course is every time we let the vulgar and hateful displace >>> the >>>>> stakes seem to become much higher. >>>>> >>>>> Michael >>>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ >>>>> mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Alfredo Jornet Gil >>>>> Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2017 1:59 AM >>>>> To: ablunden@mira.net; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity < >>>>> xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu> >>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >>> Nationalism >>>>> >>>>> Francine, >>>>> >>>>> I agree analysis is only one tool and I hope we can do much more here >>> and >>>>> elsewhere. But the overtone window seems to resonate well with our quest >>>>> for understanding the possibilities/conditions for hearing Trump's voice >>>>> sound like a pleasant flute or like toilette flush. >>>>> >>>>> I think the idea of Irony also adds to the question of perezhivanie and >>>>> Trump in the sense that different perezhivanie will also imply different >>>>> forms of generalisation/consciousness. Irony seems to always involve >>> moving >>>>> a step up in the types of generalisation or metaphor. >>>>> >>>>> A good example may be found in considering the "Love Trumps Hate" >>> message >>>>> that has been going around in the media. Although I am no linguist, I am >>>>> gonna give it a try: If you were to hear the assertion literally, you >>> may >>>>> hear an imperative to do love Trump's hate in such a way as to enter >>> into a >>>>> double bind situation. To find yourself in this situation, you need to >>>>> stick to the transitive form of the subject (you love) with respect to >>> the >>>>> object (Trump hate). You kind of have to have faith in this form, >>> respect >>>>> the integrity of the object and the integrity of the subject each in its >>>>> own terms, and so you may come to feel confused, or perhaps end up >>> hating >>>>> just the same way Trump plays he hates. >>>>> >>>>> On the other hand, to be able to hear "love trumps hate" as a message of >>>>> love, as an equivalent (as per Vygotsky's equivalence) for another >>> message >>>>> that we also have seen these days, "when they go low we go high," then >>> you >>>>> have to take the relation between subject and object in a higher level >>> of >>>>> metaphor: you now hear the sentence in a context that modifies both >>> subject >>>>> and object; hate and love cannot be exclusive opposites. The sentence >>> then >>>>> is heard as intransitive, love and hate no longer are independent. And >>> most >>>>> importantly, once you hear the sentence in its intransitive form, love >>> and >>>>> hate no longer are the same. >>>>> >>>>> Similarly, to hear everything Trump said and take it literally takes a >>>>> very different act of faith that it takes hearing it literally as an >>> irony. >>>>> Alfredo >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ________________________________________ >>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>> on behalf of Larry Smolucha >>>>> Sent: 24 January 2017 02:35 >>>>> To: ablunden@mira.net; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >>> Nationalism >>>>> >>>>> Message from Francine: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Helena Worthen was right - I am serious about finding (and creating) new >>>>> tools for understanding the Trump movement. Analysis is only one tool >>> and >>>>> there is no insight when it is overused. Figurative, analogical, >>>>> metaphorical thinking gives us other tools. Recognizing IRONY means >>> getting >>>>> the punch line in a joke (as Freud >>>>> >>>>> explained in Jokes and Their Relation to the Unconscious). >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Is there a termteson in literature for the reversal that commonly occurs >>>>> in fairy tales? >>>>> >>>>> All that is gold does not glitter, not all those who wander are lost . >>> . . >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> 1) The ironic reversals that are taking place as people change their >>>>> alignment with >>>>> >>>>> political parties remind me of a geophysics phenomena - the reversal of >>>>> the earth's magnetic field that can happen over hundreds of thousands of >>>>> years. Both are disorienting. I will give this more thought, but for the >>>>> moment consider this much. When magnetic fields shift it is not all at >>>>> once, magnetic currents in the molten layers beneath the earth's solid >>>>> crust change polarities, sometimes causing a total >>>>> >>>>> reversal. Our political parties are commonly referred to as polar >>>>> opposites but those >>>>> >>>>> polarities are not fixed they are fluid. The blue collar working class >>> can >>>>> shift from the Democratic Party to the Republican. The Black vote can >>> shift >>>>> to the Republicans, the Democrats don't own it. In the 1950's Russian >>>>> sympathies were a hallmark of the left, now the left denounces Trumps >>>>> outreach to the Russians. [A caveat here - this is two dimensional >>> thinking >>>>> because there are only two poles on one geometric plane.] >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> 2) There is another concept, the Overton Window that is a scale of how >>>>> radical of a discourse the public will tolerate (also called the window >>> of >>>>> discourse). The Window >>>>> >>>>> opens and closes along a range of discourse from the acceptable to the >>>>> unthinkable. What discourse resonates with the general public (strikes a >>>>> chord)? What will they regard as taboo (or not politically correct)? >>> Issues >>>>> like that. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Here are a couple links worth looking at: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Donald Trump & The Overton Window --Resetting America's Political < >>>>> http://www.nationalreview.com/article/428200/donald- >>>>> trump-overton-window-american-political-debate> >>>>> www.nationalreview.com/.../donald-trump-overton-window-american-p< >>>>> http://www.nationalreview.com/.../donald-trump-overton- >>> window-american-p >>>>>> .. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Trump's Win Smashed the 'Overton Window' | LifeZette>>>> lifezette.com/polizette/trumps-win-smashed-overton-window/> >>>>> www.lifezette.com/polizette/trumps-win-smashed-overton-window/ >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Can any of this be used with the concept of perezhivanie? >>>>> >>>>> ________________________________ >>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>> on behalf of Andy Blunden >>>>> Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 9:37 PM >>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism >>>>> >>>>> "Irony" - good word to introduce here Francine. >>>>> >>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>> Andy Blunden >>>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy >>>>> Andy Blunden's Home Page home.mira.net Andy >>>>> Blunden's Home Page with links to pages I maintain and mail-to buttons >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making >>>>> [http://www.brill.com/sites/default/files/styles/large/ >>>>> public/ftp/images/products/295x295/92947.jpg?itok=j5KXqZw3]< >>>>> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making> >>>>> >>>>> The Origins of Collective Decision Making | Brill>>>> products/book/origins-collective-decision-making> >>>>> www.brill.com >>>>> The Origins of Collective Decision Making, identifies three paradigms of >>>>> collective decision making - Counsel, Majority and Consensus, and >>> discovers >>>>> their origins ... >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 23/01/2017 2:32 PM, Larry Smolucha wrote: >>>>>> Message from Francine Smolucha: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> The key to an analysis of the Trump movement is understanding the >>>>>> >>>>>> fundamental IRONIES that have rocked American politics. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> The workers revolution has resulted in the >>>>>> >>>>>> workers/unions deserting the Left, the socialists, the Democratic >>> Party. >>>>>> >>>>>> Trump is a Capitalist regardless of whether he actually has a >>> Republican >>>>> ideology. >>>>>> >>>>>> The workers' movement has been hijacked by a capitalist. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> The other great IRONY is that Trump wants to make Russia a U.S. ally >>>>> (again). >>>>>> >>>>>> The Left, the socialists, the Democratic Party are the ones demonizing >>>>>> Russia - >>>>>> >>>>>> what a reversal! >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Since CHAT derives from Russian psychology (Leontiev and Vygotsky) and >>>>> the backlash against Trump is also a backlash against all things >>> Russian - >>>>> this puts CHAT in a particularly awkward position. How can a cultural >>>>> historical psychology that originated in Russia become the leader in the >>>>> anti-Trump discourse? or lead an anti-Trump educational movement? You >>> are >>>>> even extolling a Russian concept PEREZHIVANIE. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I think the XMCA needs to examine its own perezhivanie at this time. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> ________________________________ >>>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>>> on behalf of mike cole >>>>>> >>>>>> Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 3:01 PM >>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>>> Cc: Mariane Hedegaard; Reijo Miettinen; Seth Chaiklin >>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >>>>>> Nationalism >>>>>> >>>>>> Helena et al -- >>>>>> >>>>>> An important emphasis in the article for me was on the fact that >>>>>> although the article focused on the American nationalist movement that >>>>>> has just pulled of an alt-right coup, similar movements are poised to >>>>>> take hold in a lot of places in Europe to join the many already >>>>>> entrenched unsavory governments in other parts of the world. >>>>>> >>>>>> The CRADLE center in Helsinki is under very concerted attack and the >>>>>> right wing government appears, from this distance, to be making great >>>>>> progress on destroying its legacy. The same process has been in >>>>>> Denmark for some time, also with apparent success. >>>>>> >>>>>> What do our international colleagues who have already felt the hot >>>>>> breath of right wing nationalism have to offer in terms of strategies >>>>>> of resistence? >>>>>> >>>>>> Back to "what is to be done," that sombre question from an earlier >>>>>> era. The answer last time did not produce what it promised. >>>>>> >>>>>> mike >>>>>> >>>>>> mike >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 12:22 PM, Helena Worthen >>>>>> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Thank you, Alfredo - I gave it a read. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Sure, of course they're right. But I am very disappointed. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I was hoping that the following was only item #1 in a long list of >>>>>>> "what the 2016 election made apparent": >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The 2016 election has made apparent the need for scholarship that >>>>>>> explicitly defends and furthers the rights and well-being of people >>>>>>> of color, immigrants, Muslims, women, people who are differently >>>>>>> abled, LGBTQ communities, and the earth. These are stances that have >>>>>>> been limited, at least explicitly, in the Learning Sciences. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> But the call for inclusion was not just #1, it seems to be the whole >>>>>>> thing. In other words, it's all about identity -plus the earth, of >>>>> course. >>>>>>> While inclusion is necessary, it's not even a start. Yes, research, >>>>>>> teaching, publishing, promotion, conferences - everything associated >>>>>>> with teaching and learning has to include everyone as equals (see >>>>>>> Andy's book) in one way or another - but then what? What are they (we) >>>>> supposed to do? >>>>>>> Where does the pretty language touch the ground? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I was listening to a broadcast of the Women's March in DC on Saturday >>>>>>> morning, and Kamala Harris, who was the California State Attorney >>>>>>> General and is now a junior Senator from CA, was addressing the >>>>>>> rally. She said, "People always ask me to talk about women's issues. >>>>>>> I say, 'Oh, I'm SO glad you're interested in economics!! Let's talk >>>>>>> about economics." And she ran through a whole set of parallel >>>>>>> back-and-forths, always pulling identity questions back to wages, >>> jobs, >>>>> earning, supporting your family, etc etc. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Much as we need to wipe away any barriers to the Learning Sciences >>>>>>> (and the professions and institutions dedicated to them) due to >>>>>>> identity, until the Learning Sciences start taking a look at the >>>>>>> place where most people spend most of their lives - not school, I >>>>>>> mean - but work, they will be engaging in a soft conversation at the >>>>>>> edge of the real issue. It's a pleasant conversation but it doesn't >>>>>>> put a hand on the levers that translate skill and knowledge into rent >>>>> and groceries. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> H >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Helena Worthen >>>>>>> helenaworthen@gmail.com >>>>>>> Berkeley, CA 94707 >>>>>>> Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Jan 22, 2017, at 11:38 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> Here it is, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> http://cognitionandinstruction.com/engagements-the-learning- >>>>>>> sciences-in-a-new-era-of-u-s-nationalism/ >>>>>>>> Alfredo >>>>>>>> ________________________________________ >>>>>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> on behalf of Helena Worthen >>>>>>>> Sent: 22 January 2017 20:24 >>>>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >>>>>>> Nationalism >>>>>>>> Someone please re-send the link to this article? I think I'm going >>>>>>>> to >>>>>>> want to read it and respond to Mike's question. >>>>>>>> Thanks - H >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Helena Worthen >>>>>>>> helenaworthen@gmail.com >>>>>>>> Berkeley, CA 94707 >>>>>>>> Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Jan 22, 2017, at 12:25 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> Mike, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> thanks a lot for sharing this article. You and Michael, who have >>>>>>>>> and >>>>>>> know more history, have spoken in terms of reminiscences. I have >>>>>>> lived and know less, and the article feels like fresh air. During my >>>>>>> PhD, I begun to increasingly feel that I had to due something to act >>>>>>> and respond to the increasing ecological and humanitarian globe >>>>>>> crises. But how could I do anything if I had children and a PhD to >>>>>>> finalise?? What could I do that would also be doing my job as >>>>>>> researcher in a department of education? It was very difficult to >>>>>>> find anything, partly because almost every academic quest would focus >>>>>>> on learning, but so little on social development. How many scientific >>>>>>> articles are dedicated to socio-political questions in the most cited >>>>> educational journals? I felt very powerless. >>>>>>>>> To be able to address these questions within my expertise, is a >>>>>>> challenge partly because contrary to Dewey's hope, educational >>>>>>> research has only marginally focused on these questions, and yet they >>>>>>> may be exactly the question that matter to education. What are we >>>>>>> educating for? Indeed, what is education for? I think we face a >>>>>>> serious problem when someone (like myself), being an educational >>>>>>> researchers/scholar, still has to scratch her head wondering <>>>>>> can I make my profession matter to social change and development?>> >>>>> Vygotsky would be shocked! >>>>>>>>> Alfredo >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> on behalf of mike cole >>>>>>>>> Sent: 19 January 2017 04:51 >>>>>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >>>>>>> Nationalism >>>>>>>>> Yes Michael, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> It feels like the world of the later 1930's about the time I was >>>>>>>>> born as that period came down to me through the prism of a family >>>>>>>>> of "premature anti fascists." >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> For a great re-creation of those times see the highly ambivalent >>>>>>>>> film by Frank Capra, "meet John Doe." It has American big capital >>>>>>>>> interconnected with fascism combined with populist collectivism in >>>>>>>>> a manner that >>>>>>> points at >>>>>>>>> the media (as then experienced) as the bad guys in disguise. Happy >>>>>>> Ending, >>>>>>>>> Beethoven Ode to Joy and all. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> It's come round again, nastier this time. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Mike >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 6:20 PM Glassman, Michael >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Mike >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> It was so interesting to read this note after reading the >>>>>>>>>> Cognition and Instruction essay. All the way through it I kept >>>>>>>>>> thinking we have been here before. It reminded me of the >>>>>>>>>> scholars, especially those who had escaped from Germany, trying to >>>>>>>>>> make sense of what had happened to >>>>>>> their >>>>>>>>>> society during World War II. The foremost in my mind was Lewin. >>>>>>> Except I >>>>>>>>>> wonder if he would say the process of transformative action starts >>>>>>>>>> not >>>>>>> with >>>>>>>>>> emergence of quasi-needs, but our willingness and abilities to >>>>>>>>>> step >>>>>>> back >>>>>>>>>> from our quasi-needs and the ways that they drive us, often to >>>>>>>>>> dysfunctional behaviors that it ultimately destructive to both our >>>>>>> society >>>>>>>>>> and to us as individuals. How hard this is to do, we have to keep >>>>>>> going >>>>>>>>>> back again and again. The quasi-needs, tribalism, acceptance, >>>>>>> standing are >>>>>>>>>> always there. It is how they shape us that is critical. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Michael >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto: >>>>>>>>>> xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 8:31 PM >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >>>>>>>>>> Nationalism >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> In following the perezhivanie thread I encountered the note I >>>>>>> re-membered. >>>>>>>>>> And interestingly mis-remembered. A translation into my focus on >>>>>>>>>> mediational means. He places the starting point of the process of >>>>>>>>>> transformative action at the emergence of quasi-needs (from Kurt >>>>>>> Lewin). >>>>>>>>>> That seems correct to me. The new mediational means emerge under >>>>>>>>>> environmental presses. Ever functionalist ego need a goal(!). (The >>>>>>> problem >>>>>>>>>> with functionalism) In David's words, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Perhaps the place we should look for "exaptations" that can save >>>>>>>>>> both >>>>>>> our >>>>>>>>>> personalities and our environment is not in our evolved needs, but >>>>>>>>>> in >>>>>>> yet >>>>>>>>>> to be designed quasi-needs. Artificial organs, after all, always >>>>>>> suggest >>>>>>>>>> new and ever more artificial functions, like chess and language. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> This point seems worth keeping in mind as we look at where this >>>>>>>>>> group >>>>>>> of >>>>>>>>>> critical scholars who work within the Learning Sciences >>>>>>>>>> disciplinary framework would like to lead us. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> mike >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>> >>> >>> > > From hshonerd@gmail.com Tue Jan 24 14:11:19 2017 From: hshonerd@gmail.com (HENRY SHONERD) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2017 15:11:19 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: <004d01d27664$b19d5110$14d7f330$@att.net> References: <1485031482970.89461@iped.uio.no> <1485191332785.92884@iped.uio.no> <004d01d27664$b19d5110$14d7f330$@att.net> Message-ID: <7A549FC8-F5B8-4BF7-A1A1-8617ADD17100@gmail.com> Peg and all, At first I thought this was a feel-good moment from something Sophie Cruz had memorized?I couldn?t believe she is that articulate. I asked my wife if she had heard about Sophie Cruz and if she could possible measure up to her performance in Washington in a conversation, a dialog. My wife told me that an interview on Democracy now confirmed her ?gift of gab? at six years old. Amazing. Reminds me of the song ?Teach Your Children Well?: teach your children well lyrics and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teach_Your_Children . Henry > On Jan 24, 2017, at 10:09 AM, Peg Griffin wrote: > > Maybe young Sophie Cruz provides information relevant to these age differences: "I also want to tell the children not to be afraid because we are not alone. There are still many people that have their hearts filled with love and tenderness to snuggle in this path of life. Let's keep together and fight for their rights! God is with us!" > > Snuggle. > > https://mic.com/articles/166246/6-year-old-sophie-cruz-child-of-undocumented-parents-advocated-for-immigrants-at-the-womens-march#.hW1TkWzCd > > -----Original Message----- > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole > Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 6:54 PM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie > > Martin's caution relates to my suggestion that we not restrict the same to our families or students and friends. People experienced the Trump victory in different ways. The example from LSV involves kids of three ages. That still seems an important focus. Our contemporaries are in there 30's + (and > ++). Our students are in latest teens or 20+. High school kids are in > ++the > teens. Middle school kids..... > > It is my strong impression that there are significant age differences in ones experience of the event that could be elicited pretty easily and compared in the group across other interesting categories of difference such as nationality. > > A small, positive, collective effort? > > mike > > On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 9:08 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > wrote: > >> Dear Martin, >> >> thanks for the nuances you introduce. Yes, I agree with you, it is >> totally sensible to hear Trump's words with hope and actually >> experience >> (perezhivat) them in such a way as to become moving force towards >> transformation. I was only approaching the speech from a developmental >> stages perspective, where, to hear the speech with contempt given the >> speech's formal structure as a type of generalisation, would mean to >> hear them within that stage that Andy very appropriately (in my view) >> called as "magic". Vygotsky (I think) also used this term to refer to >> a stage in child development. >> >> But I do not wish to say that contempt is the only possible quality, >> and so, as you very nicely remark, hope, enthusiasm, empowerment, all >> these and their developmental and historical conditions should be >> considered as possibilities of hearing Trump's speech. >> >> Thanks a lot for the resources/links, I am incorporating them to our >> joint document. >> Alfredo >> >> ________________________________________ >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> on behalf of Martin John Packer >> >> Sent: 22 January 2017 16:08 >> To: xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie >> >> Hi Alfredo. >> >> I think your proposal is very interesting; that we could explore two >> different ways of hearing and understanding Trump?s words. But if I >> understand you correctly, I don?t agree that ?in the first case, there >> is no hope for change, there is contempt.? I have lived in Michigan >> and Pennsylvania, and in both states industries that were central to >> the economic rise of the working class, auto manufacturing and steel >> foundries, collapsed as a result of globalization. I have seen first >> hand some of the communities that were almost completely destroyed. I >> believe that people who experienced these changes do hear Trump?s >> words with hope for change, and if they have contempt it is for >> professional politicians who they feel speak but do not act. >> >> But perhaps you mean it was a lack of hope that *led* people to Trump: >> >> > donald-trump-manufacturing-jobs-hope/496541/> >> >> The New Yorker has published several articles by George Packer (no >> relation) on the appeal that Trump has to the white working class. For >> example: >> >> > donald-trump-appeals-to-the-white-working-class> >> >> Martin >> >> >> >> >> >> On Jan 21, 2017, at 3:44 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > > wrote: >> >> Dear Helena, Andy, all, >> >> >> Unfortunately, I have not been able to find the time to watch the >> movie Fate of a Man, but I have followed the very interesting analyses >> and conversations about it. I am opening this thread as connexions >> between those analyses, perezhivanie, and current tragic social and >> political situation in the US and elsewhere. This also connects with >> the article that Mike shared on the position of the Learning Sciences >> with regard to this situation (how happy I was to see this initiative!). >> >> >> In particular, I wanted to pick up on Helena's very true comment that >> "the US is going to have to produce some works of scholarship or art, >> or both, that attempt to explain what is happening now here in the US >> -- for example, this afternoon, under President Trump." >> >> >> Yesterday, we saw at home Trump's speech. Although we had followed >> Trump's campaign and its denigrating tenor, it was yesterday, for the >> first time, that my wife and me got this gut feeling of true tragedy, >> of a real *drama* as we heard those empty, but to recover the prior >> article for discussion, hollowed and hollowing words coming out of >> that mouth. It came upon us that there may be lots of people for whom >> those words are not hollowed, but actually encouraging, rich, beautiful. How can you hear that as beauty? >> >> >> So, I was wondering, and in following up with our 2016 MCA Issue 4 >> discussion, whether we could not actually conduct an analysis of the >> sort Marc offers in his article of the perezhivanie. Just as Vygotsky >> explains how 3 different children experience the situation of an >> alcoholic mother differently, could not we perform an analysis ?of >> that perezhivanie in which a person experiences yesterday's situation >> as one of encouragement, of freedom and hope. Would that not be a way >> to try to understand what is going on? This would not be a piece of >> art, but could be something we could do to try to understand and change this situation. >> >> We could then contrast that perezhivanie with the one many of as have, >> in which the situation is experience as a real TRAGEDY. I think in the >> first case, there is no hope for change, there is contempt; in the >> second, hearing those words as hollowed and hollowing require that you >> live the situation as a doubled situation in which you experienced it >> from a very different developmental stage. One in which the speech >> sounds as a case of involution. >> >> Should we find the transcribed speech and perform such analysis? >> >> >> Going now to support the Woman's march here in Victoria BC. >> >> Alfredo >> >> >> >> > > From hshonerd@gmail.com Tue Jan 24 14:24:04 2017 From: hshonerd@gmail.com (HENRY SHONERD) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2017 15:24:04 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism In-Reply-To: References: <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C71964@CIO-KRC-D1MBX04.osuad.osu.edu> <1485073527094.7145@iped.uio.no> <5E5B95EA-374F-48EB-B308-BCE49DA52760@gmail.com> <1485113892233.91870@iped.uio.no> <2c9faf42-cb69-9860-4b9f-ea0f6f0ca307@mira.net> <1485241112188.8167@iped.uio.no> <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C77497@CIO-TNC-D1MBX11.osuad.osu.edu> Message-ID: <19545050-B4A3-4A7E-90D7-2B692BEE2A4C@gmail.com> Mike, Have you seen the sign I read at the Albuquerque rally on Saturday: "Trump?s Only Man Date is Putin?? It occurred to me that Trump has left an opening I can live with: Get closer to the Russian People. As if in answer to a prayer, I found that Pussy Riot is coming to Albuquerque on March 14 (Pi Day) with: How to Start a Revolution. Maybe their on a tour of the U.S. Carnival. Henry > On Jan 24, 2017, at 11:18 AM, mike cole wrote: > > Hi Michael > > Nice thought from Bateson. And I see that Peg has just posted a link > to the book. Its certainly a keeper. > > But it does not speak to forms of action that people in our current > circumstances. Some of my colleagues argue that it is essential for > academics in these times to eschew politics in any visible form and > to focus energy on the academic work precisely in order combat over > simplification that threatens human life. > > The basic starting point of the LS/US Nationalism paper, as I see it, is > that claim that the threat of nationalist/populism is GLOBAL and that it > poses huge challenges to LS researchers. So we might not want to get too > caught up in examining Trump/US version of this problem without considering > the rest of the world and its history. The 20th Century provided at least > two clear examples of what happens when this configuration of > nationalism/populism arises in modern times - two wars to end all wars. If > we are in fact returning to the 1930's in this regard, we are doing so in > an unparalleled set of circumstances for homo sapiens. > > So as professionals/citizens, are there forms of action, lines of research, > that might be proposed that would nurture the beautiful in circumstances > that do not involve high levels of radiation and mass destruction? Is > tending to our intellectual gardens the direction to go? Or are forms of > action of the sort proposed by the authors the right direction? And if the > latter, what do we know from past experience that might guide our thinking? > They set out to open the discussion in a major journal. > > Seems like the task here is to see what this group might possibly add to > their attempts to strategize the future based on our collective experience. > > Mike > > PS- Seems like Alfredo's perezhivanie project, as an exercise in > international collaboration to both test a basic theoretical claim of > Vygotsky's and to so collectively, might combine the academic and the > political just a little. And just a little might be a lot. > > > On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 9:40 AM, Glassman, Michael > wrote: > >> So I am re-reading Bateson, somewhat in light of current happenings and I >> come across this paragraph near the beginning of Mind and Nature, >> >> "There seems to be something like a Gresham's law of cultural evolution >> according to which the oversimplified will always displace the >> sophisticated and the vulgar and hateful will always displace the >> beautiful. And yet the beautiful persists." >> >> Wise words for his time and ours. The information in nature will always >> bring us back around to the beautiful if we let it, but it always seems to >> slip through our fingers. Maybe another take on the arc of justice. The >> trouble of course is every time we let the vulgar and hateful displace the >> stakes seem to become much higher. >> >> Michael >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ >> mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Alfredo Jornet Gil >> Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2017 1:59 AM >> To: ablunden@mira.net; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity < >> xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu> >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism >> >> Francine, >> >> I agree analysis is only one tool and I hope we can do much more here and >> elsewhere. But the overtone window seems to resonate well with our quest >> for understanding the possibilities/conditions for hearing Trump's voice >> sound like a pleasant flute or like toilette flush. >> >> I think the idea of Irony also adds to the question of perezhivanie and >> Trump in the sense that different perezhivanie will also imply different >> forms of generalisation/consciousness. Irony seems to always involve moving >> a step up in the types of generalisation or metaphor. >> >> A good example may be found in considering the "Love Trumps Hate" message >> that has been going around in the media. Although I am no linguist, I am >> gonna give it a try: If you were to hear the assertion literally, you may >> hear an imperative to do love Trump's hate in such a way as to enter into a >> double bind situation. To find yourself in this situation, you need to >> stick to the transitive form of the subject (you love) with respect to the >> object (Trump hate). You kind of have to have faith in this form, respect >> the integrity of the object and the integrity of the subject each in its >> own terms, and so you may come to feel confused, or perhaps end up hating >> just the same way Trump plays he hates. >> >> On the other hand, to be able to hear "love trumps hate" as a message of >> love, as an equivalent (as per Vygotsky's equivalence) for another message >> that we also have seen these days, "when they go low we go high," then you >> have to take the relation between subject and object in a higher level of >> metaphor: you now hear the sentence in a context that modifies both subject >> and object; hate and love cannot be exclusive opposites. The sentence then >> is heard as intransitive, love and hate no longer are independent. And most >> importantly, once you hear the sentence in its intransitive form, love and >> hate no longer are the same. >> >> Similarly, to hear everything Trump said and take it literally takes a >> very different act of faith that it takes hearing it literally as an irony. >> Alfredo >> >> >> ________________________________________ >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> on behalf of Larry Smolucha >> Sent: 24 January 2017 02:35 >> To: ablunden@mira.net; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism >> >> Message from Francine: >> >> >> Helena Worthen was right - I am serious about finding (and creating) new >> tools for understanding the Trump movement. Analysis is only one tool and >> there is no insight when it is overused. Figurative, analogical, >> metaphorical thinking gives us other tools. Recognizing IRONY means getting >> the punch line in a joke (as Freud >> >> explained in Jokes and Their Relation to the Unconscious). >> >> >> Is there a termteson in literature for the reversal that commonly occurs >> in fairy tales? >> >> All that is gold does not glitter, not all those who wander are lost . . . >> >> >> 1) The ironic reversals that are taking place as people change their >> alignment with >> >> political parties remind me of a geophysics phenomena - the reversal of >> the earth's magnetic field that can happen over hundreds of thousands of >> years. Both are disorienting. I will give this more thought, but for the >> moment consider this much. When magnetic fields shift it is not all at >> once, magnetic currents in the molten layers beneath the earth's solid >> crust change polarities, sometimes causing a total >> >> reversal. Our political parties are commonly referred to as polar >> opposites but those >> >> polarities are not fixed they are fluid. The blue collar working class can >> shift from the Democratic Party to the Republican. The Black vote can shift >> to the Republicans, the Democrats don't own it. In the 1950's Russian >> sympathies were a hallmark of the left, now the left denounces Trumps >> outreach to the Russians. [A caveat here - this is two dimensional thinking >> because there are only two poles on one geometric plane.] >> >> >> 2) There is another concept, the Overton Window that is a scale of how >> radical of a discourse the public will tolerate (also called the window of >> discourse). The Window >> >> opens and closes along a range of discourse from the acceptable to the >> unthinkable. What discourse resonates with the general public (strikes a >> chord)? What will they regard as taboo (or not politically correct)? Issues >> like that. >> >> >> Here are a couple links worth looking at: >> >> >> Donald Trump & The Overton Window --Resetting America's Political < >> http://www.nationalreview.com/article/428200/donald- >> trump-overton-window-american-political-debate> >> www.nationalreview.com/.../donald-trump-overton-window-american-p< >> http://www.nationalreview.com/.../donald-trump-overton-window-american-p >>> .. >> >> >> >> Trump's Win Smashed the 'Overton Window' | LifeZette> lifezette.com/polizette/trumps-win-smashed-overton-window/> >> www.lifezette.com/polizette/trumps-win-smashed-overton-window/ >> >> >> >> Can any of this be used with the concept of perezhivanie? >> >> ________________________________ >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> on behalf of Andy Blunden >> Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 9:37 PM >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism >> >> "Irony" - good word to introduce here Francine. >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------ >> Andy Blunden >> http://home.mira.net/~andy >> Andy Blunden's Home Page home.mira.net Andy >> Blunden's Home Page with links to pages I maintain and mail-to buttons >> >> >> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making >> [http://www.brill.com/sites/default/files/styles/large/ >> public/ftp/images/products/295x295/92947.jpg?itok=j5KXqZw3]< >> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making> >> >> The Origins of Collective Decision Making | Brill> products/book/origins-collective-decision-making> >> www.brill.com >> The Origins of Collective Decision Making, identifies three paradigms of >> collective decision making - Counsel, Majority and Consensus, and discovers >> their origins ... >> >> >> >> On 23/01/2017 2:32 PM, Larry Smolucha wrote: >>> Message from Francine Smolucha: >>> >>> >>> The key to an analysis of the Trump movement is understanding the >>> >>> fundamental IRONIES that have rocked American politics. >>> >>> >>> The workers revolution has resulted in the >>> >>> workers/unions deserting the Left, the socialists, the Democratic Party. >>> >>> Trump is a Capitalist regardless of whether he actually has a Republican >> ideology. >>> >>> The workers' movement has been hijacked by a capitalist. >>> >>> >>> The other great IRONY is that Trump wants to make Russia a U.S. ally >> (again). >>> >>> The Left, the socialists, the Democratic Party are the ones demonizing >>> Russia - >>> >>> what a reversal! >>> >>> >>> Since CHAT derives from Russian psychology (Leontiev and Vygotsky) and >> the backlash against Trump is also a backlash against all things Russian - >> this puts CHAT in a particularly awkward position. How can a cultural >> historical psychology that originated in Russia become the leader in the >> anti-Trump discourse? or lead an anti-Trump educational movement? You are >> even extolling a Russian concept PEREZHIVANIE. >>> >>> >>> I think the XMCA needs to examine its own perezhivanie at this time. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ________________________________ >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>> on behalf of mike cole >>> >>> Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 3:01 PM >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>> Cc: Mariane Hedegaard; Reijo Miettinen; Seth Chaiklin >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >>> Nationalism >>> >>> Helena et al -- >>> >>> An important emphasis in the article for me was on the fact that >>> although the article focused on the American nationalist movement that >>> has just pulled of an alt-right coup, similar movements are poised to >>> take hold in a lot of places in Europe to join the many already >>> entrenched unsavory governments in other parts of the world. >>> >>> The CRADLE center in Helsinki is under very concerted attack and the >>> right wing government appears, from this distance, to be making great >>> progress on destroying its legacy. The same process has been in >>> Denmark for some time, also with apparent success. >>> >>> What do our international colleagues who have already felt the hot >>> breath of right wing nationalism have to offer in terms of strategies >>> of resistence? >>> >>> Back to "what is to be done," that sombre question from an earlier >>> era. The answer last time did not produce what it promised. >>> >>> mike >>> >>> mike >>> >>> On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 12:22 PM, Helena Worthen >>> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Thank you, Alfredo - I gave it a read. >>>> >>>> Sure, of course they're right. But I am very disappointed. >>>> >>>> I was hoping that the following was only item #1 in a long list of >>>> "what the 2016 election made apparent": >>>> >>>> The 2016 election has made apparent the need for scholarship that >>>> explicitly defends and furthers the rights and well-being of people >>>> of color, immigrants, Muslims, women, people who are differently >>>> abled, LGBTQ communities, and the earth. These are stances that have >>>> been limited, at least explicitly, in the Learning Sciences. >>>> >>>> But the call for inclusion was not just #1, it seems to be the whole >>>> thing. In other words, it's all about identity -plus the earth, of >> course. >>>> While inclusion is necessary, it's not even a start. Yes, research, >>>> teaching, publishing, promotion, conferences - everything associated >>>> with teaching and learning has to include everyone as equals (see >>>> Andy's book) in one way or another - but then what? What are they (we) >> supposed to do? >>>> Where does the pretty language touch the ground? >>>> >>>> I was listening to a broadcast of the Women's March in DC on Saturday >>>> morning, and Kamala Harris, who was the California State Attorney >>>> General and is now a junior Senator from CA, was addressing the >>>> rally. She said, "People always ask me to talk about women's issues. >>>> I say, 'Oh, I'm SO glad you're interested in economics!! Let's talk >>>> about economics." And she ran through a whole set of parallel >>>> back-and-forths, always pulling identity questions back to wages, jobs, >> earning, supporting your family, etc etc. >>>> >>>> Much as we need to wipe away any barriers to the Learning Sciences >>>> (and the professions and institutions dedicated to them) due to >>>> identity, until the Learning Sciences start taking a look at the >>>> place where most people spend most of their lives - not school, I >>>> mean - but work, they will be engaging in a soft conversation at the >>>> edge of the real issue. It's a pleasant conversation but it doesn't >>>> put a hand on the levers that translate skill and knowledge into rent >> and groceries. >>>> >>>> H >>>> >>>> >>>> Helena Worthen >>>> helenaworthen@gmail.com >>>> Berkeley, CA 94707 >>>> Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> On Jan 22, 2017, at 11:38 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >>>>> >>>> wrote: >>>>> Here it is, >>>>> >>>>> http://cognitionandinstruction.com/engagements-the-learning- >>>> sciences-in-a-new-era-of-u-s-nationalism/ >>>>> Alfredo >>>>> ________________________________________ >>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>> >>>> on behalf of Helena Worthen >>>>> Sent: 22 January 2017 20:24 >>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >>>> Nationalism >>>>> Someone please re-send the link to this article? I think I'm going >>>>> to >>>> want to read it and respond to Mike's question. >>>>> Thanks - H >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Helena Worthen >>>>> helenaworthen@gmail.com >>>>> Berkeley, CA 94707 >>>>> Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> On Jan 22, 2017, at 12:25 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >>>>>> >>>> wrote: >>>>>> Mike, >>>>>> >>>>>> thanks a lot for sharing this article. You and Michael, who have >>>>>> and >>>> know more history, have spoken in terms of reminiscences. I have >>>> lived and know less, and the article feels like fresh air. During my >>>> PhD, I begun to increasingly feel that I had to due something to act >>>> and respond to the increasing ecological and humanitarian globe >>>> crises. But how could I do anything if I had children and a PhD to >>>> finalise?? What could I do that would also be doing my job as >>>> researcher in a department of education? It was very difficult to >>>> find anything, partly because almost every academic quest would focus >>>> on learning, but so little on social development. How many scientific >>>> articles are dedicated to socio-political questions in the most cited >> educational journals? I felt very powerless. >>>>>> To be able to address these questions within my expertise, is a >>>> challenge partly because contrary to Dewey's hope, educational >>>> research has only marginally focused on these questions, and yet they >>>> may be exactly the question that matter to education. What are we >>>> educating for? Indeed, what is education for? I think we face a >>>> serious problem when someone (like myself), being an educational >>>> researchers/scholar, still has to scratch her head wondering <>>> can I make my profession matter to social change and development?>> >> Vygotsky would be shocked! >>>>>> Alfredo >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>>> >>>> on behalf of mike cole >>>>>> Sent: 19 January 2017 04:51 >>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >>>> Nationalism >>>>>> Yes Michael, >>>>>> >>>>>> It feels like the world of the later 1930's about the time I was >>>>>> born as that period came down to me through the prism of a family >>>>>> of "premature anti fascists." >>>>>> >>>>>> For a great re-creation of those times see the highly ambivalent >>>>>> film by Frank Capra, "meet John Doe." It has American big capital >>>>>> interconnected with fascism combined with populist collectivism in >>>>>> a manner that >>>> points at >>>>>> the media (as then experienced) as the bad guys in disguise. Happy >>>> Ending, >>>>>> Beethoven Ode to Joy and all. >>>>>> >>>>>> It's come round again, nastier this time. >>>>>> >>>>>> Mike >>>>>> On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 6:20 PM Glassman, Michael >>>>>> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Mike >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It was so interesting to read this note after reading the >>>>>>> Cognition and Instruction essay. All the way through it I kept >>>>>>> thinking we have been here before. It reminded me of the >>>>>>> scholars, especially those who had escaped from Germany, trying to >>>>>>> make sense of what had happened to >>>> their >>>>>>> society during World War II. The foremost in my mind was Lewin. >>>> Except I >>>>>>> wonder if he would say the process of transformative action starts >>>>>>> not >>>> with >>>>>>> emergence of quasi-needs, but our willingness and abilities to >>>>>>> step >>>> back >>>>>>> from our quasi-needs and the ways that they drive us, often to >>>>>>> dysfunctional behaviors that it ultimately destructive to both our >>>> society >>>>>>> and to us as individuals. How hard this is to do, we have to keep >>>> going >>>>>>> back again and again. The quasi-needs, tribalism, acceptance, >>>> standing are >>>>>>> always there. It is how they shape us that is critical. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Michael >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto: >>>>>>> xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 8:31 PM >>>>>>> >>>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >>>>>>> Nationalism >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> In following the perezhivanie thread I encountered the note I >>>> re-membered. >>>>>>> And interestingly mis-remembered. A translation into my focus on >>>>>>> mediational means. He places the starting point of the process of >>>>>>> transformative action at the emergence of quasi-needs (from Kurt >>>> Lewin). >>>>>>> That seems correct to me. The new mediational means emerge under >>>>>>> environmental presses. Ever functionalist ego need a goal(!). (The >>>> problem >>>>>>> with functionalism) In David's words, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Perhaps the place we should look for "exaptations" that can save >>>>>>> both >>>> our >>>>>>> personalities and our environment is not in our evolved needs, but >>>>>>> in >>>> yet >>>>>>> to be designed quasi-needs. Artificial organs, after all, always >>>> suggest >>>>>>> new and ever more artificial functions, like chess and language. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This point seems worth keeping in mind as we look at where this >>>>>>> group >>>> of >>>>>>> critical scholars who work within the Learning Sciences >>>>>>> disciplinary framework would like to lead us. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> mike >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >> >> From hshonerd@gmail.com Tue Jan 24 14:39:02 2017 From: hshonerd@gmail.com (HENRY SHONERD) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2017 15:39:02 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism In-Reply-To: <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C7753A@CIO-TNC-D1MBX11.osuad.osu.edu> References: <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C71964@CIO-KRC-D1MBX04.osuad.osu.edu> <1485073527094.7145@iped.uio.no> <5E5B95EA-374F-48EB-B308-BCE49DA52760@gmail.com> <1485113892233.91870@iped.uio.no> <2c9faf42-cb69-9860-4b9f-ea0f6f0ca307@mira.net> <1485241112188.8167@iped.uio.no> <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C77497@CIO-TNC-D1MBX11.osuad.osu.edu> <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C7753A@CIO-TNC-D1MBX11.osuad.osu.edu> Message-ID: Michael, Your post moves me to something I have thought a bit about, what you call ?democratic decision making". Andy has written extensively about collaborative decision making. I was wondering about leadership. Today I ran across the term ?Leaderful?. So as not to instantiate the Peter Principle, let me just suggest anyone who is interested google the term. Interesting, and it has roots in Black Lives Matter. Henry > On Jan 24, 2017, at 1:50 PM, Glassman, Michael wrote: > > Hi Mike, Peg, Alfredo, all, > > I don't know where the saying comes from but I think of, "Problems are global but solutions are local." A couple of lists I have been on have been pushing for instance for people to run for local office, school boards and town councils. You start with change of those things you can change. LS and education in general can perhaps change the trajectory of education. Sometimes I don't know where my biases end and my quest for solutions start but perhaps as a field we should not so much tend our garden as look to redesign our garden, fewer flowers and more winter vegetables. Maybe people could move journals towards acceptance of more emancipatory types of methods like participatory action research. Maybe we could spend more time on the dangers of human design - one of the reasons I am reading Bateson. Maybe we could move away from talking about how this or that educational technique will achieve a certain outcome and include how it promotes democratic decision making. Maybe a greater wariness of PISA and local standardized tests. I know that this has been done to a point, including by people on this list. But perhaps a push to make it more mainstream. Maybe these aren't the right approaches, but at least an emphasis on taking a really close look at who we are, the role education has played in where we are, and how we might re-imagine it. Maybe better than railing at the machine. Change what we can. But it also means everybody really having skin in the game (I actually don't like that saying but can't think of anything else that expresses the same thing). > > Michael > > -----Original Message----- > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole > Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2017 1:19 PM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism > > Hi Michael > > Nice thought from Bateson. And I see that Peg has just posted a link to the book. Its certainly a keeper. > > But it does not speak to forms of action that people in our current circumstances. Some of my colleagues argue that it is essential for academics in these times to eschew politics in any visible form and to focus energy on the academic work precisely in order combat over simplification that threatens human life. > > The basic starting point of the LS/US Nationalism paper, as I see it, is that claim that the threat of nationalist/populism is GLOBAL and that it poses huge challenges to LS researchers. So we might not want to get too caught up in examining Trump/US version of this problem without considering the rest of the world and its history. The 20th Century provided at least two clear examples of what happens when this configuration of nationalism/populism arises in modern times - two wars to end all wars. If we are in fact returning to the 1930's in this regard, we are doing so in an unparalleled set of circumstances for homo sapiens. > > So as professionals/citizens, are there forms of action, lines of research, that might be proposed that would nurture the beautiful in circumstances that do not involve high levels of radiation and mass destruction? Is tending to our intellectual gardens the direction to go? Or are forms of action of the sort proposed by the authors the right direction? And if the latter, what do we know from past experience that might guide our thinking? > They set out to open the discussion in a major journal. > > Seems like the task here is to see what this group might possibly add to their attempts to strategize the future based on our collective experience. > > Mike > > PS- Seems like Alfredo's perezhivanie project, as an exercise in international collaboration to both test a basic theoretical claim of Vygotsky's and to so collectively, might combine the academic and the political just a little. And just a little might be a lot. > > > On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 9:40 AM, Glassman, Michael > wrote: > >> So I am re-reading Bateson, somewhat in light of current happenings >> and I come across this paragraph near the beginning of Mind and >> Nature, >> >> "There seems to be something like a Gresham's law of cultural >> evolution according to which the oversimplified will always displace >> the sophisticated and the vulgar and hateful will always displace the >> beautiful. And yet the beautiful persists." >> >> Wise words for his time and ours. The information in nature will >> always bring us back around to the beautiful if we let it, but it >> always seems to slip through our fingers. Maybe another take on the >> arc of justice. The trouble of course is every time we let the vulgar >> and hateful displace the stakes seem to become much higher. >> >> Michael >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ >> mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Alfredo Jornet Gil >> Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2017 1:59 AM >> To: ablunden@mira.net; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity < >> xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu> >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >> Nationalism >> >> Francine, >> >> I agree analysis is only one tool and I hope we can do much more here >> and elsewhere. But the overtone window seems to resonate well with our >> quest for understanding the possibilities/conditions for hearing >> Trump's voice sound like a pleasant flute or like toilette flush. >> >> I think the idea of Irony also adds to the question of perezhivanie >> and Trump in the sense that different perezhivanie will also imply >> different forms of generalisation/consciousness. Irony seems to always >> involve moving a step up in the types of generalisation or metaphor. >> >> A good example may be found in considering the "Love Trumps Hate" >> message that has been going around in the media. Although I am no >> linguist, I am gonna give it a try: If you were to hear the assertion >> literally, you may hear an imperative to do love Trump's hate in such >> a way as to enter into a double bind situation. To find yourself in >> this situation, you need to stick to the transitive form of the >> subject (you love) with respect to the object (Trump hate). You kind >> of have to have faith in this form, respect the integrity of the >> object and the integrity of the subject each in its own terms, and so >> you may come to feel confused, or perhaps end up hating just the same way Trump plays he hates. >> >> On the other hand, to be able to hear "love trumps hate" as a message >> of love, as an equivalent (as per Vygotsky's equivalence) for another >> message that we also have seen these days, "when they go low we go >> high," then you have to take the relation between subject and object >> in a higher level of >> metaphor: you now hear the sentence in a context that modifies both >> subject and object; hate and love cannot be exclusive opposites. The >> sentence then is heard as intransitive, love and hate no longer are >> independent. And most importantly, once you hear the sentence in its >> intransitive form, love and hate no longer are the same. >> >> Similarly, to hear everything Trump said and take it literally takes a >> very different act of faith that it takes hearing it literally as an irony. >> Alfredo >> >> >> ________________________________________ >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> on behalf of Larry Smolucha >> >> Sent: 24 January 2017 02:35 >> To: ablunden@mira.net; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >> Nationalism >> >> Message from Francine: >> >> >> Helena Worthen was right - I am serious about finding (and creating) >> new tools for understanding the Trump movement. Analysis is only one >> tool and there is no insight when it is overused. Figurative, >> analogical, metaphorical thinking gives us other tools. Recognizing >> IRONY means getting the punch line in a joke (as Freud >> >> explained in Jokes and Their Relation to the Unconscious). >> >> >> Is there a termteson in literature for the reversal that commonly >> occurs in fairy tales? >> >> All that is gold does not glitter, not all those who wander are lost . . . >> >> >> 1) The ironic reversals that are taking place as people change their >> alignment with >> >> political parties remind me of a geophysics phenomena - the reversal >> of the earth's magnetic field that can happen over hundreds of >> thousands of years. Both are disorienting. I will give this more >> thought, but for the moment consider this much. When magnetic fields >> shift it is not all at once, magnetic currents in the molten layers >> beneath the earth's solid crust change polarities, sometimes causing a >> total >> >> reversal. Our political parties are commonly referred to as polar >> opposites but those >> >> polarities are not fixed they are fluid. The blue collar working class >> can shift from the Democratic Party to the Republican. The Black vote >> can shift to the Republicans, the Democrats don't own it. In the >> 1950's Russian sympathies were a hallmark of the left, now the left >> denounces Trumps outreach to the Russians. [A caveat here - this is >> two dimensional thinking because there are only two poles on one >> geometric plane.] >> >> >> 2) There is another concept, the Overton Window that is a scale of how >> radical of a discourse the public will tolerate (also called the >> window of discourse). The Window >> >> opens and closes along a range of discourse from the acceptable to the >> unthinkable. What discourse resonates with the general public (strikes >> a chord)? What will they regard as taboo (or not politically correct)? >> Issues like that. >> >> >> Here are a couple links worth looking at: >> >> >> Donald Trump & The Overton Window --Resetting America's Political < >> http://www.nationalreview.com/article/428200/donald- >> trump-overton-window-american-political-debate> >> www.nationalreview.com/.../donald-trump-overton-window-american-p< >> http://www.nationalreview.com/.../donald-trump-overton-window-american >> -p >>> .. >> >> >> >> Trump's Win Smashed the 'Overton Window' | LifeZette> lifezette.com/polizette/trumps-win-smashed-overton-window/> >> www.lifezette.com/polizette/trumps-win-smashed-overton-window/ >> >> >> >> Can any of this be used with the concept of perezhivanie? >> >> ________________________________ >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> on behalf of Andy Blunden >> >> Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 9:37 PM >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism >> >> "Irony" - good word to introduce here Francine. >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------ >> Andy Blunden >> http://home.mira.net/~andy >> Andy Blunden's Home Page home.mira.net >> Andy Blunden's Home Page with links to pages I maintain and mail-to >> buttons >> >> >> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making >> [http://www.brill.com/sites/default/files/styles/large/ >> public/ftp/images/products/295x295/92947.jpg?itok=j5KXqZw3]< >> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making> >> >> The Origins of Collective Decision Making | >> Brill> products/book/origins-collective-decision-making> >> www.brill.com >> The Origins of Collective Decision Making, identifies three paradigms >> of collective decision making - Counsel, Majority and Consensus, and >> discovers their origins ... >> >> >> >> On 23/01/2017 2:32 PM, Larry Smolucha wrote: >>> Message from Francine Smolucha: >>> >>> >>> The key to an analysis of the Trump movement is understanding the >>> >>> fundamental IRONIES that have rocked American politics. >>> >>> >>> The workers revolution has resulted in the >>> >>> workers/unions deserting the Left, the socialists, the Democratic Party. >>> >>> Trump is a Capitalist regardless of whether he actually has a >>> Republican >> ideology. >>> >>> The workers' movement has been hijacked by a capitalist. >>> >>> >>> The other great IRONY is that Trump wants to make Russia a U.S. ally >> (again). >>> >>> The Left, the socialists, the Democratic Party are the ones >>> demonizing Russia - >>> >>> what a reversal! >>> >>> >>> Since CHAT derives from Russian psychology (Leontiev and Vygotsky) >>> and >> the backlash against Trump is also a backlash against all things >> Russian - this puts CHAT in a particularly awkward position. How can a >> cultural historical psychology that originated in Russia become the >> leader in the anti-Trump discourse? or lead an anti-Trump educational >> movement? You are even extolling a Russian concept PEREZHIVANIE. >>> >>> >>> I think the XMCA needs to examine its own perezhivanie at this time. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ________________________________ >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>> on behalf of mike cole >>> >>> Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 3:01 PM >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>> Cc: Mariane Hedegaard; Reijo Miettinen; Seth Chaiklin >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >>> Nationalism >>> >>> Helena et al -- >>> >>> An important emphasis in the article for me was on the fact that >>> although the article focused on the American nationalist movement >>> that has just pulled of an alt-right coup, similar movements are >>> poised to take hold in a lot of places in Europe to join the many >>> already entrenched unsavory governments in other parts of the world. >>> >>> The CRADLE center in Helsinki is under very concerted attack and the >>> right wing government appears, from this distance, to be making >>> great progress on destroying its legacy. The same process has been >>> in Denmark for some time, also with apparent success. >>> >>> What do our international colleagues who have already felt the hot >>> breath of right wing nationalism have to offer in terms of >>> strategies of resistence? >>> >>> Back to "what is to be done," that sombre question from an earlier >>> era. The answer last time did not produce what it promised. >>> >>> mike >>> >>> mike >>> >>> On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 12:22 PM, Helena Worthen >>> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Thank you, Alfredo - I gave it a read. >>>> >>>> Sure, of course they're right. But I am very disappointed. >>>> >>>> I was hoping that the following was only item #1 in a long list of >>>> "what the 2016 election made apparent": >>>> >>>> The 2016 election has made apparent the need for scholarship that >>>> explicitly defends and furthers the rights and well-being of people >>>> of color, immigrants, Muslims, women, people who are differently >>>> abled, LGBTQ communities, and the earth. These are stances that >>>> have been limited, at least explicitly, in the Learning Sciences. >>>> >>>> But the call for inclusion was not just #1, it seems to be the >>>> whole thing. In other words, it's all about identity -plus the >>>> earth, of >> course. >>>> While inclusion is necessary, it's not even a start. Yes, research, >>>> teaching, publishing, promotion, conferences - everything >>>> associated with teaching and learning has to include everyone as >>>> equals (see Andy's book) in one way or another - but then what? >>>> What are they (we) >> supposed to do? >>>> Where does the pretty language touch the ground? >>>> >>>> I was listening to a broadcast of the Women's March in DC on >>>> Saturday morning, and Kamala Harris, who was the California State >>>> Attorney General and is now a junior Senator from CA, was >>>> addressing the rally. She said, "People always ask me to talk about women's issues. >>>> I say, 'Oh, I'm SO glad you're interested in economics!! Let's talk >>>> about economics." And she ran through a whole set of parallel >>>> back-and-forths, always pulling identity questions back to wages, >>>> jobs, >> earning, supporting your family, etc etc. >>>> >>>> Much as we need to wipe away any barriers to the Learning Sciences >>>> (and the professions and institutions dedicated to them) due to >>>> identity, until the Learning Sciences start taking a look at the >>>> place where most people spend most of their lives - not school, I >>>> mean - but work, they will be engaging in a soft conversation at >>>> the edge of the real issue. It's a pleasant conversation but it >>>> doesn't put a hand on the levers that translate skill and knowledge >>>> into rent >> and groceries. >>>> >>>> H >>>> >>>> >>>> Helena Worthen >>>> helenaworthen@gmail.com >>>> Berkeley, CA 94707 >>>> Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> On Jan 22, 2017, at 11:38 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >>>>> >>>> wrote: >>>>> Here it is, >>>>> >>>>> http://cognitionandinstruction.com/engagements-the-learning- >>>> sciences-in-a-new-era-of-u-s-nationalism/ >>>>> Alfredo >>>>> ________________________________________ >>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>> >>>> on behalf of Helena Worthen >>>>> Sent: 22 January 2017 20:24 >>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >>>> Nationalism >>>>> Someone please re-send the link to this article? I think I'm >>>>> going to >>>> want to read it and respond to Mike's question. >>>>> Thanks - H >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Helena Worthen >>>>> helenaworthen@gmail.com >>>>> Berkeley, CA 94707 >>>>> Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> On Jan 22, 2017, at 12:25 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >>>>>> >>>> wrote: >>>>>> Mike, >>>>>> >>>>>> thanks a lot for sharing this article. You and Michael, who have >>>>>> and >>>> know more history, have spoken in terms of reminiscences. I have >>>> lived and know less, and the article feels like fresh air. During >>>> my PhD, I begun to increasingly feel that I had to due something to >>>> act and respond to the increasing ecological and humanitarian globe >>>> crises. But how could I do anything if I had children and a PhD to >>>> finalise?? What could I do that would also be doing my job as >>>> researcher in a department of education? It was very difficult to >>>> find anything, partly because almost every academic quest would >>>> focus on learning, but so little on social development. How many >>>> scientific articles are dedicated to socio-political questions in >>>> the most cited >> educational journals? I felt very powerless. >>>>>> To be able to address these questions within my expertise, is a >>>> challenge partly because contrary to Dewey's hope, educational >>>> research has only marginally focused on these questions, and yet >>>> they may be exactly the question that matter to education. What are >>>> we educating for? Indeed, what is education for? I think we face a >>>> serious problem when someone (like myself), being an educational >>>> researchers/scholar, still has to scratch her head wondering <>>> can I make my profession matter to social change and development?>> >> Vygotsky would be shocked! >>>>>> Alfredo >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>>> >>>> on behalf of mike cole >>>>>> Sent: 19 January 2017 04:51 >>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >>>> Nationalism >>>>>> Yes Michael, >>>>>> >>>>>> It feels like the world of the later 1930's about the time I was >>>>>> born as that period came down to me through the prism of a family >>>>>> of "premature anti fascists." >>>>>> >>>>>> For a great re-creation of those times see the highly ambivalent >>>>>> film by Frank Capra, "meet John Doe." It has American big capital >>>>>> interconnected with fascism combined with populist collectivism >>>>>> in a manner that >>>> points at >>>>>> the media (as then experienced) as the bad guys in disguise. >>>>>> Happy >>>> Ending, >>>>>> Beethoven Ode to Joy and all. >>>>>> >>>>>> It's come round again, nastier this time. >>>>>> >>>>>> Mike >>>>>> On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 6:20 PM Glassman, Michael >>>>>> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Mike >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It was so interesting to read this note after reading the >>>>>>> Cognition and Instruction essay. All the way through it I kept >>>>>>> thinking we have been here before. It reminded me of the >>>>>>> scholars, especially those who had escaped from Germany, trying >>>>>>> to make sense of what had happened to >>>> their >>>>>>> society during World War II. The foremost in my mind was Lewin. >>>> Except I >>>>>>> wonder if he would say the process of transformative action >>>>>>> starts not >>>> with >>>>>>> emergence of quasi-needs, but our willingness and abilities to >>>>>>> step >>>> back >>>>>>> from our quasi-needs and the ways that they drive us, often to >>>>>>> dysfunctional behaviors that it ultimately destructive to both >>>>>>> our >>>> society >>>>>>> and to us as individuals. How hard this is to do, we have to >>>>>>> keep >>>> going >>>>>>> back again and again. The quasi-needs, tribalism, acceptance, >>>> standing are >>>>>>> always there. It is how they shape us that is critical. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Michael >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto: >>>>>>> xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 8:31 PM >>>>>>> >>>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >>>>>>> Nationalism >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> In following the perezhivanie thread I encountered the note I >>>> re-membered. >>>>>>> And interestingly mis-remembered. A translation into my focus on >>>>>>> mediational means. He places the starting point of the process >>>>>>> of transformative action at the emergence of quasi-needs (from >>>>>>> Kurt >>>> Lewin). >>>>>>> That seems correct to me. The new mediational means emerge under >>>>>>> environmental presses. Ever functionalist ego need a goal(!). >>>>>>> (The >>>> problem >>>>>>> with functionalism) In David's words, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Perhaps the place we should look for "exaptations" that can save >>>>>>> both >>>> our >>>>>>> personalities and our environment is not in our evolved needs, >>>>>>> but in >>>> yet >>>>>>> to be designed quasi-needs. Artificial organs, after all, always >>>> suggest >>>>>>> new and ever more artificial functions, like chess and language. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This point seems worth keeping in mind as we look at where this >>>>>>> group >>>> of >>>>>>> critical scholars who work within the Learning Sciences >>>>>>> disciplinary framework would like to lead us. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> mike >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >> >> > From helenaworthen@gmail.com Tue Jan 24 14:42:58 2017 From: helenaworthen@gmail.com (Helena Worthen) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2017 14:42:58 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism In-Reply-To: <7F7191DE-736A-4383-8BC9-45AA90EFB08D@gmail.com> References: <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C71964@CIO-KRC-D1MBX04.osuad.osu.edu> <1485073527094.7145@iped.uio.no> <5E5B95EA-374F-48EB-B308-BCE49DA52760@gmail.com> <1485113892233.91870@iped.uio.no> <2c9faf42-cb69-9860-4b9f-ea0f6f0ca307@mira.net> <1485241112188.8167@iped.uio.no> <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C77497@CIO-TNC-D1MBX11.osuad.osu.edu> <7F7191DE-736A-4383-8BC9-45AA90EFB08D@gmail.com> Message-ID: <13147548-EBFB-48E5-B500-A52B6BD0808E@gmail.com> Shirin, are you the person Joe has worked with from the NAFFE days? I don?t know how common that name is. H Helena Worthen helenaworthen@gmail.com Berkeley, CA 94707 Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com > On Jan 24, 2017, at 1:54 PM, Helena Worthen wrote: > > Shirin - A person like that would be great, and there are some around although not already in the pool. I should have made the word ?only? stronger. It works the other way, too ? someone with ?only? labor background is not ?necessarily? (I?m trying to back off) going to know anything about community organizing. They are different and their differences have lots of history, also worth knowing. > > We don?t want either tradition to get slighted. > > Don?t get me started!! I just wanted to say that this is a discussion worth having, and a fight worth joining. > > :) > Helena Worthen > helenaworthen@gmail.com > Berkeley, CA 94707 > Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com > > > >> On Jan 24, 2017, at 1:10 PM, Shirin Vossoughi wrote: >> >> Helena >> This was very interesting to hear about >> one question: >> this strikes me as a big assumption "Someone with only a degree in Ethnic >> Studies will not know this stuff." >> Would it be fruitful to look for someone with a strong background in Ethnic >> studies AND labor organizing within such a position? >> Sounds like a generative opening >> Shirin >> >> On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 2:58 PM, Helena Worthen >> wrote: >> >>> Just in time, I have been gifted with a way to "ascend (out of this >>> discussion) to the concrete." >>> >>> Mike mentions "forms of action" and says some colleagues are saying "focus >>> energy on academic work." Faculty committee work is part of academic work. >>> >>> I just got a phone call from a colleague who teaches at California State >>> University and who is, with me and others, on an advisory committee >>> convened to revive the moribund Labor Studies Program at Laney, a community >>> college in Oakland, near where I live. >>> >>> Everyone is probably aware that Labor Studies programs are target practice >>> for right-wingers. If you're not aware, you aren't surprised. So the >>> program at Laney has been shrinking for years. The idea now is to revive it >>> by joining it with the Community Studies Program, which is an umbrella >>> Ethnic Studies program. This makes sense, right? Latino Studies, Black >>> Studies, Gender Studies, Women's Studies, Asian Studies and Labor Studies >>> intuitively seem to belong together. They address people who are likely to >>> be working for a living. >>> >>> So our advisory committee will meet Thursday night and the big issue is >>> this: A core required course is going to be "Community and Labor >>> Organizing." This course already exists in the Community Studies program. >>> If it is submitted to the Academic Senate un-changed, it will speed through >>> approval and be offered in Fall 2017. It will also count for transfer to >>> the State University and UC systems. >>> >>> The catch is that as written, it has to be taught by someone with an >>> advanced Ethnic Studies degree. >>> >>> The easy thing to do is to shrug and let it through without changing it. >>> But an Ethnic Studies degree does not prepare someone to teach labor >>> organizing. First, there are a lot of technical issues that come up in >>> labor organizing. The tricks and traps of labor legislation are just the >>> beginning. Second, although you might think that labor unions and community >>> based organizations (CBOs) are natural allies, they have a very hard time >>> working with each other in practice because of the way authority runs >>> through them. Someone with only a degree in Ethnic Studies will not know >>> this stuff. >>> >>> But it's not just a matter of the content of the course. Letting the >>> course go to approval as is would eliminate the possibility that any of the >>> program faculty who come our of labor (who usually have degrees in >>> Philosophy, History, Political Science) would be able to teach that class. >>> >>> So, is this worth the fight? It looks, on the surface, like a tempest in a >>> teapot. But it's a concrete example of a moment when you can put the teeth >>> of economic justice into the mouth of (block that metaphor). >>> >>> I will go to the meeting Thursday night arguing in favor re-writing the >>> course description to allow faculty who do not have a degree in Ethnic >>> Studies to teach this course. I will say that it's worth losing a semester >>> because there is something bigger at stake here. This is also academic >>> work. >>> >>> >>> Helena Worthen >>> helenaworthen@gmail.com >>> Vietnam blog: helenaworthen.wordpress.com >>> >>> On Jan 24, 2017, at 10:18 AM, mike cole wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Michael >>>> >>>> Nice thought from Bateson. And I see that Peg has just posted a link >>>> to the book. Its certainly a keeper. >>>> >>>> But it does not speak to forms of action that people in our current >>>> circumstances. Some of my colleagues argue that it is essential for >>>> academics in these times to eschew politics in any visible form and >>>> to focus energy on the academic work precisely in order combat over >>>> simplification that threatens human life. >>>> >>>> The basic starting point of the LS/US Nationalism paper, as I see it, is >>>> that claim that the threat of nationalist/populism is GLOBAL and that it >>>> poses huge challenges to LS researchers. So we might not want to get too >>>> caught up in examining Trump/US version of this problem without >>> considering >>>> the rest of the world and its history. The 20th Century provided at least >>>> two clear examples of what happens when this configuration of >>>> nationalism/populism arises in modern times - two wars to end all wars. >>> If >>>> we are in fact returning to the 1930's in this regard, we are doing so in >>>> an unparalleled set of circumstances for homo sapiens. >>>> >>>> So as professionals/citizens, are there forms of action, lines of >>> research, >>>> that might be proposed that would nurture the beautiful in circumstances >>>> that do not involve high levels of radiation and mass destruction? Is >>>> tending to our intellectual gardens the direction to go? Or are forms of >>>> action of the sort proposed by the authors the right direction? And if >>> the >>>> latter, what do we know from past experience that might guide our >>> thinking? >>>> They set out to open the discussion in a major journal. >>>> >>>> Seems like the task here is to see what this group might possibly add to >>>> their attempts to strategize the future based on our collective >>> experience. >>>> >>>> Mike >>>> >>>> PS- Seems like Alfredo's perezhivanie project, as an exercise in >>>> international collaboration to both test a basic theoretical claim of >>>> Vygotsky's and to so collectively, might combine the academic and the >>>> political just a little. And just a little might be a lot. >>>> >>>> >>>> On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 9:40 AM, Glassman, Michael >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> So I am re-reading Bateson, somewhat in light of current happenings and >>> I >>>>> come across this paragraph near the beginning of Mind and Nature, >>>>> >>>>> "There seems to be something like a Gresham's law of cultural evolution >>>>> according to which the oversimplified will always displace the >>>>> sophisticated and the vulgar and hateful will always displace the >>>>> beautiful. And yet the beautiful persists." >>>>> >>>>> Wise words for his time and ours. The information in nature will always >>>>> bring us back around to the beautiful if we let it, but it always seems >>> to >>>>> slip through our fingers. Maybe another take on the arc of justice. >>> The >>>>> trouble of course is every time we let the vulgar and hateful displace >>> the >>>>> stakes seem to become much higher. >>>>> >>>>> Michael >>>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ >>>>> mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Alfredo Jornet Gil >>>>> Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2017 1:59 AM >>>>> To: ablunden@mira.net; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity < >>>>> xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu> >>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >>> Nationalism >>>>> >>>>> Francine, >>>>> >>>>> I agree analysis is only one tool and I hope we can do much more here >>> and >>>>> elsewhere. But the overtone window seems to resonate well with our quest >>>>> for understanding the possibilities/conditions for hearing Trump's voice >>>>> sound like a pleasant flute or like toilette flush. >>>>> >>>>> I think the idea of Irony also adds to the question of perezhivanie and >>>>> Trump in the sense that different perezhivanie will also imply different >>>>> forms of generalisation/consciousness. Irony seems to always involve >>> moving >>>>> a step up in the types of generalisation or metaphor. >>>>> >>>>> A good example may be found in considering the "Love Trumps Hate" >>> message >>>>> that has been going around in the media. Although I am no linguist, I am >>>>> gonna give it a try: If you were to hear the assertion literally, you >>> may >>>>> hear an imperative to do love Trump's hate in such a way as to enter >>> into a >>>>> double bind situation. To find yourself in this situation, you need to >>>>> stick to the transitive form of the subject (you love) with respect to >>> the >>>>> object (Trump hate). You kind of have to have faith in this form, >>> respect >>>>> the integrity of the object and the integrity of the subject each in its >>>>> own terms, and so you may come to feel confused, or perhaps end up >>> hating >>>>> just the same way Trump plays he hates. >>>>> >>>>> On the other hand, to be able to hear "love trumps hate" as a message of >>>>> love, as an equivalent (as per Vygotsky's equivalence) for another >>> message >>>>> that we also have seen these days, "when they go low we go high," then >>> you >>>>> have to take the relation between subject and object in a higher level >>> of >>>>> metaphor: you now hear the sentence in a context that modifies both >>> subject >>>>> and object; hate and love cannot be exclusive opposites. The sentence >>> then >>>>> is heard as intransitive, love and hate no longer are independent. And >>> most >>>>> importantly, once you hear the sentence in its intransitive form, love >>> and >>>>> hate no longer are the same. >>>>> >>>>> Similarly, to hear everything Trump said and take it literally takes a >>>>> very different act of faith that it takes hearing it literally as an >>> irony. >>>>> Alfredo >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ________________________________________ >>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>> on behalf of Larry Smolucha >>>>> Sent: 24 January 2017 02:35 >>>>> To: ablunden@mira.net; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >>> Nationalism >>>>> >>>>> Message from Francine: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Helena Worthen was right - I am serious about finding (and creating) new >>>>> tools for understanding the Trump movement. Analysis is only one tool >>> and >>>>> there is no insight when it is overused. Figurative, analogical, >>>>> metaphorical thinking gives us other tools. Recognizing IRONY means >>> getting >>>>> the punch line in a joke (as Freud >>>>> >>>>> explained in Jokes and Their Relation to the Unconscious). >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Is there a termteson in literature for the reversal that commonly occurs >>>>> in fairy tales? >>>>> >>>>> All that is gold does not glitter, not all those who wander are lost . >>> . . >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> 1) The ironic reversals that are taking place as people change their >>>>> alignment with >>>>> >>>>> political parties remind me of a geophysics phenomena - the reversal of >>>>> the earth's magnetic field that can happen over hundreds of thousands of >>>>> years. Both are disorienting. I will give this more thought, but for the >>>>> moment consider this much. When magnetic fields shift it is not all at >>>>> once, magnetic currents in the molten layers beneath the earth's solid >>>>> crust change polarities, sometimes causing a total >>>>> >>>>> reversal. Our political parties are commonly referred to as polar >>>>> opposites but those >>>>> >>>>> polarities are not fixed they are fluid. The blue collar working class >>> can >>>>> shift from the Democratic Party to the Republican. The Black vote can >>> shift >>>>> to the Republicans, the Democrats don't own it. In the 1950's Russian >>>>> sympathies were a hallmark of the left, now the left denounces Trumps >>>>> outreach to the Russians. [A caveat here - this is two dimensional >>> thinking >>>>> because there are only two poles on one geometric plane.] >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> 2) There is another concept, the Overton Window that is a scale of how >>>>> radical of a discourse the public will tolerate (also called the window >>> of >>>>> discourse). The Window >>>>> >>>>> opens and closes along a range of discourse from the acceptable to the >>>>> unthinkable. What discourse resonates with the general public (strikes a >>>>> chord)? What will they regard as taboo (or not politically correct)? >>> Issues >>>>> like that. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Here are a couple links worth looking at: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Donald Trump & The Overton Window --Resetting America's Political < >>>>> http://www.nationalreview.com/article/428200/donald- >>>>> trump-overton-window-american-political-debate> >>>>> www.nationalreview.com/.../donald-trump-overton-window-american-p< >>>>> http://www.nationalreview.com/.../donald-trump-overton- >>> window-american-p >>>>>> .. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Trump's Win Smashed the 'Overton Window' | LifeZette>>>> lifezette.com/polizette/trumps-win-smashed-overton-window/> >>>>> www.lifezette.com/polizette/trumps-win-smashed-overton-window/ >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Can any of this be used with the concept of perezhivanie? >>>>> >>>>> ________________________________ >>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>> on behalf of Andy Blunden >>>>> Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 9:37 PM >>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism >>>>> >>>>> "Irony" - good word to introduce here Francine. >>>>> >>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>> Andy Blunden >>>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy >>>>> Andy Blunden's Home Page home.mira.net Andy >>>>> Blunden's Home Page with links to pages I maintain and mail-to buttons >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making >>>>> [http://www.brill.com/sites/default/files/styles/large/ >>>>> public/ftp/images/products/295x295/92947.jpg?itok=j5KXqZw3]< >>>>> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making> >>>>> >>>>> The Origins of Collective Decision Making | Brill>>>> products/book/origins-collective-decision-making> >>>>> www.brill.com >>>>> The Origins of Collective Decision Making, identifies three paradigms of >>>>> collective decision making - Counsel, Majority and Consensus, and >>> discovers >>>>> their origins ... >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 23/01/2017 2:32 PM, Larry Smolucha wrote: >>>>>> Message from Francine Smolucha: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> The key to an analysis of the Trump movement is understanding the >>>>>> >>>>>> fundamental IRONIES that have rocked American politics. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> The workers revolution has resulted in the >>>>>> >>>>>> workers/unions deserting the Left, the socialists, the Democratic >>> Party. >>>>>> >>>>>> Trump is a Capitalist regardless of whether he actually has a >>> Republican >>>>> ideology. >>>>>> >>>>>> The workers' movement has been hijacked by a capitalist. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> The other great IRONY is that Trump wants to make Russia a U.S. ally >>>>> (again). >>>>>> >>>>>> The Left, the socialists, the Democratic Party are the ones demonizing >>>>>> Russia - >>>>>> >>>>>> what a reversal! >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Since CHAT derives from Russian psychology (Leontiev and Vygotsky) and >>>>> the backlash against Trump is also a backlash against all things >>> Russian - >>>>> this puts CHAT in a particularly awkward position. How can a cultural >>>>> historical psychology that originated in Russia become the leader in the >>>>> anti-Trump discourse? or lead an anti-Trump educational movement? You >>> are >>>>> even extolling a Russian concept PEREZHIVANIE. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I think the XMCA needs to examine its own perezhivanie at this time. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> ________________________________ >>>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>>> on behalf of mike cole >>>>>> >>>>>> Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 3:01 PM >>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>>> Cc: Mariane Hedegaard; Reijo Miettinen; Seth Chaiklin >>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >>>>>> Nationalism >>>>>> >>>>>> Helena et al -- >>>>>> >>>>>> An important emphasis in the article for me was on the fact that >>>>>> although the article focused on the American nationalist movement that >>>>>> has just pulled of an alt-right coup, similar movements are poised to >>>>>> take hold in a lot of places in Europe to join the many already >>>>>> entrenched unsavory governments in other parts of the world. >>>>>> >>>>>> The CRADLE center in Helsinki is under very concerted attack and the >>>>>> right wing government appears, from this distance, to be making great >>>>>> progress on destroying its legacy. The same process has been in >>>>>> Denmark for some time, also with apparent success. >>>>>> >>>>>> What do our international colleagues who have already felt the hot >>>>>> breath of right wing nationalism have to offer in terms of strategies >>>>>> of resistence? >>>>>> >>>>>> Back to "what is to be done," that sombre question from an earlier >>>>>> era. The answer last time did not produce what it promised. >>>>>> >>>>>> mike >>>>>> >>>>>> mike >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 12:22 PM, Helena Worthen >>>>>> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Thank you, Alfredo - I gave it a read. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Sure, of course they're right. But I am very disappointed. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I was hoping that the following was only item #1 in a long list of >>>>>>> "what the 2016 election made apparent": >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The 2016 election has made apparent the need for scholarship that >>>>>>> explicitly defends and furthers the rights and well-being of people >>>>>>> of color, immigrants, Muslims, women, people who are differently >>>>>>> abled, LGBTQ communities, and the earth. These are stances that have >>>>>>> been limited, at least explicitly, in the Learning Sciences. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> But the call for inclusion was not just #1, it seems to be the whole >>>>>>> thing. In other words, it's all about identity -plus the earth, of >>>>> course. >>>>>>> While inclusion is necessary, it's not even a start. Yes, research, >>>>>>> teaching, publishing, promotion, conferences - everything associated >>>>>>> with teaching and learning has to include everyone as equals (see >>>>>>> Andy's book) in one way or another - but then what? What are they (we) >>>>> supposed to do? >>>>>>> Where does the pretty language touch the ground? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I was listening to a broadcast of the Women's March in DC on Saturday >>>>>>> morning, and Kamala Harris, who was the California State Attorney >>>>>>> General and is now a junior Senator from CA, was addressing the >>>>>>> rally. She said, "People always ask me to talk about women's issues. >>>>>>> I say, 'Oh, I'm SO glad you're interested in economics!! Let's talk >>>>>>> about economics." And she ran through a whole set of parallel >>>>>>> back-and-forths, always pulling identity questions back to wages, >>> jobs, >>>>> earning, supporting your family, etc etc. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Much as we need to wipe away any barriers to the Learning Sciences >>>>>>> (and the professions and institutions dedicated to them) due to >>>>>>> identity, until the Learning Sciences start taking a look at the >>>>>>> place where most people spend most of their lives - not school, I >>>>>>> mean - but work, they will be engaging in a soft conversation at the >>>>>>> edge of the real issue. It's a pleasant conversation but it doesn't >>>>>>> put a hand on the levers that translate skill and knowledge into rent >>>>> and groceries. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> H >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Helena Worthen >>>>>>> helenaworthen@gmail.com >>>>>>> Berkeley, CA 94707 >>>>>>> Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Jan 22, 2017, at 11:38 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> Here it is, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> http://cognitionandinstruction.com/engagements-the-learning- >>>>>>> sciences-in-a-new-era-of-u-s-nationalism/ >>>>>>>> Alfredo >>>>>>>> ________________________________________ >>>>>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> on behalf of Helena Worthen >>>>>>>> Sent: 22 January 2017 20:24 >>>>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >>>>>>> Nationalism >>>>>>>> Someone please re-send the link to this article? I think I'm going >>>>>>>> to >>>>>>> want to read it and respond to Mike's question. >>>>>>>> Thanks - H >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Helena Worthen >>>>>>>> helenaworthen@gmail.com >>>>>>>> Berkeley, CA 94707 >>>>>>>> Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Jan 22, 2017, at 12:25 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> Mike, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> thanks a lot for sharing this article. You and Michael, who have >>>>>>>>> and >>>>>>> know more history, have spoken in terms of reminiscences. I have >>>>>>> lived and know less, and the article feels like fresh air. During my >>>>>>> PhD, I begun to increasingly feel that I had to due something to act >>>>>>> and respond to the increasing ecological and humanitarian globe >>>>>>> crises. But how could I do anything if I had children and a PhD to >>>>>>> finalise?? What could I do that would also be doing my job as >>>>>>> researcher in a department of education? It was very difficult to >>>>>>> find anything, partly because almost every academic quest would focus >>>>>>> on learning, but so little on social development. How many scientific >>>>>>> articles are dedicated to socio-political questions in the most cited >>>>> educational journals? I felt very powerless. >>>>>>>>> To be able to address these questions within my expertise, is a >>>>>>> challenge partly because contrary to Dewey's hope, educational >>>>>>> research has only marginally focused on these questions, and yet they >>>>>>> may be exactly the question that matter to education. What are we >>>>>>> educating for? Indeed, what is education for? I think we face a >>>>>>> serious problem when someone (like myself), being an educational >>>>>>> researchers/scholar, still has to scratch her head wondering <>>>>>> can I make my profession matter to social change and development?>> >>>>> Vygotsky would be shocked! >>>>>>>>> Alfredo >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> on behalf of mike cole >>>>>>>>> Sent: 19 January 2017 04:51 >>>>>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >>>>>>> Nationalism >>>>>>>>> Yes Michael, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> It feels like the world of the later 1930's about the time I was >>>>>>>>> born as that period came down to me through the prism of a family >>>>>>>>> of "premature anti fascists." >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> For a great re-creation of those times see the highly ambivalent >>>>>>>>> film by Frank Capra, "meet John Doe." It has American big capital >>>>>>>>> interconnected with fascism combined with populist collectivism in >>>>>>>>> a manner that >>>>>>> points at >>>>>>>>> the media (as then experienced) as the bad guys in disguise. Happy >>>>>>> Ending, >>>>>>>>> Beethoven Ode to Joy and all. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> It's come round again, nastier this time. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Mike >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 6:20 PM Glassman, Michael >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Mike >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> It was so interesting to read this note after reading the >>>>>>>>>> Cognition and Instruction essay. All the way through it I kept >>>>>>>>>> thinking we have been here before. It reminded me of the >>>>>>>>>> scholars, especially those who had escaped from Germany, trying to >>>>>>>>>> make sense of what had happened to >>>>>>> their >>>>>>>>>> society during World War II. The foremost in my mind was Lewin. >>>>>>> Except I >>>>>>>>>> wonder if he would say the process of transformative action starts >>>>>>>>>> not >>>>>>> with >>>>>>>>>> emergence of quasi-needs, but our willingness and abilities to >>>>>>>>>> step >>>>>>> back >>>>>>>>>> from our quasi-needs and the ways that they drive us, often to >>>>>>>>>> dysfunctional behaviors that it ultimately destructive to both our >>>>>>> society >>>>>>>>>> and to us as individuals. How hard this is to do, we have to keep >>>>>>> going >>>>>>>>>> back again and again. The quasi-needs, tribalism, acceptance, >>>>>>> standing are >>>>>>>>>> always there. It is how they shape us that is critical. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Michael >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto: >>>>>>>>>> xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 8:31 PM >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >>>>>>>>>> Nationalism >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> In following the perezhivanie thread I encountered the note I >>>>>>> re-membered. >>>>>>>>>> And interestingly mis-remembered. A translation into my focus on >>>>>>>>>> mediational means. He places the starting point of the process of >>>>>>>>>> transformative action at the emergence of quasi-needs (from Kurt >>>>>>> Lewin). >>>>>>>>>> That seems correct to me. The new mediational means emerge under >>>>>>>>>> environmental presses. Ever functionalist ego need a goal(!). (The >>>>>>> problem >>>>>>>>>> with functionalism) In David's words, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Perhaps the place we should look for "exaptations" that can save >>>>>>>>>> both >>>>>>> our >>>>>>>>>> personalities and our environment is not in our evolved needs, but >>>>>>>>>> in >>>>>>> yet >>>>>>>>>> to be designed quasi-needs. Artificial organs, after all, always >>>>>>> suggest >>>>>>>>>> new and ever more artificial functions, like chess and language. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> This point seems worth keeping in mind as we look at where this >>>>>>>>>> group >>>>>>> of >>>>>>>>>> critical scholars who work within the Learning Sciences >>>>>>>>>> disciplinary framework would like to lead us. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> mike >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>> >>> >>> > From hshonerd@gmail.com Tue Jan 24 14:46:09 2017 From: hshonerd@gmail.com (HENRY SHONERD) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2017 15:46:09 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism In-Reply-To: References: <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C71964@CIO-KRC-D1MBX04.osuad.osu.edu> <1485073527094.7145@iped.uio.no> <5E5B95EA-374F-48EB-B308-BCE49DA52760@gmail.com> <1485113892233.91870@iped.uio.no> <2c9faf42-cb69-9860-4b9f-ea0f6f0ca307@mira.net> <1485241112188.8167@iped.uio.no> <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C77497@CIO-TNC-D1MBX11.osuad.osu.edu> Message-ID: Helena, I look forward to what you find on Thursday at Laney. Oakland is where I lived when I was attending UC Berkeley. I hated being a grad student in economics (though it kept me out of Viet Nam), but my life ?on the ground? (1967-70) shaped much of who I am today. Place matters. I go there every year around Christmas and New Year. If something gets up and going at Laney it will add to the pleasure of my visits to family and friends. I guess what I am trying to say is that it?s personal, which surely adds to the energy. Henry > On Jan 24, 2017, at 1:58 PM, Helena Worthen wrote: > > Just in time, I have been gifted with a way to "ascend (out of this discussion) to the concrete." > > Mike mentions "forms of action" and says some colleagues are saying "focus energy on academic work." Faculty committee work is part of academic work. > > I just got a phone call from a colleague who teaches at California State University and who is, with me and others, on an advisory committee convened to revive the moribund Labor Studies Program at Laney, a community college in Oakland, near where I live. > > Everyone is probably aware that Labor Studies programs are target practice for right-wingers. If you're not aware, you aren't surprised. So the program at Laney has been shrinking for years. The idea now is to revive it by joining it with the Community Studies Program, which is an umbrella Ethnic Studies program. This makes sense, right? Latino Studies, Black Studies, Gender Studies, Women's Studies, Asian Studies and Labor Studies intuitively seem to belong together. They address people who are likely to be working for a living. > > So our advisory committee will meet Thursday night and the big issue is this: A core required course is going to be "Community and Labor Organizing." This course already exists in the Community Studies program. If it is submitted to the Academic Senate un-changed, it will speed through approval and be offered in Fall 2017. It will also count for transfer to the State University and UC systems. > > The catch is that as written, it has to be taught by someone with an advanced Ethnic Studies degree. > > The easy thing to do is to shrug and let it through without changing it. But an Ethnic Studies degree does not prepare someone to teach labor organizing. First, there are a lot of technical issues that come up in labor organizing. The tricks and traps of labor legislation are just the beginning. Second, although you might think that labor unions and community based organizations (CBOs) are natural allies, they have a very hard time working with each other in practice because of the way authority runs through them. Someone with only a degree in Ethnic Studies will not know this stuff. > > But it's not just a matter of the content of the course. Letting the course go to approval as is would eliminate the possibility that any of the program faculty who come our of labor (who usually have degrees in Philosophy, History, Political Science) would be able to teach that class. > > So, is this worth the fight? It looks, on the surface, like a tempest in a teapot. But it's a concrete example of a moment when you can put the teeth of economic justice into the mouth of (block that metaphor). > > I will go to the meeting Thursday night arguing in favor re-writing the course description to allow faculty who do not have a degree in Ethnic Studies to teach this course. I will say that it's worth losing a semester because there is something bigger at stake here. This is also academic work. > > > Helena Worthen > helenaworthen@gmail.com > Vietnam blog: helenaworthen.wordpress.com > > On Jan 24, 2017, at 10:18 AM, mike cole wrote: > >> Hi Michael >> >> Nice thought from Bateson. And I see that Peg has just posted a link >> to the book. Its certainly a keeper. >> >> But it does not speak to forms of action that people in our current >> circumstances. Some of my colleagues argue that it is essential for >> academics in these times to eschew politics in any visible form and >> to focus energy on the academic work precisely in order combat over >> simplification that threatens human life. >> >> The basic starting point of the LS/US Nationalism paper, as I see it, is >> that claim that the threat of nationalist/populism is GLOBAL and that it >> poses huge challenges to LS researchers. So we might not want to get too >> caught up in examining Trump/US version of this problem without considering >> the rest of the world and its history. The 20th Century provided at least >> two clear examples of what happens when this configuration of >> nationalism/populism arises in modern times - two wars to end all wars. If >> we are in fact returning to the 1930's in this regard, we are doing so in >> an unparalleled set of circumstances for homo sapiens. >> >> So as professionals/citizens, are there forms of action, lines of research, >> that might be proposed that would nurture the beautiful in circumstances >> that do not involve high levels of radiation and mass destruction? Is >> tending to our intellectual gardens the direction to go? Or are forms of >> action of the sort proposed by the authors the right direction? And if the >> latter, what do we know from past experience that might guide our thinking? >> They set out to open the discussion in a major journal. >> >> Seems like the task here is to see what this group might possibly add to >> their attempts to strategize the future based on our collective experience. >> >> Mike >> >> PS- Seems like Alfredo's perezhivanie project, as an exercise in >> international collaboration to both test a basic theoretical claim of >> Vygotsky's and to so collectively, might combine the academic and the >> political just a little. And just a little might be a lot. >> >> >> On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 9:40 AM, Glassman, Michael >> wrote: >> >>> So I am re-reading Bateson, somewhat in light of current happenings and I >>> come across this paragraph near the beginning of Mind and Nature, >>> >>> "There seems to be something like a Gresham's law of cultural evolution >>> according to which the oversimplified will always displace the >>> sophisticated and the vulgar and hateful will always displace the >>> beautiful. And yet the beautiful persists." >>> >>> Wise words for his time and ours. The information in nature will always >>> bring us back around to the beautiful if we let it, but it always seems to >>> slip through our fingers. Maybe another take on the arc of justice. The >>> trouble of course is every time we let the vulgar and hateful displace the >>> stakes seem to become much higher. >>> >>> Michael >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ >>> mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Alfredo Jornet Gil >>> Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2017 1:59 AM >>> To: ablunden@mira.net; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity < >>> xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu> >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism >>> >>> Francine, >>> >>> I agree analysis is only one tool and I hope we can do much more here and >>> elsewhere. But the overtone window seems to resonate well with our quest >>> for understanding the possibilities/conditions for hearing Trump's voice >>> sound like a pleasant flute or like toilette flush. >>> >>> I think the idea of Irony also adds to the question of perezhivanie and >>> Trump in the sense that different perezhivanie will also imply different >>> forms of generalisation/consciousness. Irony seems to always involve moving >>> a step up in the types of generalisation or metaphor. >>> >>> A good example may be found in considering the "Love Trumps Hate" message >>> that has been going around in the media. Although I am no linguist, I am >>> gonna give it a try: If you were to hear the assertion literally, you may >>> hear an imperative to do love Trump's hate in such a way as to enter into a >>> double bind situation. To find yourself in this situation, you need to >>> stick to the transitive form of the subject (you love) with respect to the >>> object (Trump hate). You kind of have to have faith in this form, respect >>> the integrity of the object and the integrity of the subject each in its >>> own terms, and so you may come to feel confused, or perhaps end up hating >>> just the same way Trump plays he hates. >>> >>> On the other hand, to be able to hear "love trumps hate" as a message of >>> love, as an equivalent (as per Vygotsky's equivalence) for another message >>> that we also have seen these days, "when they go low we go high," then you >>> have to take the relation between subject and object in a higher level of >>> metaphor: you now hear the sentence in a context that modifies both subject >>> and object; hate and love cannot be exclusive opposites. The sentence then >>> is heard as intransitive, love and hate no longer are independent. And most >>> importantly, once you hear the sentence in its intransitive form, love and >>> hate no longer are the same. >>> >>> Similarly, to hear everything Trump said and take it literally takes a >>> very different act of faith that it takes hearing it literally as an irony. >>> Alfredo >>> >>> >>> ________________________________________ >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>> on behalf of Larry Smolucha >>> Sent: 24 January 2017 02:35 >>> To: ablunden@mira.net; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism >>> >>> Message from Francine: >>> >>> >>> Helena Worthen was right - I am serious about finding (and creating) new >>> tools for understanding the Trump movement. Analysis is only one tool and >>> there is no insight when it is overused. Figurative, analogical, >>> metaphorical thinking gives us other tools. Recognizing IRONY means getting >>> the punch line in a joke (as Freud >>> >>> explained in Jokes and Their Relation to the Unconscious). >>> >>> >>> Is there a termteson in literature for the reversal that commonly occurs >>> in fairy tales? >>> >>> All that is gold does not glitter, not all those who wander are lost . . . >>> >>> >>> 1) The ironic reversals that are taking place as people change their >>> alignment with >>> >>> political parties remind me of a geophysics phenomena - the reversal of >>> the earth's magnetic field that can happen over hundreds of thousands of >>> years. Both are disorienting. I will give this more thought, but for the >>> moment consider this much. When magnetic fields shift it is not all at >>> once, magnetic currents in the molten layers beneath the earth's solid >>> crust change polarities, sometimes causing a total >>> >>> reversal. Our political parties are commonly referred to as polar >>> opposites but those >>> >>> polarities are not fixed they are fluid. The blue collar working class can >>> shift from the Democratic Party to the Republican. The Black vote can shift >>> to the Republicans, the Democrats don't own it. In the 1950's Russian >>> sympathies were a hallmark of the left, now the left denounces Trumps >>> outreach to the Russians. [A caveat here - this is two dimensional thinking >>> because there are only two poles on one geometric plane.] >>> >>> >>> 2) There is another concept, the Overton Window that is a scale of how >>> radical of a discourse the public will tolerate (also called the window of >>> discourse). The Window >>> >>> opens and closes along a range of discourse from the acceptable to the >>> unthinkable. What discourse resonates with the general public (strikes a >>> chord)? What will they regard as taboo (or not politically correct)? Issues >>> like that. >>> >>> >>> Here are a couple links worth looking at: >>> >>> >>> Donald Trump & The Overton Window --Resetting America's Political < >>> http://www.nationalreview.com/article/428200/donald- >>> trump-overton-window-american-political-debate> >>> www.nationalreview.com/.../donald-trump-overton-window-american-p< >>> http://www.nationalreview.com/.../donald-trump-overton-window-american-p >>>> .. >>> >>> >>> >>> Trump's Win Smashed the 'Overton Window' | LifeZette>> lifezette.com/polizette/trumps-win-smashed-overton-window/> >>> www.lifezette.com/polizette/trumps-win-smashed-overton-window/ >>> >>> >>> >>> Can any of this be used with the concept of perezhivanie? >>> >>> ________________________________ >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>> on behalf of Andy Blunden >>> Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 9:37 PM >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism >>> >>> "Irony" - good word to introduce here Francine. >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>> Andy Blunden >>> http://home.mira.net/~andy >>> Andy Blunden's Home Page home.mira.net Andy >>> Blunden's Home Page with links to pages I maintain and mail-to buttons >>> >>> >>> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making >>> [http://www.brill.com/sites/default/files/styles/large/ >>> public/ftp/images/products/295x295/92947.jpg?itok=j5KXqZw3]< >>> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making> >>> >>> The Origins of Collective Decision Making | Brill>> products/book/origins-collective-decision-making> >>> www.brill.com >>> The Origins of Collective Decision Making, identifies three paradigms of >>> collective decision making - Counsel, Majority and Consensus, and discovers >>> their origins ... >>> >>> >>> >>> On 23/01/2017 2:32 PM, Larry Smolucha wrote: >>>> Message from Francine Smolucha: >>>> >>>> >>>> The key to an analysis of the Trump movement is understanding the >>>> >>>> fundamental IRONIES that have rocked American politics. >>>> >>>> >>>> The workers revolution has resulted in the >>>> >>>> workers/unions deserting the Left, the socialists, the Democratic Party. >>>> >>>> Trump is a Capitalist regardless of whether he actually has a Republican >>> ideology. >>>> >>>> The workers' movement has been hijacked by a capitalist. >>>> >>>> >>>> The other great IRONY is that Trump wants to make Russia a U.S. ally >>> (again). >>>> >>>> The Left, the socialists, the Democratic Party are the ones demonizing >>>> Russia - >>>> >>>> what a reversal! >>>> >>>> >>>> Since CHAT derives from Russian psychology (Leontiev and Vygotsky) and >>> the backlash against Trump is also a backlash against all things Russian - >>> this puts CHAT in a particularly awkward position. How can a cultural >>> historical psychology that originated in Russia become the leader in the >>> anti-Trump discourse? or lead an anti-Trump educational movement? You are >>> even extolling a Russian concept PEREZHIVANIE. >>>> >>>> >>>> I think the XMCA needs to examine its own perezhivanie at this time. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ________________________________ >>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>> on behalf of mike cole >>>> >>>> Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 3:01 PM >>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>> Cc: Mariane Hedegaard; Reijo Miettinen; Seth Chaiklin >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >>>> Nationalism >>>> >>>> Helena et al -- >>>> >>>> An important emphasis in the article for me was on the fact that >>>> although the article focused on the American nationalist movement that >>>> has just pulled of an alt-right coup, similar movements are poised to >>>> take hold in a lot of places in Europe to join the many already >>>> entrenched unsavory governments in other parts of the world. >>>> >>>> The CRADLE center in Helsinki is under very concerted attack and the >>>> right wing government appears, from this distance, to be making great >>>> progress on destroying its legacy. The same process has been in >>>> Denmark for some time, also with apparent success. >>>> >>>> What do our international colleagues who have already felt the hot >>>> breath of right wing nationalism have to offer in terms of strategies >>>> of resistence? >>>> >>>> Back to "what is to be done," that sombre question from an earlier >>>> era. The answer last time did not produce what it promised. >>>> >>>> mike >>>> >>>> mike >>>> >>>> On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 12:22 PM, Helena Worthen >>>> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Thank you, Alfredo - I gave it a read. >>>>> >>>>> Sure, of course they're right. But I am very disappointed. >>>>> >>>>> I was hoping that the following was only item #1 in a long list of >>>>> "what the 2016 election made apparent": >>>>> >>>>> The 2016 election has made apparent the need for scholarship that >>>>> explicitly defends and furthers the rights and well-being of people >>>>> of color, immigrants, Muslims, women, people who are differently >>>>> abled, LGBTQ communities, and the earth. These are stances that have >>>>> been limited, at least explicitly, in the Learning Sciences. >>>>> >>>>> But the call for inclusion was not just #1, it seems to be the whole >>>>> thing. In other words, it's all about identity -plus the earth, of >>> course. >>>>> While inclusion is necessary, it's not even a start. Yes, research, >>>>> teaching, publishing, promotion, conferences - everything associated >>>>> with teaching and learning has to include everyone as equals (see >>>>> Andy's book) in one way or another - but then what? What are they (we) >>> supposed to do? >>>>> Where does the pretty language touch the ground? >>>>> >>>>> I was listening to a broadcast of the Women's March in DC on Saturday >>>>> morning, and Kamala Harris, who was the California State Attorney >>>>> General and is now a junior Senator from CA, was addressing the >>>>> rally. She said, "People always ask me to talk about women's issues. >>>>> I say, 'Oh, I'm SO glad you're interested in economics!! Let's talk >>>>> about economics." And she ran through a whole set of parallel >>>>> back-and-forths, always pulling identity questions back to wages, jobs, >>> earning, supporting your family, etc etc. >>>>> >>>>> Much as we need to wipe away any barriers to the Learning Sciences >>>>> (and the professions and institutions dedicated to them) due to >>>>> identity, until the Learning Sciences start taking a look at the >>>>> place where most people spend most of their lives - not school, I >>>>> mean - but work, they will be engaging in a soft conversation at the >>>>> edge of the real issue. It's a pleasant conversation but it doesn't >>>>> put a hand on the levers that translate skill and knowledge into rent >>> and groceries. >>>>> >>>>> H >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Helena Worthen >>>>> helenaworthen@gmail.com >>>>> Berkeley, CA 94707 >>>>> Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> On Jan 22, 2017, at 11:38 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >>>>>> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> Here it is, >>>>>> >>>>>> http://cognitionandinstruction.com/engagements-the-learning- >>>>> sciences-in-a-new-era-of-u-s-nationalism/ >>>>>> Alfredo >>>>>> ________________________________________ >>>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>>> >>>>> on behalf of Helena Worthen >>>>>> Sent: 22 January 2017 20:24 >>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >>>>> Nationalism >>>>>> Someone please re-send the link to this article? I think I'm going >>>>>> to >>>>> want to read it and respond to Mike's question. >>>>>> Thanks - H >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Helena Worthen >>>>>> helenaworthen@gmail.com >>>>>> Berkeley, CA 94707 >>>>>> Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Jan 22, 2017, at 12:25 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >>>>>>> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> Mike, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> thanks a lot for sharing this article. You and Michael, who have >>>>>>> and >>>>> know more history, have spoken in terms of reminiscences. I have >>>>> lived and know less, and the article feels like fresh air. During my >>>>> PhD, I begun to increasingly feel that I had to due something to act >>>>> and respond to the increasing ecological and humanitarian globe >>>>> crises. But how could I do anything if I had children and a PhD to >>>>> finalise?? What could I do that would also be doing my job as >>>>> researcher in a department of education? It was very difficult to >>>>> find anything, partly because almost every academic quest would focus >>>>> on learning, but so little on social development. How many scientific >>>>> articles are dedicated to socio-political questions in the most cited >>> educational journals? I felt very powerless. >>>>>>> To be able to address these questions within my expertise, is a >>>>> challenge partly because contrary to Dewey's hope, educational >>>>> research has only marginally focused on these questions, and yet they >>>>> may be exactly the question that matter to education. What are we >>>>> educating for? Indeed, what is education for? I think we face a >>>>> serious problem when someone (like myself), being an educational >>>>> researchers/scholar, still has to scratch her head wondering <>>>> can I make my profession matter to social change and development?>> >>> Vygotsky would be shocked! >>>>>>> Alfredo >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>>>> >>>>> on behalf of mike cole >>>>>>> Sent: 19 January 2017 04:51 >>>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >>>>> Nationalism >>>>>>> Yes Michael, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It feels like the world of the later 1930's about the time I was >>>>>>> born as that period came down to me through the prism of a family >>>>>>> of "premature anti fascists." >>>>>>> >>>>>>> For a great re-creation of those times see the highly ambivalent >>>>>>> film by Frank Capra, "meet John Doe." It has American big capital >>>>>>> interconnected with fascism combined with populist collectivism in >>>>>>> a manner that >>>>> points at >>>>>>> the media (as then experienced) as the bad guys in disguise. Happy >>>>> Ending, >>>>>>> Beethoven Ode to Joy and all. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It's come round again, nastier this time. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Mike >>>>>>> On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 6:20 PM Glassman, Michael >>>>>>> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Mike >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> It was so interesting to read this note after reading the >>>>>>>> Cognition and Instruction essay. All the way through it I kept >>>>>>>> thinking we have been here before. It reminded me of the >>>>>>>> scholars, especially those who had escaped from Germany, trying to >>>>>>>> make sense of what had happened to >>>>> their >>>>>>>> society during World War II. The foremost in my mind was Lewin. >>>>> Except I >>>>>>>> wonder if he would say the process of transformative action starts >>>>>>>> not >>>>> with >>>>>>>> emergence of quasi-needs, but our willingness and abilities to >>>>>>>> step >>>>> back >>>>>>>> from our quasi-needs and the ways that they drive us, often to >>>>>>>> dysfunctional behaviors that it ultimately destructive to both our >>>>> society >>>>>>>> and to us as individuals. How hard this is to do, we have to keep >>>>> going >>>>>>>> back again and again. The quasi-needs, tribalism, acceptance, >>>>> standing are >>>>>>>> always there. It is how they shape us that is critical. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Michael >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto: >>>>>>>> xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 8:31 PM >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >>>>>>>> Nationalism >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> In following the perezhivanie thread I encountered the note I >>>>> re-membered. >>>>>>>> And interestingly mis-remembered. A translation into my focus on >>>>>>>> mediational means. He places the starting point of the process of >>>>>>>> transformative action at the emergence of quasi-needs (from Kurt >>>>> Lewin). >>>>>>>> That seems correct to me. The new mediational means emerge under >>>>>>>> environmental presses. Ever functionalist ego need a goal(!). (The >>>>> problem >>>>>>>> with functionalism) In David's words, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Perhaps the place we should look for "exaptations" that can save >>>>>>>> both >>>>> our >>>>>>>> personalities and our environment is not in our evolved needs, but >>>>>>>> in >>>>> yet >>>>>>>> to be designed quasi-needs. Artificial organs, after all, always >>>>> suggest >>>>>>>> new and ever more artificial functions, like chess and language. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> This point seems worth keeping in mind as we look at where this >>>>>>>> group >>>>> of >>>>>>>> critical scholars who work within the Learning Sciences >>>>>>>> disciplinary framework would like to lead us. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> mike >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> > > From lpscholar2@gmail.com Wed Jan 25 08:17:19 2017 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2017 08:17:19 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Reading Octavio Paz through Simmel to explore FORM and DISTANCE as key concepts Message-ID: <5888cf91.c803630a.b613.3ace@mx.google.com> I realize this article may be going too far off topic. However, for Susan and Chris who introduced the sense of carnival into the discussion, I offer the way Paz traced the labyrinth of isolation within Mexican identity THROUGH a Simmelian lens. I decided to send as a separate link, to put aside for a later moment, unless others find some relevance in Paz and Simmel to the Trump phenomena Sent from Mail for Windows 10 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: JANUARY 25 2017 CAPITILLO PONCE Navigating the Labyrinth Simmel and his Influence on Ovtavio Paz.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 155447 bytes Desc: not available Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20170125/b22b8652/attachment-0001.pdf From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Wed Jan 25 10:19:59 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2017 18:19:59 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's "talking" versus "speaking" In-Reply-To: References: <628ebbd3-8b51-8e15-47d0-9164e8352c36@mira.net> <58866d1f.90966b0a.1b7d5.c1c8@mx.google.com> <289C4B7F-0A9A-4A10-BB1F-0619858FFBAA@umn.edu> <1485241782176.85472@iped.uio.no>, Message-ID: <1485368397236.71956@iped.uio.no> Chris, I think you are very right, everything about this situation is not so much about the formal text... but still, as others have been pointing out throughout the discussion, particularly in the parallel thread on the role of the Learning Sciences, we need to do what we can, locally, globally, and elsewhere. And so one way to do something we know how to do is analysing the speech not as text, but as *contexture*. We remarked bringing up Martin's points, and also using an example, that the point is to see societal possibilities of hearing a speech. And that includes bringing in so much more than just formal text. One example was Roth's analysis of a song by rap artist Eminem, http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/1213 . A ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Christopher Schuck Sent: 24 January 2017 16:22 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's "talking" versus "speaking" Another irony that hasn't been mentioned is that this distictive speaking/ talking style flagged by McWhorter made him unusually effective as a campaigner where the goal was to create chaos and premature action, yet would undermine his ability to be an effective (or safe) president and doesn't "fit." This is relevant insofar as it emphasizes the new experience of hearing him speak this way *as president* as opposed to president-wannabe. In the inauguration speech, this person who is known for talking not speaking attempts to speak formally, which creates yet another split between taking that pseudo-formal language literally and taking it ironically. So it is not just the difference between reading him literally and reading him ironically, but that what is formal and what is literal (as well as what is informal and what is indirect, and whether he is a "formal" leader or informal television personality) become tangled up with each other as he transitions from celebrity to this official role.That is one reason why I wonder whether looking at the formal text of this official speech (however fascinating) is such a useful way to explore the perezhivanie of the Trump experience, because it's so uniquely not about the written text. I suspect even many of Trump's supporters were not particularly interested in the speech. On Tuesday, January 24, 2017, Alfredo Jornet Gil > wrote: > Richard, > what this linguist says and you comment on Trump's talk is pretty close to > what I was just writing to Francine in the main "trump's speech" thread > about hearing him literally and hearing him as irony. If you stick to > hearing in the same he seems to treat his recipients, then you may have to > believe that each word conveys an idea and that one word suffices to give > the idea, like "it's true". It seems to be enough. As per your question, > yes, it's a very scary question. It also is very scary that he may say, > "it's true" and so be it. > Alfredo > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of Richard Beach > Sent: 23 January 2017 23:09 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Trump's "talking" versus "speaking" > > In a New York Times op-ed 01/21/opinion/sunday/how-to-listen-to-donald-trump-every-day > -for-years.html>, the linguist, John McWhorter, distinguishes between > Trump?s informal, spontaneous ?talking? versus ?speaking? that involves > employing a more formal register associated with written language. He cites > the example of Trump?s talking: ?Look, having nuclear ? my uncle was a > great professor and scientist and engineer, Dr. John Trump at M.I.T.; good > genes, very good genes, O.K., very smart, the Wharton School of Finance, > very good, very smart ? you know, if you?re a conservative Republican, if I > were a liberal, if, like, O.K. ?? > > > What?s problematic here is that Trump?s off-the-cuff ?talking,? as well as > his use of tweets, can convey messages with problematic uptakes from > others, resulting in taking action without careful thought or consultation > with others. As McWhorter notes: ?All understand that his speech is > structurally ungraceful. It may be harder to grasp that Mr. Trump, as > someone just talking rather than artfully communicating ideas, has no sense > of the tacit understanding that a politician?s utterances are more signals > than statements, vehicles meant to convey larger messages.? > > When one of his hotels is another country is attacked by ?terrorists,? > will Trump, as someone who perceives himself as the prime actor, > spontaneously declare war with little or no consideration of the > consequences of his actions? > > > > Richard Beach, Professor Emeritus of English Education, University of > Minnesota > rbeach@umn.edu > Websites: Digital writing , Media > literacy , Teaching literature > , Identity-focused ELA Teaching < > http://identities.pbworks.com/>, Common Core State Standards < > http://englishccss.pbworks.com/>, Apps for literacy learning < > http://usingipads.pbworks.com/>, Teaching about climate change < > http://climatechangeela.pbworks.com/> > > > > On Jan 23, 2017, at 12:52 PM, lpscholar2@gmail.com wrote: > > > > Andrew, Andy, > > I also want to pursue the example of James Lawson. > > What struck me was his relationship to both parents as formative. > > Moving to Trump?s inauguration, what struck me was the bodily gesture he > was expressing walking down the hallway just prior to speaking. > > This body language that i was reading before he spoke a word. > > I hope some of you watched the Frontline documentary on PBS EXPLORING > both Trump?s and Clinton?s early family life. > > > > Trump?s father was only interested in ?winners? and to come second was > to be a ?loser?. The father sent Trump as a young man to a military academy > that would teach his son how to be a ?winner? a lesson that Trump inhabits > and is incarnating in his every gesture. > > > > His emotional, cognitive, and performative symmetry captured in his > facial expression as he walked forward to give his inaugural address. > > > > In other words, James Lawson, Donald Trump, and Martin Packer?s book > review i see as overlapping themes. > > When we explore ?expression? and ?intentionality? and ?language? i want > to include the family upbringing as formative. > > > > Now as an aside, Simmel would say both James and Donald are inhabiting > (fictions) that INform their experiences, but that may be a leap too far. > Simmel was following the philosopher Vasinger (spelling?) who focused on > how we live our lives (as is) or (as though) but to take this turn would be > for another thread. > > > > > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > From: Andrew Babson > > Sent: January 23, 2017 9:08 AM > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: James Lawson and perezhivanie > > > > Andy, thank you for the timely post, especially as we move forward in the > > shadow of authoritarianism here in the USA. Lawson's example of choosing > > non-violent protest, following Gandhi, is helpful. Consider the > > effectiveness of millions of people last weekend peacefully taking to the > > streets with few if any arrests (side note: we all went as a family here > in > > Philly, it was great). Contrast the Black Bloc member's sucker punch of > > neo-nazi Richard Spencer: people are cheering it, but those same people > > probably realize it's not a scalable strategy. Different tours de force, > > different effects, the gender connotations of which are interesting. > > > > *P **erezhivanie > > *is a new term to me, > which I > > link here to the XMCA blog for those other also unfamiliar with it. It > > seems like a pretty clear gloss of a term I do know well, *Erlebnis, > > *"experience" > > (I dislike the gloss of that Dilthey-an term as "lived" experience...but > > that's for another discussion). > > > > It's fascinating to learn about Lawson's vocational decision-making > > process, and to consider the possible effects of violent and non-violent > > dissent. But perhaps you could clarify for us Andy why you thought > Lawson's > > story was an example of *perezhivanie*? Where's the point of analytical > > traction? If it means more than "experience", how can we apply that > broader > > meaning here? It seems like he had a Pauline metanoia/conversion > > experience. Is that what you mean? > > > > Andrew > > > > ------------------------------------------------ > > Andrew Babson, Ph.D. > > Lecturer > > Graduate School of Education > > University of Pennsylvania > > > > On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 4:40 AM, Andy Blunden wrote: > > > > James Lawson is the Methodist preacher who trained the young members of > the > > SNCC in non-violent action and wrote their constitution. I paste below > and > > attach an excerpt from my book "The Origins of Collective Decision > Making" > > which narrates Lawson's life up until April 1960. Perezhivanie was not > the > > topic under discussion so it is not mentioned in the text, but xmca-ers > > should be able to see it, an example of perezhivanie: > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > > > > > > > James Lawson was born in 1928, in Uniontown, Pennsylvania. His father, > > James Snr., was the grandson of an escaped slave, and a Minister for the > > African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church in New England. > > > > > > > > > > > > Via the Free African Society(FAS) the Methodists had recruited freed > slaves > > in Philadelphiain 1787, but as a result of a racist incident, some left > to > > found the African Methodist Episcopal Church(AMEC). Nonetheless, many > > African Americans stayed with the United Methodist Church. The AMEC split > > started in Philadelphia and the AMEC Zion Church was a split that came > out > > of New York. It was to AMEC Zion, James Lawson was born. > > > > > > > > > > > > However, Lawson returned to The United Methodist Church, created by a > 1939 > > merger of several branches of the Methodist Church, which set up five > > regional ?jurisdictions? of Methodists in the US, organized to maintain > > regionally identity and a sixth, called the ?Central Jurisdiction? which > > combined the Black annual conferences, thus building segregation into the > > constitution of the Church.The Methodists went through a long and painful > > process, carried out in accordance with the Methodist Code of Discipline, > > which mandates the principle of Majority, to re-integrate the white and > > Black, but it was not till after 1964 that Black conferences started to > > merge into white conferences. At the local level, congregations continued > > much as before. So it was within the Black section of the segregated > United > > Methodist Church, that James Lawson became a Methodist. > > > > > > > > > > > > James Snr. was a militant preacher; he packed a 38 pistol and set up > > branches of the NAACP wherever he was assigned to preach. After serving > at > > St. James AMEZ Church in Massillon, Ohio, he transferred to the Lexington > > Annual Conference of the Central Jurisdiction of the United Methodist > > Church. James Snr. was no pacifist and according to Lawson he ?refused to > > take any guff from anyone, particularly on the point of race? and > ?insisted > > that he was going to be treated as a man.? > > > > > > > > > > > > Lawson?s mother, Philane May Cover, on the other hand, was decidedly > > nonviolent. Lawson?s challenge, which was to form his character, was to > > reconcile his father?s militancy with his mother?s nonviolence. Lawson > grew > > up in Massillon. One day, at the age of 10, Lawson was asked by his > mother > > to run an errand: > > > > > > > > > > > > A little white child in an automobile yelled ?nigger? out the opened > > window. I walked over ... and, since I was in a hurry running my mother?s > > errand, I smacked the child and went on my way. When the Lawson kids got > > called ?nigger? on the streets or at school, we usually fought. I don?t > > know where we got that from, except that we figured that it was something > > to fight over. (Lawson, cited in King, 1999) > > > > > > > > > > > > On the return trip home, aware of possible repercussions, Lawson tried to > > find the parents of the offending child, to talk to them, but the car was > > gone. Once home, he told his mother of the incident. Lawson?s mother > > replied, ?Jimmy, what good did that do?? > > > > > > > > > > > > She talked about who I was, the fact of God?s love, that we were a family > > of love and that such an incident could not hurt me, because of who I > was. > > I don?t remember anyone else being around, but a stillness took over my > > being at that moment. It was, as I realized much later on, a mystical > > experience. In a very real way, my life stood still. I realized in that > > stillness that I had changed forever. One of the phrases my mother used > in > > her conversation with me was that ?there must be a better way?. I > > determined, from then on, that I would find the better way. (Lawson, > cited > > in King, 1999, pp. 187-188) > > > > > > > > > > > > He first became acquainted with Gandhi?s experiments in nonviolence as a > > child, thanks to the African-American press which the family discussed > > around the dinner table, and had read Gandhi?s autobiography as a > teenager. > > At Baldwin Wallace College, a liberal arts Methodistcollege in Berea, > Ohio, > > he studied Thoreau, Gandhi and Tolstoy, and the pacifist theologians > > Dietrich Bonhoeffer and Reinhold Niebuhr. At age 19, he became a draft > > resister, refusing service in the Korean War. Executive director of > > Fellowship Of Reconciliation (FOR), A. J. Muste,frequently visited to > > lecture at the College: > > > > > > > > > > > > All of us in history classes were required to hear Muste. I was thrilled. > > He made me realize that I was not alone in my experimentation, that there > > was a world movement, and a national movement. ... He acquainted me with > > the Fellowship Of Reconciliation, which I joined on the spot in 1947. > That > > meant that I got exposed to their book list. > > > > > > > > > > > > After hearing a lecture by A. J. Muste, he joined FOR and CORE. Muste was > > instrumental thereafter in strengthening Lawson?s nonviolent orientation, > > directing him towards Gandhi and later facilitating his entry into the > > sit-in and boycott movement beginning in the South. In the late 1940s and > > early 1950s Lawson had organized sit-ins and protests directed at > > establishments that discriminated against blacks in Massillon, long > before > > the Montgomery bus-boycott. > > > > > > > > > > > > He was also active with the National Conference of Methodist Youth. > > Although a member of a segregated Methodist Church, he found plenty of > > support for his stands against racial discrimination and war from his > white > > colleagues and church fellows. While he was in prison serving thirteen > > months of a two and a half year term for draft resistance in 1952, he was > > re-elected as Vice-President of the NCMY. > > > > > > > > > > > > Wesleyan Methodism was central to Lawson?s outlook. Just as John Wesley > had > > sought to cleanse individuals of iniquity, so could society be purged of > > the social sins of slavery, segregation, poverty, and war.Generations of > > African American Methodists from Harriet Tubman (AMEZ) and Henry M. > Turner > > (AME) in the nineteenth century, to Rosa Parks (AME) and James Farmer > > (MEC), were led to social justice activism by this Methodist heritage. > > > > > > > > > > > > Lawson used his prison time to read and think. Writing from prison in > 1952 > > aged 23 years old and yet to enter the seminary, Lawson said he aspired > to > > emulate ?the life of Jesus, St. Francis, George Fox, Gandhi, Buddha... > and > > other great religious persons.? These figures attached little importance > to > > ?theology but (to their) experience with God.?Further, he noted > ?religious > > failures today are in (the arena of) experience and practice, not > > theology.? When Lawson entered prison, he was a Christian pacifist.He > told > > Mary King however, that his ?first commitment was to work on race,? and > > conscientious objection came second.By the time of his release, he had > > advanced to Gandhian nonviolence. He wondered ?why can?t a mass > non-violent > > revolution be staged throughout the South where the segregation pattern > is > > much like the ?untouchables? of India? Such a movement would have to > start > > with one person who had the Christian vision to make such a revolution a > > reality in his own life.? Gandhian nonviolence became the synthesizing > > factor for Lawson?s religious thinking: the militancy of his father?s > > Methodism and the Christian pacifism that he drew from his mother. > > > > > > > > > > > > Muste arranged for Lawson to visit India after his release from prison > with > > a letter of introduction to activists in the Gandhian movement, and he > > remained in India from May 1953 to 1956, working at Hislop College in > > Nagpur, reading Indian literature and working with Gandhi?s movement. > > Lawson?s practice would remain deeply religious; his nonviolence was > > saturated with the message of Christian love, and blended with principles > > synthesized from a broad range of religious and secular sources, both > > Eastern and Western. His aim was the ?mass education and training of > people > > in the use of nonviolent direct action techniques.? Lawson insisted that > > ?you are fighting a system, not an individual, not a race, or not the > > people of another country, but a system.? > > > > > > > > > > > > He continued his study of pacifism and Gandhian nonviolence at Oberlin > > College, Ohio. While still in India, he had read about Martin Luther King > > and his successful leadership of the Montgomery bus boycott.King?s > lecture > > at Oberlin on February 6, 1957, fortified his long-held intention to work > > in the South for transformative social change. After King?s lecture to a > > packed audience, he and Lawson talked together at dinner.Though Lawson > was > > contemplating study for a Ph.D., King told him ?don?t wait, but come > south > > now!? adding that there was no one else like Lawson.Muste arranged for > FOR > > to hire Lawson as southern field secretary to be stationed at Nashville > in > > January 1958. Upon his arrival, he found that Glenn Smiley, national > field > > director of FOR, had arranged for Lawson to run a full schedule of > > workshops ? including one to take place early that year at the first > annual > > meeting of the SCLC in Columbia, South Carolina. > > > > > > > > > > > > At the SCLC meeting, King made an exuberant introduction of Lawson as > FOR?s > > new regional representative and discussed the organization?s role in > > Montgomery, telling delegates to be sure to attend Lawson?s workshop on > > nonviolence. King took his seat in the first pew, waiting for the > > three-hour session to start: > > > > > > > > > > > > Martin did that at every SCLC meeting as long as he lived. He would ask > me > > to conduct an afternoon workshop, usually two or three hours, and he > would > > arrange for it to be ?at-large? so that everyone could attend, with > nothing > > else to compete. He put it on the schedule himself. A few minutes early, > he > > would show up and sit alone, as an example, in the front row. > > > > > > > > > > > > Back in Nashville, Lawson continued with Monday evening workshops during > > the autumn of 1959 in which he trained the students who were to be the > core > > of the Nashville sit-in movement. As a result of his involvement with the > > sit-ins Lawson was expelled from Vanderbilt, but he enrolled with Boston > > University to finish his degree in theology,while continuing to work with > > the students. Several professors in the School of Theology resigned over > > his expulsion. > > > > > > > > > > > > The techniques that the students deployed were drawn from Lawson?s > > workshops. In 1958 and 1959, Lawson mobilized all that he knew about > > Christian pacifism, Gandhian nonviolence, and Methodist social ministry > and > > blended them into an unprecedented curriculum that influenced the civil > > rights movement in Nashville and beyond. > > > > > > > > > > > > Blending Christianity and interreligious sources, he did not present its > > philosophy and practice as a secular doctrine, but as the essence of > > religion itself. Core to nonviolence was mirroring God?s love for > humankind > > and exhibiting it through concrete relationships of human solidarity and > > community. ?Nonviolence,? Lawson taught, is the aggressive, forgiving, > > patient, long-suffering Christ-like and Christ-commanded love or > good-will > > for all humankind even in the face of tension, fear, hatred, or demonic > > evil.? Moreover, ?it is the readiness to absorb suffering with > forgiveness > > and courage rather than to inflict suffering on others.? > > > > > > > > > > > > Lawson divided his instruction into four modules: how nonviolence reacts, > > training for nonviolence, the virtues of nonviolence, and the methods of > > nonviolence. Practitioners prepared themselves by jettisoning anger, > > hostility and fear thus ?minimizing the effect of an attack,? valuing > love, > > courage, fearlessness, and forgiveness, and pursuing redemptive suffering > > which ?releases unknown elements for good.? Preparation included > meditation > > and prayer, study of the scriptures, practicing nonviolence through > > challenges to segregation in bus transportation and in other public > > facilities.The practice steps included fact-finding, negotiation, > education > > of the community, and various methods of nonviolent direct action > including > > sit-ins, boycotts, strikes, and civil disobedience. Lawson provided an > > extensive bibliography including relevant verses from the Bible, the > > Bhagavad Gita, and from the Chinese philosopher, Mo Ti and the Hebrew > > prophet, Isaiah. > > > > > > > > > > > > The Nashville sit-ins and those led by students in other southern cities > > convinced Ella Baker of the SCLC to call a conference in April, 1960, at > > Shaw University in Raleigh, North Carolina. Out of this meeting emerged > the > > Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee.Lawson delivered an opening > > keynote address that helped to frame SNCC?s nonviolent trajectory.Later, > > Lawson summarized discussions and consensus that emerged out of the > > conference, and his synopsis received the approval of everyone there. > > Lawson?s overall comments said that ?nonviolence as it grows from > > Judaic-Christian tradition seeks a social order of justice permeated by > > love.? > > > > > > > > > > > > It was Lawson who delivered the keynote address and framed SNCC?s > > nonviolent orientation. > > > > > > > > > > > > The whole group, perhaps 120 participants, all in the room, asked me to > > draft a statement. Eventually, three different drafts emerged. The > > Nashville group was cohesive. The extant draft was the third, influenced > by > > the Nashville group, after two earlier conversations. (Interview with > King, > > June 2014) > > > > > > > > > > > > Lawson?s synopsis was approved by the Conference. > > > > > > > > > > > > In a private email message Mary King told me: > > > > > > > > > > > > He [James Lawson] was reading from the FOR booklist from a young age, > but I > > don?t think that he was influenced on notions of Consensus by Quakers, > > because the connection was too abstract. Let me underscore that he says > it > > was for him Methodist origins. (Private email, 15 April 2014) > > > > > > > > > > > > In his interview with Mary King, Lawson confirmed that the origin of > > Consensus in SNCC was the Nashville Central Committee, confirming what > Mary > > King had told me in April. As to the roots Consensus in Lawson?s own > > experience, he emphasized that: > > > > > > > > > > > > It was the Methodist youth and student movements with which I had grown > up, > > and this is how they made decisions. They knew the rules of parliamentary > > procedures, but they wanted to find a common mind. (Interview with King, > > June 2014) > > > > > > > > > > > > The Methodist Church to this very day still mandates Majority decisions, > > but this would never have entailed children voting ? in general > youngsters > > in these organizations were simply told what to do. The Black > congregations > > had operated separately for more than a century, so there was some room > for > > Lawson to develop a consensual model of collaboration in working with > young > > people. It is also possible the Black congregations, like other Black > > Churches in America, drew on other traditions of decision making. > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > Andy Blunden > > > > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > > > > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > > > From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Wed Jan 25 10:34:38 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2017 18:34:38 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: <004d01d27664$b19d5110$14d7f330$@att.net> References: <1485031482970.89461@iped.uio.no> <1485191332785.92884@iped.uio.no> , <004d01d27664$b19d5110$14d7f330$@att.net> Message-ID: <1485369277024.99321@iped.uio.no> Peg, thanks for the link! This truly makes for a comparative study! There are so many parallels between the two speeches, and yet the two speeches are so different. I enjoyed this one much better! Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Peg Griffin Sent: 24 January 2017 18:09 To: 'eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity' Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie Maybe young Sophie Cruz provides information relevant to these age differences: "I also want to tell the children not to be afraid because we are not alone. There are still many people that have their hearts filled with love and tenderness to snuggle in this path of life. Let's keep together and fight for their rights! God is with us!" Snuggle. https://mic.com/articles/166246/6-year-old-sophie-cruz-child-of-undocumented-parents-advocated-for-immigrants-at-the-womens-march#.hW1TkWzCd -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 6:54 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie Martin's caution relates to my suggestion that we not restrict the same to our families or students and friends. People experienced the Trump victory in different ways. The example from LSV involves kids of three ages. That still seems an important focus. Our contemporaries are in there 30's + (and ++). Our students are in latest teens or 20+. High school kids are in ++the teens. Middle school kids..... It is my strong impression that there are significant age differences in ones experience of the event that could be elicited pretty easily and compared in the group across other interesting categories of difference such as nationality. A small, positive, collective effort? mike On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 9:08 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > Dear Martin, > > thanks for the nuances you introduce. Yes, I agree with you, it is > totally sensible to hear Trump's words with hope and actually > experience > (perezhivat) them in such a way as to become moving force towards > transformation. I was only approaching the speech from a developmental > stages perspective, where, to hear the speech with contempt given the > speech's formal structure as a type of generalisation, would mean to > hear them within that stage that Andy very appropriately (in my view) > called as "magic". Vygotsky (I think) also used this term to refer to > a stage in child development. > > But I do not wish to say that contempt is the only possible quality, > and so, as you very nicely remark, hope, enthusiasm, empowerment, all > these and their developmental and historical conditions should be > considered as possibilities of hearing Trump's speech. > > Thanks a lot for the resources/links, I am incorporating them to our > joint document. > Alfredo > > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of Martin John Packer > > Sent: 22 January 2017 16:08 > To: xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie > > Hi Alfredo. > > I think your proposal is very interesting; that we could explore two > different ways of hearing and understanding Trump?s words. But if I > understand you correctly, I don?t agree that ?in the first case, there > is no hope for change, there is contempt.? I have lived in Michigan > and Pennsylvania, and in both states industries that were central to > the economic rise of the working class, auto manufacturing and steel > foundries, collapsed as a result of globalization. I have seen first > hand some of the communities that were almost completely destroyed. I > believe that people who experienced these changes do hear Trump?s > words with hope for change, and if they have contempt it is for > professional politicians who they feel speak but do not act. > > But perhaps you mean it was a lack of hope that *led* people to Trump: > > donald-trump-manufacturing-jobs-hope/496541/> > > The New Yorker has published several articles by George Packer (no > relation) on the appeal that Trump has to the white working class. For > example: > > donald-trump-appeals-to-the-white-working-class> > > Martin > > > > > > On Jan 21, 2017, at 3:44 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > wrote: > > Dear Helena, Andy, all, > > > Unfortunately, I have not been able to find the time to watch the > movie Fate of a Man, but I have followed the very interesting analyses > and conversations about it. I am opening this thread as connexions > between those analyses, perezhivanie, and current tragic social and > political situation in the US and elsewhere. This also connects with > the article that Mike shared on the position of the Learning Sciences > with regard to this situation (how happy I was to see this initiative!). > > > In particular, I wanted to pick up on Helena's very true comment that > "the US is going to have to produce some works of scholarship or art, > or both, that attempt to explain what is happening now here in the US > -- for example, this afternoon, under President Trump." > > > Yesterday, we saw at home Trump's speech. Although we had followed > Trump's campaign and its denigrating tenor, it was yesterday, for the > first time, that my wife and me got this gut feeling of true tragedy, > of a real *drama* as we heard those empty, but to recover the prior > article for discussion, hollowed and hollowing words coming out of > that mouth. It came upon us that there may be lots of people for whom > those words are not hollowed, but actually encouraging, rich, beautiful. How can you hear that as beauty? > > > So, I was wondering, and in following up with our 2016 MCA Issue 4 > discussion, whether we could not actually conduct an analysis of the > sort Marc offers in his article of the perezhivanie. Just as Vygotsky > explains how 3 different children experience the situation of an > alcoholic mother differently, could not we perform an analysis ?of > that perezhivanie in which a person experiences yesterday's situation > as one of encouragement, of freedom and hope. Would that not be a way > to try to understand what is going on? This would not be a piece of > art, but could be something we could do to try to understand and change this situation. > > We could then contrast that perezhivanie with the one many of as have, > in which the situation is experience as a real TRAGEDY. I think in the > first case, there is no hope for change, there is contempt; in the > second, hearing those words as hollowed and hollowing require that you > live the situation as a doubled situation in which you experienced it > from a very different developmental stage. One in which the speech > sounds as a case of involution. > > Should we find the transcribed speech and perform such analysis? > > > Going now to support the Woman's march here in Victoria BC. > > Alfredo > > > > From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Wed Jan 25 10:40:30 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2017 18:40:30 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Reading Octavio Paz through Simmel to explore FORM and DISTANCE as key concepts In-Reply-To: <5888cf91.c803630a.b613.3ace@mx.google.com> References: <5888cf91.c803630a.b613.3ace@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <1485369629011.8107@iped.uio.no> Thanks for sharing this in an alternative thread, it helps! A ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com Sent: 25 January 2017 17:17 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Reading Octavio Paz through Simmel to explore FORM and DISTANCE as key concepts I realize this article may be going too far off topic. However, for Susan and Chris who introduced the sense of carnival into the discussion, I offer the way Paz traced the labyrinth of isolation within Mexican identity THROUGH a Simmelian lens. I decided to send as a separate link, to put aside for a later moment, unless others find some relevance in Paz and Simmel to the Trump phenomena Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From mcole@ucsd.edu Wed Jan 25 10:40:52 2017 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2017 10:40:52 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] The Cambridge Atlantica site that Peg referred to Message-ID: https://antidotezine.com/2017/01/22/trump-knows-you/ From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Wed Jan 25 10:41:32 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2017 18:41:32 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's "talking" versus "speaking" In-Reply-To: <1485368397236.71956@iped.uio.no> References: <628ebbd3-8b51-8e15-47d0-9164e8352c36@mira.net> <58866d1f.90966b0a.1b7d5.c1c8@mx.google.com> <289C4B7F-0A9A-4A10-BB1F-0619858FFBAA@umn.edu> <1485241782176.85472@iped.uio.no>, , <1485368397236.71956@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <1485369691280.7805@iped.uio.no> David's analyses also give more than just text, I believe. A ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil Sent: 25 January 2017 19:19 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's "talking" versus "speaking" Chris, I think you are very right, everything about this situation is not so much about the formal text... but still, as others have been pointing out throughout the discussion, particularly in the parallel thread on the role of the Learning Sciences, we need to do what we can, locally, globally, and elsewhere. And so one way to do something we know how to do is analysing the speech not as text, but as *contexture*. We remarked bringing up Martin's points, and also using an example, that the point is to see societal possibilities of hearing a speech. And that includes bringing in so much more than just formal text. One example was Roth's analysis of a song by rap artist Eminem, http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/1213 . A ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Christopher Schuck Sent: 24 January 2017 16:22 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's "talking" versus "speaking" Another irony that hasn't been mentioned is that this distictive speaking/ talking style flagged by McWhorter made him unusually effective as a campaigner where the goal was to create chaos and premature action, yet would undermine his ability to be an effective (or safe) president and doesn't "fit." This is relevant insofar as it emphasizes the new experience of hearing him speak this way *as president* as opposed to president-wannabe. In the inauguration speech, this person who is known for talking not speaking attempts to speak formally, which creates yet another split between taking that pseudo-formal language literally and taking it ironically. So it is not just the difference between reading him literally and reading him ironically, but that what is formal and what is literal (as well as what is informal and what is indirect, and whether he is a "formal" leader or informal television personality) become tangled up with each other as he transitions from celebrity to this official role.That is one reason why I wonder whether looking at the formal text of this official speech (however fascinating) is such a useful way to explore the perezhivanie of the Trump experience, because it's so uniquely not about the written text. I suspect even many of Trump's supporters were not particularly interested in the speech. On Tuesday, January 24, 2017, Alfredo Jornet Gil > wrote: > Richard, > what this linguist says and you comment on Trump's talk is pretty close to > what I was just writing to Francine in the main "trump's speech" thread > about hearing him literally and hearing him as irony. If you stick to > hearing in the same he seems to treat his recipients, then you may have to > believe that each word conveys an idea and that one word suffices to give > the idea, like "it's true". It seems to be enough. As per your question, > yes, it's a very scary question. It also is very scary that he may say, > "it's true" and so be it. > Alfredo > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of Richard Beach > Sent: 23 January 2017 23:09 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Trump's "talking" versus "speaking" > > In a New York Times op-ed 01/21/opinion/sunday/how-to-listen-to-donald-trump-every-day > -for-years.html>, the linguist, John McWhorter, distinguishes between > Trump?s informal, spontaneous ?talking? versus ?speaking? that involves > employing a more formal register associated with written language. He cites > the example of Trump?s talking: ?Look, having nuclear ? my uncle was a > great professor and scientist and engineer, Dr. John Trump at M.I.T.; good > genes, very good genes, O.K., very smart, the Wharton School of Finance, > very good, very smart ? you know, if you?re a conservative Republican, if I > were a liberal, if, like, O.K. ?? > > > What?s problematic here is that Trump?s off-the-cuff ?talking,? as well as > his use of tweets, can convey messages with problematic uptakes from > others, resulting in taking action without careful thought or consultation > with others. As McWhorter notes: ?All understand that his speech is > structurally ungraceful. It may be harder to grasp that Mr. Trump, as > someone just talking rather than artfully communicating ideas, has no sense > of the tacit understanding that a politician?s utterances are more signals > than statements, vehicles meant to convey larger messages.? > > When one of his hotels is another country is attacked by ?terrorists,? > will Trump, as someone who perceives himself as the prime actor, > spontaneously declare war with little or no consideration of the > consequences of his actions? > > > > Richard Beach, Professor Emeritus of English Education, University of > Minnesota > rbeach@umn.edu > Websites: Digital writing , Media > literacy , Teaching literature > , Identity-focused ELA Teaching < > http://identities.pbworks.com/>, Common Core State Standards < > http://englishccss.pbworks.com/>, Apps for literacy learning < > http://usingipads.pbworks.com/>, Teaching about climate change < > http://climatechangeela.pbworks.com/> > > > > On Jan 23, 2017, at 12:52 PM, lpscholar2@gmail.com wrote: > > > > Andrew, Andy, > > I also want to pursue the example of James Lawson. > > What struck me was his relationship to both parents as formative. > > Moving to Trump?s inauguration, what struck me was the bodily gesture he > was expressing walking down the hallway just prior to speaking. > > This body language that i was reading before he spoke a word. > > I hope some of you watched the Frontline documentary on PBS EXPLORING > both Trump?s and Clinton?s early family life. > > > > Trump?s father was only interested in ?winners? and to come second was > to be a ?loser?. The father sent Trump as a young man to a military academy > that would teach his son how to be a ?winner? a lesson that Trump inhabits > and is incarnating in his every gesture. > > > > His emotional, cognitive, and performative symmetry captured in his > facial expression as he walked forward to give his inaugural address. > > > > In other words, James Lawson, Donald Trump, and Martin Packer?s book > review i see as overlapping themes. > > When we explore ?expression? and ?intentionality? and ?language? i want > to include the family upbringing as formative. > > > > Now as an aside, Simmel would say both James and Donald are inhabiting > (fictions) that INform their experiences, but that may be a leap too far. > Simmel was following the philosopher Vasinger (spelling?) who focused on > how we live our lives (as is) or (as though) but to take this turn would be > for another thread. > > > > > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > From: Andrew Babson > > Sent: January 23, 2017 9:08 AM > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: James Lawson and perezhivanie > > > > Andy, thank you for the timely post, especially as we move forward in the > > shadow of authoritarianism here in the USA. Lawson's example of choosing > > non-violent protest, following Gandhi, is helpful. Consider the > > effectiveness of millions of people last weekend peacefully taking to the > > streets with few if any arrests (side note: we all went as a family here > in > > Philly, it was great). Contrast the Black Bloc member's sucker punch of > > neo-nazi Richard Spencer: people are cheering it, but those same people > > probably realize it's not a scalable strategy. Different tours de force, > > different effects, the gender connotations of which are interesting. > > > > *P **erezhivanie > > *is a new term to me, > which I > > link here to the XMCA blog for those other also unfamiliar with it. It > > seems like a pretty clear gloss of a term I do know well, *Erlebnis, > > *"experience" > > (I dislike the gloss of that Dilthey-an term as "lived" experience...but > > that's for another discussion). > > > > It's fascinating to learn about Lawson's vocational decision-making > > process, and to consider the possible effects of violent and non-violent > > dissent. But perhaps you could clarify for us Andy why you thought > Lawson's > > story was an example of *perezhivanie*? Where's the point of analytical > > traction? If it means more than "experience", how can we apply that > broader > > meaning here? It seems like he had a Pauline metanoia/conversion > > experience. Is that what you mean? > > > > Andrew > > > > ------------------------------------------------ > > Andrew Babson, Ph.D. > > Lecturer > > Graduate School of Education > > University of Pennsylvania > > > > On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 4:40 AM, Andy Blunden wrote: > > > > James Lawson is the Methodist preacher who trained the young members of > the > > SNCC in non-violent action and wrote their constitution. I paste below > and > > attach an excerpt from my book "The Origins of Collective Decision > Making" > > which narrates Lawson's life up until April 1960. Perezhivanie was not > the > > topic under discussion so it is not mentioned in the text, but xmca-ers > > should be able to see it, an example of perezhivanie: > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > > > > > > > James Lawson was born in 1928, in Uniontown, Pennsylvania. His father, > > James Snr., was the grandson of an escaped slave, and a Minister for the > > African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church in New England. > > > > > > > > > > > > Via the Free African Society(FAS) the Methodists had recruited freed > slaves > > in Philadelphiain 1787, but as a result of a racist incident, some left > to > > found the African Methodist Episcopal Church(AMEC). Nonetheless, many > > African Americans stayed with the United Methodist Church. The AMEC split > > started in Philadelphia and the AMEC Zion Church was a split that came > out > > of New York. It was to AMEC Zion, James Lawson was born. > > > > > > > > > > > > However, Lawson returned to The United Methodist Church, created by a > 1939 > > merger of several branches of the Methodist Church, which set up five > > regional ?jurisdictions? of Methodists in the US, organized to maintain > > regionally identity and a sixth, called the ?Central Jurisdiction? which > > combined the Black annual conferences, thus building segregation into the > > constitution of the Church.The Methodists went through a long and painful > > process, carried out in accordance with the Methodist Code of Discipline, > > which mandates the principle of Majority, to re-integrate the white and > > Black, but it was not till after 1964 that Black conferences started to > > merge into white conferences. At the local level, congregations continued > > much as before. So it was within the Black section of the segregated > United > > Methodist Church, that James Lawson became a Methodist. > > > > > > > > > > > > James Snr. was a militant preacher; he packed a 38 pistol and set up > > branches of the NAACP wherever he was assigned to preach. After serving > at > > St. James AMEZ Church in Massillon, Ohio, he transferred to the Lexington > > Annual Conference of the Central Jurisdiction of the United Methodist > > Church. James Snr. was no pacifist and according to Lawson he ?refused to > > take any guff from anyone, particularly on the point of race? and > ?insisted > > that he was going to be treated as a man.? > > > > > > > > > > > > Lawson?s mother, Philane May Cover, on the other hand, was decidedly > > nonviolent. Lawson?s challenge, which was to form his character, was to > > reconcile his father?s militancy with his mother?s nonviolence. Lawson > grew > > up in Massillon. One day, at the age of 10, Lawson was asked by his > mother > > to run an errand: > > > > > > > > > > > > A little white child in an automobile yelled ?nigger? out the opened > > window. I walked over ... and, since I was in a hurry running my mother?s > > errand, I smacked the child and went on my way. When the Lawson kids got > > called ?nigger? on the streets or at school, we usually fought. I don?t > > know where we got that from, except that we figured that it was something > > to fight over. (Lawson, cited in King, 1999) > > > > > > > > > > > > On the return trip home, aware of possible repercussions, Lawson tried to > > find the parents of the offending child, to talk to them, but the car was > > gone. Once home, he told his mother of the incident. Lawson?s mother > > replied, ?Jimmy, what good did that do?? > > > > > > > > > > > > She talked about who I was, the fact of God?s love, that we were a family > > of love and that such an incident could not hurt me, because of who I > was. > > I don?t remember anyone else being around, but a stillness took over my > > being at that moment. It was, as I realized much later on, a mystical > > experience. In a very real way, my life stood still. I realized in that > > stillness that I had changed forever. One of the phrases my mother used > in > > her conversation with me was that ?there must be a better way?. I > > determined, from then on, that I would find the better way. (Lawson, > cited > > in King, 1999, pp. 187-188) > > > > > > > > > > > > He first became acquainted with Gandhi?s experiments in nonviolence as a > > child, thanks to the African-American press which the family discussed > > around the dinner table, and had read Gandhi?s autobiography as a > teenager. > > At Baldwin Wallace College, a liberal arts Methodistcollege in Berea, > Ohio, > > he studied Thoreau, Gandhi and Tolstoy, and the pacifist theologians > > Dietrich Bonhoeffer and Reinhold Niebuhr. At age 19, he became a draft > > resister, refusing service in the Korean War. Executive director of > > Fellowship Of Reconciliation (FOR), A. J. Muste,frequently visited to > > lecture at the College: > > > > > > > > > > > > All of us in history classes were required to hear Muste. I was thrilled. > > He made me realize that I was not alone in my experimentation, that there > > was a world movement, and a national movement. ... He acquainted me with > > the Fellowship Of Reconciliation, which I joined on the spot in 1947. > That > > meant that I got exposed to their book list. > > > > > > > > > > > > After hearing a lecture by A. J. Muste, he joined FOR and CORE. Muste was > > instrumental thereafter in strengthening Lawson?s nonviolent orientation, > > directing him towards Gandhi and later facilitating his entry into the > > sit-in and boycott movement beginning in the South. In the late 1940s and > > early 1950s Lawson had organized sit-ins and protests directed at > > establishments that discriminated against blacks in Massillon, long > before > > the Montgomery bus-boycott. > > > > > > > > > > > > He was also active with the National Conference of Methodist Youth. > > Although a member of a segregated Methodist Church, he found plenty of > > support for his stands against racial discrimination and war from his > white > > colleagues and church fellows. While he was in prison serving thirteen > > months of a two and a half year term for draft resistance in 1952, he was > > re-elected as Vice-President of the NCMY. > > > > > > > > > > > > Wesleyan Methodism was central to Lawson?s outlook. Just as John Wesley > had > > sought to cleanse individuals of iniquity, so could society be purged of > > the social sins of slavery, segregation, poverty, and war.Generations of > > African American Methodists from Harriet Tubman (AMEZ) and Henry M. > Turner > > (AME) in the nineteenth century, to Rosa Parks (AME) and James Farmer > > (MEC), were led to social justice activism by this Methodist heritage. > > > > > > > > > > > > Lawson used his prison time to read and think. Writing from prison in > 1952 > > aged 23 years old and yet to enter the seminary, Lawson said he aspired > to > > emulate ?the life of Jesus, St. Francis, George Fox, Gandhi, Buddha... > and > > other great religious persons.? These figures attached little importance > to > > ?theology but (to their) experience with God.?Further, he noted > ?religious > > failures today are in (the arena of) experience and practice, not > > theology.? When Lawson entered prison, he was a Christian pacifist.He > told > > Mary King however, that his ?first commitment was to work on race,? and > > conscientious objection came second.By the time of his release, he had > > advanced to Gandhian nonviolence. He wondered ?why can?t a mass > non-violent > > revolution be staged throughout the South where the segregation pattern > is > > much like the ?untouchables? of India? Such a movement would have to > start > > with one person who had the Christian vision to make such a revolution a > > reality in his own life.? Gandhian nonviolence became the synthesizing > > factor for Lawson?s religious thinking: the militancy of his father?s > > Methodism and the Christian pacifism that he drew from his mother. > > > > > > > > > > > > Muste arranged for Lawson to visit India after his release from prison > with > > a letter of introduction to activists in the Gandhian movement, and he > > remained in India from May 1953 to 1956, working at Hislop College in > > Nagpur, reading Indian literature and working with Gandhi?s movement. > > Lawson?s practice would remain deeply religious; his nonviolence was > > saturated with the message of Christian love, and blended with principles > > synthesized from a broad range of religious and secular sources, both > > Eastern and Western. His aim was the ?mass education and training of > people > > in the use of nonviolent direct action techniques.? Lawson insisted that > > ?you are fighting a system, not an individual, not a race, or not the > > people of another country, but a system.? > > > > > > > > > > > > He continued his study of pacifism and Gandhian nonviolence at Oberlin > > College, Ohio. While still in India, he had read about Martin Luther King > > and his successful leadership of the Montgomery bus boycott.King?s > lecture > > at Oberlin on February 6, 1957, fortified his long-held intention to work > > in the South for transformative social change. After King?s lecture to a > > packed audience, he and Lawson talked together at dinner.Though Lawson > was > > contemplating study for a Ph.D., King told him ?don?t wait, but come > south > > now!? adding that there was no one else like Lawson.Muste arranged for > FOR > > to hire Lawson as southern field secretary to be stationed at Nashville > in > > January 1958. Upon his arrival, he found that Glenn Smiley, national > field > > director of FOR, had arranged for Lawson to run a full schedule of > > workshops ? including one to take place early that year at the first > annual > > meeting of the SCLC in Columbia, South Carolina. > > > > > > > > > > > > At the SCLC meeting, King made an exuberant introduction of Lawson as > FOR?s > > new regional representative and discussed the organization?s role in > > Montgomery, telling delegates to be sure to attend Lawson?s workshop on > > nonviolence. King took his seat in the first pew, waiting for the > > three-hour session to start: > > > > > > > > > > > > Martin did that at every SCLC meeting as long as he lived. He would ask > me > > to conduct an afternoon workshop, usually two or three hours, and he > would > > arrange for it to be ?at-large? so that everyone could attend, with > nothing > > else to compete. He put it on the schedule himself. A few minutes early, > he > > would show up and sit alone, as an example, in the front row. > > > > > > > > > > > > Back in Nashville, Lawson continued with Monday evening workshops during > > the autumn of 1959 in which he trained the students who were to be the > core > > of the Nashville sit-in movement. As a result of his involvement with the > > sit-ins Lawson was expelled from Vanderbilt, but he enrolled with Boston > > University to finish his degree in theology,while continuing to work with > > the students. Several professors in the School of Theology resigned over > > his expulsion. > > > > > > > > > > > > The techniques that the students deployed were drawn from Lawson?s > > workshops. In 1958 and 1959, Lawson mobilized all that he knew about > > Christian pacifism, Gandhian nonviolence, and Methodist social ministry > and > > blended them into an unprecedented curriculum that influenced the civil > > rights movement in Nashville and beyond. > > > > > > > > > > > > Blending Christianity and interreligious sources, he did not present its > > philosophy and practice as a secular doctrine, but as the essence of > > religion itself. Core to nonviolence was mirroring God?s love for > humankind > > and exhibiting it through concrete relationships of human solidarity and > > community. ?Nonviolence,? Lawson taught, is the aggressive, forgiving, > > patient, long-suffering Christ-like and Christ-commanded love or > good-will > > for all humankind even in the face of tension, fear, hatred, or demonic > > evil.? Moreover, ?it is the readiness to absorb suffering with > forgiveness > > and courage rather than to inflict suffering on others.? > > > > > > > > > > > > Lawson divided his instruction into four modules: how nonviolence reacts, > > training for nonviolence, the virtues of nonviolence, and the methods of > > nonviolence. Practitioners prepared themselves by jettisoning anger, > > hostility and fear thus ?minimizing the effect of an attack,? valuing > love, > > courage, fearlessness, and forgiveness, and pursuing redemptive suffering > > which ?releases unknown elements for good.? Preparation included > meditation > > and prayer, study of the scriptures, practicing nonviolence through > > challenges to segregation in bus transportation and in other public > > facilities.The practice steps included fact-finding, negotiation, > education > > of the community, and various methods of nonviolent direct action > including > > sit-ins, boycotts, strikes, and civil disobedience. Lawson provided an > > extensive bibliography including relevant verses from the Bible, the > > Bhagavad Gita, and from the Chinese philosopher, Mo Ti and the Hebrew > > prophet, Isaiah. > > > > > > > > > > > > The Nashville sit-ins and those led by students in other southern cities > > convinced Ella Baker of the SCLC to call a conference in April, 1960, at > > Shaw University in Raleigh, North Carolina. Out of this meeting emerged > the > > Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee.Lawson delivered an opening > > keynote address that helped to frame SNCC?s nonviolent trajectory.Later, > > Lawson summarized discussions and consensus that emerged out of the > > conference, and his synopsis received the approval of everyone there. > > Lawson?s overall comments said that ?nonviolence as it grows from > > Judaic-Christian tradition seeks a social order of justice permeated by > > love.? > > > > > > > > > > > > It was Lawson who delivered the keynote address and framed SNCC?s > > nonviolent orientation. > > > > > > > > > > > > The whole group, perhaps 120 participants, all in the room, asked me to > > draft a statement. Eventually, three different drafts emerged. The > > Nashville group was cohesive. The extant draft was the third, influenced > by > > the Nashville group, after two earlier conversations. (Interview with > King, > > June 2014) > > > > > > > > > > > > Lawson?s synopsis was approved by the Conference. > > > > > > > > > > > > In a private email message Mary King told me: > > > > > > > > > > > > He [James Lawson] was reading from the FOR booklist from a young age, > but I > > don?t think that he was influenced on notions of Consensus by Quakers, > > because the connection was too abstract. Let me underscore that he says > it > > was for him Methodist origins. (Private email, 15 April 2014) > > > > > > > > > > > > In his interview with Mary King, Lawson confirmed that the origin of > > Consensus in SNCC was the Nashville Central Committee, confirming what > Mary > > King had told me in April. As to the roots Consensus in Lawson?s own > > experience, he emphasized that: > > > > > > > > > > > > It was the Methodist youth and student movements with which I had grown > up, > > and this is how they made decisions. They knew the rules of parliamentary > > procedures, but they wanted to find a common mind. (Interview with King, > > June 2014) > > > > > > > > > > > > The Methodist Church to this very day still mandates Majority decisions, > > but this would never have entailed children voting ? in general > youngsters > > in these organizations were simply told what to do. The Black > congregations > > had operated separately for more than a century, so there was some room > for > > Lawson to develop a consensual model of collaboration in working with > young > > people. It is also possible the Black congregations, like other Black > > Churches in America, drew on other traditions of decision making. > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > Andy Blunden > > > > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > > > > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > > > From ulvi.icil@gmail.com Wed Jan 25 11:11:25 2017 From: ulvi.icil@gmail.com (=?UTF-8?B?VWx2aSDEsMOnaWw=?=) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2017 21:11:25 +0200 Subject: [Xmca-l] Interesting article on struggle against Trump Message-ID: Interesting article. https://www.liberationnews.org/two-roads-to-fight-the-trump-agenda-revolutionary-politics-or-the-democratic-party/ On 24 January 2017 at 18:23, wrote: > Chris, > Would it make a difference to orally perform the text out loud and feel > the difference from the felt experience of reading the text silently? > Different proportions of distance and intimacy in understanding the > ?intention-in-action?. > Different quality from being a spectator watching the speech on multiple > media as spectacle. > This goes to Susan?s point of carnival and the women?s march also having a > proportion of carnival (along side) the seriousness of the social situation. > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > From: Christopher Schuck > Sent: January 24, 2017 7:25 AM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's "talking" versus "speaking" > > Another irony that hasn't been mentioned is that this distictive speaking/ > talking style flagged by McWhorter made him unusually effective as a > campaigner where the goal was to create chaos and premature action, yet > would undermine his ability to be an effective (or safe) president and > doesn't "fit." This is relevant insofar as it emphasizes the new experience > of hearing him speak this way *as president* as opposed to > president-wannabe. In the inauguration speech, this person who is known for > talking not speaking attempts to speak formally, which creates yet another > split between taking that pseudo-formal language literally and taking it > ironically. > > So it is not just the difference between reading him literally and reading > him ironically, but that what is formal and what is literal (as well as > what is informal and what is indirect, and whether he is a "formal" leader > or informal television personality) become tangled up with each other as he > transitions from celebrity to this official role.That is one reason why I > wonder whether looking at the formal text of this official speech (however > fascinating) is such a useful way to explore the perezhivanie of the Trump > experience, because it's so uniquely not about the written text. I suspect > even many of Trump's supporters were not particularly interested in the > speech. > > On Tuesday, January 24, 2017, Alfredo Jornet Gil > wrote: > > > Richard, > > what this linguist says and you comment on Trump's talk is pretty close > to > > what I was just writing to Francine in the main "trump's speech" thread > > about hearing him literally and hearing him as irony. If you stick to > > hearing in the same he seems to treat his recipients, then you may have > to > > believe that each word conveys an idea and that one word suffices to give > > the idea, like "it's true". It seems to be enough. As per your question, > > yes, it's a very scary question. It also is very scary that he may say, > > "it's true" and so be it. > > Alfredo > > ________________________________________ > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > on behalf of Richard Beach > > Sent: 23 January 2017 23:09 > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Trump's "talking" versus "speaking" > > > > In a New York Times op-ed > 01/21/opinion/sunday/how-to-listen-to-donald-trump-every-day > > -for-years.html>, the linguist, John McWhorter, distinguishes between > > Trump?s informal, spontaneous ?talking? versus ?speaking? that involves > > employing a more formal register associated with written language. He > cites > > the example of Trump?s talking: ?Look, having nuclear ? my uncle was a > > great professor and scientist and engineer, Dr. John Trump at M.I.T.; > good > > genes, very good genes, O.K., very smart, the Wharton School of Finance, > > very good, very smart ? you know, if you?re a conservative Republican, > if I > > were a liberal, if, like, O.K. ?? > > > > > > What?s problematic here is that Trump?s off-the-cuff ?talking,? as well > as > > his use of tweets, can convey messages with problematic uptakes from > > others, resulting in taking action without careful thought or > consultation > > with others. As McWhorter notes: ?All understand that his speech is > > structurally ungraceful. It may be harder to grasp that Mr. Trump, as > > someone just talking rather than artfully communicating ideas, has no > sense > > of the tacit understanding that a politician?s utterances are more > signals > > than statements, vehicles meant to convey larger messages.? > > > > When one of his hotels is another country is attacked by ?terrorists,? > > will Trump, as someone who perceives himself as the prime actor, > > spontaneously declare war with little or no consideration of the > > consequences of his actions? > > > > > > > > Richard Beach, Professor Emeritus of English Education, University of > > Minnesota > > rbeach@umn.edu > > Websites: Digital writing , Media > > literacy , Teaching > literature > > , Identity-focused ELA Teaching > < > > http://identities.pbworks.com/>, Common Core State Standards < > > http://englishccss.pbworks.com/>, Apps for literacy learning < > > http://usingipads.pbworks.com/>, Teaching about climate change < > > http://climatechangeela.pbworks.com/> > > > > > > > On Jan 23, 2017, at 12:52 PM, lpscholar2@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > Andrew, Andy, > > > I also want to pursue the example of James Lawson. > > > What struck me was his relationship to both parents as formative. > > > Moving to Trump?s inauguration, what struck me was the bodily gesture > he > > was expressing walking down the hallway just prior to speaking. > > > This body language that i was reading before he spoke a word. > > > I hope some of you watched the Frontline documentary on PBS EXPLORING > > both Trump?s and Clinton?s early family life. > > > > > > Trump?s father was only interested in ?winners? and to come second was > > to be a ?loser?. The father sent Trump as a young man to a military > academy > > that would teach his son how to be a ?winner? a lesson that Trump > inhabits > > and is incarnating in his every gesture. > > > > > > His emotional, cognitive, and performative symmetry captured in his > > facial expression as he walked forward to give his inaugural address. > > > > > > In other words, James Lawson, Donald Trump, and Martin Packer?s book > > review i see as overlapping themes. > > > When we explore ?expression? and ?intentionality? and ?language? i want > > to include the family upbringing as formative. > > > > > > Now as an aside, Simmel would say both James and Donald are inhabiting > > (fictions) that INform their experiences, but that may be a leap too far. > > Simmel was following the philosopher Vasinger (spelling?) who focused on > > how we live our lives (as is) or (as though) but to take this turn would > be > > for another thread. > > > > > > > > > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > > > From: Andrew Babson > > > Sent: January 23, 2017 9:08 AM > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: James Lawson and perezhivanie > > > > > > Andy, thank you for the timely post, especially as we move forward in > the > > > shadow of authoritarianism here in the USA. Lawson's example of > choosing > > > non-violent protest, following Gandhi, is helpful. Consider the > > > effectiveness of millions of people last weekend peacefully taking to > the > > > streets with few if any arrests (side note: we all went as a family > here > > in > > > Philly, it was great). Contrast the Black Bloc member's sucker punch of > > > neo-nazi Richard Spencer: people are cheering it, but those same people > > > probably realize it's not a scalable strategy. Different tours de > force, > > > different effects, the gender connotations of which are interesting. > > > > > > *P **erezhivanie > > > *is a new term to me, > > which I > > > link here to the XMCA blog for those other also unfamiliar with it. It > > > seems like a pretty clear gloss of a term I do know well, *Erlebnis, > > > *"experience" > > > (I dislike the gloss of that Dilthey-an term as "lived" > experience...but > > > that's for another discussion). > > > > > > It's fascinating to learn about Lawson's vocational decision-making > > > process, and to consider the possible effects of violent and > non-violent > > > dissent. But perhaps you could clarify for us Andy why you thought > > Lawson's > > > story was an example of *perezhivanie*? Where's the point of analytical > > > traction? If it means more than "experience", how can we apply that > > broader > > > meaning here? It seems like he had a Pauline metanoia/conversion > > > experience. Is that what you mean? > > > > > > Andrew > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------ > > > Andrew Babson, Ph.D. > > > Lecturer > > > Graduate School of Education > > > University of Pennsylvania > > > > > > On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 4:40 AM, Andy Blunden > wrote: > > > > > > James Lawson is the Methodist preacher who trained the young members of > > the > > > SNCC in non-violent action and wrote their constitution. I paste below > > and > > > attach an excerpt from my book "The Origins of Collective Decision > > Making" > > > which narrates Lawson's life up until April 1960. Perezhivanie was not > > the > > > topic under discussion so it is not mentioned in the text, but xmca-ers > > > should be able to see it, an example of perezhivanie: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > James Lawson was born in 1928, in Uniontown, Pennsylvania. His father, > > > James Snr., was the grandson of an escaped slave, and a Minister for > the > > > African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church in New England. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Via the Free African Society(FAS) the Methodists had recruited freed > > slaves > > > in Philadelphiain 1787, but as a result of a racist incident, some left > > to > > > found the African Methodist Episcopal Church(AMEC). Nonetheless, many > > > African Americans stayed with the United Methodist Church. The AMEC > split > > > started in Philadelphia and the AMEC Zion Church was a split that came > > out > > > of New York. It was to AMEC Zion, James Lawson was born. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > However, Lawson returned to The United Methodist Church, created by a > > 1939 > > > merger of several branches of the Methodist Church, which set up five > > > regional ?jurisdictions? of Methodists in the US, organized to maintain > > > regionally identity and a sixth, called the ?Central Jurisdiction? > which > > > combined the Black annual conferences, thus building segregation into > the > > > constitution of the Church.The Methodists went through a long and > painful > > > process, carried out in accordance with the Methodist Code of > Discipline, > > > which mandates the principle of Majority, to re-integrate the white and > > > Black, but it was not till after 1964 that Black conferences started to > > > merge into white conferences. At the local level, congregations > continued > > > much as before. So it was within the Black section of the segregated > > United > > > Methodist Church, that James Lawson became a Methodist. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > James Snr. was a militant preacher; he packed a 38 pistol and set up > > > branches of the NAACP wherever he was assigned to preach. After serving > > at > > > St. James AMEZ Church in Massillon, Ohio, he transferred to the > Lexington > > > Annual Conference of the Central Jurisdiction of the United Methodist > > > Church. James Snr. was no pacifist and according to Lawson he ?refused > to > > > take any guff from anyone, particularly on the point of race? and > > ?insisted > > > that he was going to be treated as a man.? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lawson?s mother, Philane May Cover, on the other hand, was decidedly > > > nonviolent. Lawson?s challenge, which was to form his character, was to > > > reconcile his father?s militancy with his mother?s nonviolence. Lawson > > grew > > > up in Massillon. One day, at the age of 10, Lawson was asked by his > > mother > > > to run an errand: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A little white child in an automobile yelled ?nigger? out the opened > > > window. I walked over ... and, since I was in a hurry running my > mother?s > > > errand, I smacked the child and went on my way. When the Lawson kids > got > > > called ?nigger? on the streets or at school, we usually fought. I don?t > > > know where we got that from, except that we figured that it was > something > > > to fight over. (Lawson, cited in King, 1999) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On the return trip home, aware of possible repercussions, Lawson tried > to > > > find the parents of the offending child, to talk to them, but the car > was > > > gone. Once home, he told his mother of the incident. Lawson?s mother > > > replied, ?Jimmy, what good did that do?? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > She talked about who I was, the fact of God?s love, that we were a > family > > > of love and that such an incident could not hurt me, because of who I > > was. > > > I don?t remember anyone else being around, but a stillness took over my > > > being at that moment. It was, as I realized much later on, a mystical > > > experience. In a very real way, my life stood still. I realized in that > > > stillness that I had changed forever. One of the phrases my mother used > > in > > > her conversation with me was that ?there must be a better way?. I > > > determined, from then on, that I would find the better way. (Lawson, > > cited > > > in King, 1999, pp. 187-188) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > He first became acquainted with Gandhi?s experiments in nonviolence as > a > > > child, thanks to the African-American press which the family discussed > > > around the dinner table, and had read Gandhi?s autobiography as a > > teenager. > > > At Baldwin Wallace College, a liberal arts Methodistcollege in Berea, > > Ohio, > > > he studied Thoreau, Gandhi and Tolstoy, and the pacifist theologians > > > Dietrich Bonhoeffer and Reinhold Niebuhr. At age 19, he became a draft > > > resister, refusing service in the Korean War. Executive director of > > > Fellowship Of Reconciliation (FOR), A. J. Muste,frequently visited to > > > lecture at the College: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > All of us in history classes were required to hear Muste. I was > thrilled. > > > He made me realize that I was not alone in my experimentation, that > there > > > was a world movement, and a national movement. ... He acquainted me > with > > > the Fellowship Of Reconciliation, which I joined on the spot in 1947. > > That > > > meant that I got exposed to their book list. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > After hearing a lecture by A. J. Muste, he joined FOR and CORE. Muste > was > > > instrumental thereafter in strengthening Lawson?s nonviolent > orientation, > > > directing him towards Gandhi and later facilitating his entry into the > > > sit-in and boycott movement beginning in the South. In the late 1940s > and > > > early 1950s Lawson had organized sit-ins and protests directed at > > > establishments that discriminated against blacks in Massillon, long > > before > > > the Montgomery bus-boycott. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > He was also active with the National Conference of Methodist Youth. > > > Although a member of a segregated Methodist Church, he found plenty of > > > support for his stands against racial discrimination and war from his > > white > > > colleagues and church fellows. While he was in prison serving thirteen > > > months of a two and a half year term for draft resistance in 1952, he > was > > > re-elected as Vice-President of the NCMY. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Wesleyan Methodism was central to Lawson?s outlook. Just as John Wesley > > had > > > sought to cleanse individuals of iniquity, so could society be purged > of > > > the social sins of slavery, segregation, poverty, and war.Generations > of > > > African American Methodists from Harriet Tubman (AMEZ) and Henry M. > > Turner > > > (AME) in the nineteenth century, to Rosa Parks (AME) and James Farmer > > > (MEC), were led to social justice activism by this Methodist heritage. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lawson used his prison time to read and think. Writing from prison in > > 1952 > > > aged 23 years old and yet to enter the seminary, Lawson said he aspired > > to > > > emulate ?the life of Jesus, St. Francis, George Fox, Gandhi, Buddha... > > and > > > other great religious persons.? These figures attached little > importance > > to > > > ?theology but (to their) experience with God.?Further, he noted > > ?religious > > > failures today are in (the arena of) experience and practice, not > > > theology.? When Lawson entered prison, he was a Christian pacifist.He > > told > > > Mary King however, that his ?first commitment was to work on race,? and > > > conscientious objection came second.By the time of his release, he had > > > advanced to Gandhian nonviolence. He wondered ?why can?t a mass > > non-violent > > > revolution be staged throughout the South where the segregation pattern > > is > > > much like the ?untouchables? of India? Such a movement would have to > > start > > > with one person who had the Christian vision to make such a revolution > a > > > reality in his own life.? Gandhian nonviolence became the synthesizing > > > factor for Lawson?s religious thinking: the militancy of his father?s > > > Methodism and the Christian pacifism that he drew from his mother. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Muste arranged for Lawson to visit India after his release from prison > > with > > > a letter of introduction to activists in the Gandhian movement, and he > > > remained in India from May 1953 to 1956, working at Hislop College in > > > Nagpur, reading Indian literature and working with Gandhi?s movement. > > > Lawson?s practice would remain deeply religious; his nonviolence was > > > saturated with the message of Christian love, and blended with > principles > > > synthesized from a broad range of religious and secular sources, both > > > Eastern and Western. His aim was the ?mass education and training of > > people > > > in the use of nonviolent direct action techniques.? Lawson insisted > that > > > ?you are fighting a system, not an individual, not a race, or not the > > > people of another country, but a system.? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > He continued his study of pacifism and Gandhian nonviolence at Oberlin > > > College, Ohio. While still in India, he had read about Martin Luther > King > > > and his successful leadership of the Montgomery bus boycott.King?s > > lecture > > > at Oberlin on February 6, 1957, fortified his long-held intention to > work > > > in the South for transformative social change. After King?s lecture to > a > > > packed audience, he and Lawson talked together at dinner.Though Lawson > > was > > > contemplating study for a Ph.D., King told him ?don?t wait, but come > > south > > > now!? adding that there was no one else like Lawson.Muste arranged for > > FOR > > > to hire Lawson as southern field secretary to be stationed at Nashville > > in > > > January 1958. Upon his arrival, he found that Glenn Smiley, national > > field > > > director of FOR, had arranged for Lawson to run a full schedule of > > > workshops ? including one to take place early that year at the first > > annual > > > meeting of the SCLC in Columbia, South Carolina. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > At the SCLC meeting, King made an exuberant introduction of Lawson as > > FOR?s > > > new regional representative and discussed the organization?s role in > > > Montgomery, telling delegates to be sure to attend Lawson?s workshop on > > > nonviolence. King took his seat in the first pew, waiting for the > > > three-hour session to start: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Martin did that at every SCLC meeting as long as he lived. He would ask > > me > > > to conduct an afternoon workshop, usually two or three hours, and he > > would > > > arrange for it to be ?at-large? so that everyone could attend, with > > nothing > > > else to compete. He put it on the schedule himself. A few minutes > early, > > he > > > would show up and sit alone, as an example, in the front row. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Back in Nashville, Lawson continued with Monday evening workshops > during > > > the autumn of 1959 in which he trained the students who were to be the > > core > > > of the Nashville sit-in movement. As a result of his involvement with > the > > > sit-ins Lawson was expelled from Vanderbilt, but he enrolled with > Boston > > > University to finish his degree in theology,while continuing to work > with > > > the students. Several professors in the School of Theology resigned > over > > > his expulsion. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The techniques that the students deployed were drawn from Lawson?s > > > workshops. In 1958 and 1959, Lawson mobilized all that he knew about > > > Christian pacifism, Gandhian nonviolence, and Methodist social ministry > > and > > > blended them into an unprecedented curriculum that influenced the civil > > > rights movement in Nashville and beyond. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Blending Christianity and interreligious sources, he did not present > its > > > philosophy and practice as a secular doctrine, but as the essence of > > > religion itself. Core to nonviolence was mirroring God?s love for > > humankind > > > and exhibiting it through concrete relationships of human solidarity > and > > > community. ?Nonviolence,? Lawson taught, is the aggressive, forgiving, > > > patient, long-suffering Christ-like and Christ-commanded love or > > good-will > > > for all humankind even in the face of tension, fear, hatred, or demonic > > > evil.? Moreover, ?it is the readiness to absorb suffering with > > forgiveness > > > and courage rather than to inflict suffering on others.? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lawson divided his instruction into four modules: how nonviolence > reacts, > > > training for nonviolence, the virtues of nonviolence, and the methods > of > > > nonviolence. Practitioners prepared themselves by jettisoning anger, > > > hostility and fear thus ?minimizing the effect of an attack,? valuing > > love, > > > courage, fearlessness, and forgiveness, and pursuing redemptive > suffering > > > which ?releases unknown elements for good.? Preparation included > > meditation > > > and prayer, study of the scriptures, practicing nonviolence through > > > challenges to segregation in bus transportation and in other public > > > facilities.The practice steps included fact-finding, negotiation, > > education > > > of the community, and various methods of nonviolent direct action > > including > > > sit-ins, boycotts, strikes, and civil disobedience. Lawson provided an > > > extensive bibliography including relevant verses from the Bible, the > > > Bhagavad Gita, and from the Chinese philosopher, Mo Ti and the Hebrew > > > prophet, Isaiah. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The Nashville sit-ins and those led by students in other southern > cities > > > convinced Ella Baker of the SCLC to call a conference in April, 1960, > at > > > Shaw University in Raleigh, North Carolina. Out of this meeting emerged > > the > > > Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee.Lawson delivered an opening > > > keynote address that helped to frame SNCC?s nonviolent > trajectory.Later, > > > Lawson summarized discussions and consensus that emerged out of the > > > conference, and his synopsis received the approval of everyone there. > > > Lawson?s overall comments said that ?nonviolence as it grows from > > > Judaic-Christian tradition seeks a social order of justice permeated by > > > love.? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It was Lawson who delivered the keynote address and framed SNCC?s > > > nonviolent orientation. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The whole group, perhaps 120 participants, all in the room, asked me to > > > draft a statement. Eventually, three different drafts emerged. The > > > Nashville group was cohesive. The extant draft was the third, > influenced > > by > > > the Nashville group, after two earlier conversations. (Interview with > > King, > > > June 2014) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lawson?s synopsis was approved by the Conference. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In a private email message Mary King told me: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > He [James Lawson] was reading from the FOR booklist from a young age, > > but I > > > don?t think that he was influenced on notions of Consensus by Quakers, > > > because the connection was too abstract. Let me underscore that he says > > it > > > was for him Methodist origins. (Private email, 15 April 2014) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In his interview with Mary King, Lawson confirmed that the origin of > > > Consensus in SNCC was the Nashville Central Committee, confirming what > > Mary > > > King had told me in April. As to the roots Consensus in Lawson?s own > > > experience, he emphasized that: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It was the Methodist youth and student movements with which I had grown > > up, > > > and this is how they made decisions. They knew the rules of > parliamentary > > > procedures, but they wanted to find a common mind. (Interview with > King, > > > June 2014) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The Methodist Church to this very day still mandates Majority > decisions, > > > but this would never have entailed children voting ? in general > > youngsters > > > in these organizations were simply told what to do. The Black > > congregations > > > had operated separately for more than a century, so there was some room > > for > > > Lawson to develop a consensual model of collaboration in working with > > young > > > people. It is also possible the Black congregations, like other Black > > > Churches in America, drew on other traditions of decision making. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > > > > Andy Blunden > > > > > > > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > > > > > > > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > > > > > > > > From schuckcschuck@gmail.com Wed Jan 25 11:33:20 2017 From: schuckcschuck@gmail.com (Christopher Schuck) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2017 14:33:20 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's "talking" versus "speaking" In-Reply-To: <1485368397236.71956@iped.uio.no> References: <628ebbd3-8b51-8e15-47d0-9164e8352c36@mira.net> <58866d1f.90966b0a.1b7d5.c1c8@mx.google.com> <289C4B7F-0A9A-4A10-BB1F-0619858FFBAA@umn.edu> <1485241782176.85472@iped.uio.no> <1485368397236.71956@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: I didn't see that link before - thank you Alfredo. I would never wish to imply that the deep analysis of the speech concerns itself only with the formal text and that it doesn't reveal new possibilities and layers. Quite the contrary!! If there was any question I meant to raise, it had more to do with how we go about deciding what to take as our reference point/point of departure for such a discussion, and whether with someone such as Trump the inauguration speech might possibly turn out to be a more arbitrary starting point than it would be for some other people. But you are right - and anyway, it's all important. Chris On Wednesday, January 25, 2017, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > Chris, > I think you are very right, everything about this situation is not so much > about the formal text... but still, as others have been pointing out > throughout the discussion, particularly in the parallel thread on the role > of the Learning Sciences, we need to do what we can, locally, globally, and > elsewhere. And so one way to do something we know how to do is analysing > the speech not as text, but as *contexture*. We remarked bringing up > Martin's points, and also using an example, that the point is to see > societal possibilities of hearing a speech. And that includes bringing in > so much more than just formal text. One example was Roth's analysis of a > song by rap artist Eminem, http://www.qualitative- > research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/1213 . > A > > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu < > xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of Christopher > Schuck > > Sent: 24 January 2017 16:22 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's "talking" versus "speaking" > > Another irony that hasn't been mentioned is that this distictive speaking/ > talking style flagged by McWhorter made him unusually effective as a > campaigner where the goal was to create chaos and premature action, yet > would undermine his ability to be an effective (or safe) president and > doesn't "fit." This is relevant insofar as it emphasizes the new experience > of hearing him speak this way *as president* as opposed to > president-wannabe. In the inauguration speech, this person who is known for > talking not speaking attempts to speak formally, which creates yet another > split between taking that pseudo-formal language literally and taking it > ironically. > > So it is not just the difference between reading him literally and reading > him ironically, but that what is formal and what is literal (as well as > what is informal and what is indirect, and whether he is a "formal" leader > or informal television personality) become tangled up with each other as he > transitions from celebrity to this official role.That is one reason why I > wonder whether looking at the formal text of this official speech (however > fascinating) is such a useful way to explore the perezhivanie of the Trump > experience, because it's so uniquely not about the written text. I suspect > even many of Trump's supporters were not particularly interested in the > speech. > > On Tuesday, January 24, 2017, Alfredo Jornet Gil > ');>> > wrote: > > > Richard, > > what this linguist says and you comment on Trump's talk is pretty close > to > > what I was just writing to Francine in the main "trump's speech" thread > > about hearing him literally and hearing him as irony. If you stick to > > hearing in the same he seems to treat his recipients, then you may have > to > > believe that each word conveys an idea and that one word suffices to give > > the idea, like "it's true". It seems to be enough. As per your question, > > yes, it's a very scary question. It also is very scary that he may say, > > "it's true" and so be it. > > Alfredo > > ________________________________________ > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu < > xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > on behalf of Richard Beach > > > Sent: 23 January 2017 23:09 > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Trump's "talking" versus "speaking" > > > > In a New York Times op-ed > 01/21/opinion/sunday/how-to-listen-to-donald-trump-every-day > > -for-years.html>, the linguist, John McWhorter, distinguishes between > > Trump?s informal, spontaneous ?talking? versus ?speaking? that involves > > employing a more formal register associated with written language. He > cites > > the example of Trump?s talking: ?Look, having nuclear ? my uncle was a > > great professor and scientist and engineer, Dr. John Trump at M.I.T.; > good > > genes, very good genes, O.K., very smart, the Wharton School of Finance, > > very good, very smart ? you know, if you?re a conservative Republican, > if I > > were a liberal, if, like, O.K. ?? > > > > > > What?s problematic here is that Trump?s off-the-cuff ?talking,? as well > as > > his use of tweets, can convey messages with problematic uptakes from > > others, resulting in taking action without careful thought or > consultation > > with others. As McWhorter notes: ?All understand that his speech is > > structurally ungraceful. It may be harder to grasp that Mr. Trump, as > > someone just talking rather than artfully communicating ideas, has no > sense > > of the tacit understanding that a politician?s utterances are more > signals > > than statements, vehicles meant to convey larger messages.? > > > > When one of his hotels is another country is attacked by ?terrorists,? > > will Trump, as someone who perceives himself as the prime actor, > > spontaneously declare war with little or no consideration of the > > consequences of his actions? > > > > > > > > Richard Beach, Professor Emeritus of English Education, University of > > Minnesota > > rbeach@umn.edu > > Websites: Digital writing , Media > > literacy , Teaching > literature > > , Identity-focused ELA Teaching > < > > http://identities.pbworks.com/>, Common Core State Standards < > > http://englishccss.pbworks.com/>, Apps for literacy learning < > > http://usingipads.pbworks.com/>, Teaching about climate change < > > http://climatechangeela.pbworks.com/> > > > > > > > On Jan 23, 2017, at 12:52 PM, lpscholar2@gmail.com > wrote: > > > > > > Andrew, Andy, > > > I also want to pursue the example of James Lawson. > > > What struck me was his relationship to both parents as formative. > > > Moving to Trump?s inauguration, what struck me was the bodily gesture > he > > was expressing walking down the hallway just prior to speaking. > > > This body language that i was reading before he spoke a word. > > > I hope some of you watched the Frontline documentary on PBS EXPLORING > > both Trump?s and Clinton?s early family life. > > > > > > Trump?s father was only interested in ?winners? and to come second was > > to be a ?loser?. The father sent Trump as a young man to a military > academy > > that would teach his son how to be a ?winner? a lesson that Trump > inhabits > > and is incarnating in his every gesture. > > > > > > His emotional, cognitive, and performative symmetry captured in his > > facial expression as he walked forward to give his inaugural address. > > > > > > In other words, James Lawson, Donald Trump, and Martin Packer?s book > > review i see as overlapping themes. > > > When we explore ?expression? and ?intentionality? and ?language? i want > > to include the family upbringing as formative. > > > > > > Now as an aside, Simmel would say both James and Donald are inhabiting > > (fictions) that INform their experiences, but that may be a leap too far. > > Simmel was following the philosopher Vasinger (spelling?) who focused on > > how we live our lives (as is) or (as though) but to take this turn would > be > > for another thread. > > > > > > > > > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > > > From: Andrew Babson > > > Sent: January 23, 2017 9:08 AM > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: James Lawson and perezhivanie > > > > > > Andy, thank you for the timely post, especially as we move forward in > the > > > shadow of authoritarianism here in the USA. Lawson's example of > choosing > > > non-violent protest, following Gandhi, is helpful. Consider the > > > effectiveness of millions of people last weekend peacefully taking to > the > > > streets with few if any arrests (side note: we all went as a family > here > > in > > > Philly, it was great). Contrast the Black Bloc member's sucker punch of > > > neo-nazi Richard Spencer: people are cheering it, but those same people > > > probably realize it's not a scalable strategy. Different tours de > force, > > > different effects, the gender connotations of which are interesting. > > > > > > *P **erezhivanie > > > *is a new term to me, > > which I > > > link here to the XMCA blog for those other also unfamiliar with it. It > > > seems like a pretty clear gloss of a term I do know well, *Erlebnis, > > > *"experience" > > > (I dislike the gloss of that Dilthey-an term as "lived" > experience...but > > > that's for another discussion). > > > > > > It's fascinating to learn about Lawson's vocational decision-making > > > process, and to consider the possible effects of violent and > non-violent > > > dissent. But perhaps you could clarify for us Andy why you thought > > Lawson's > > > story was an example of *perezhivanie*? Where's the point of analytical > > > traction? If it means more than "experience", how can we apply that > > broader > > > meaning here? It seems like he had a Pauline metanoia/conversion > > > experience. Is that what you mean? > > > > > > Andrew > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------ > > > Andrew Babson, Ph.D. > > > Lecturer > > > Graduate School of Education > > > University of Pennsylvania > > > > > > On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 4:40 AM, Andy Blunden > wrote: > > > > > > James Lawson is the Methodist preacher who trained the young members of > > the > > > SNCC in non-violent action and wrote their constitution. I paste below > > and > > > attach an excerpt from my book "The Origins of Collective Decision > > Making" > > > which narrates Lawson's life up until April 1960. Perezhivanie was not > > the > > > topic under discussion so it is not mentioned in the text, but xmca-ers > > > should be able to see it, an example of perezhivanie: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > James Lawson was born in 1928, in Uniontown, Pennsylvania. His father, > > > James Snr., was the grandson of an escaped slave, and a Minister for > the > > > African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church in New England. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Via the Free African Society(FAS) the Methodists had recruited freed > > slaves > > > in Philadelphiain 1787, but as a result of a racist incident, some left > > to > > > found the African Methodist Episcopal Church(AMEC). Nonetheless, many > > > African Americans stayed with the United Methodist Church. The AMEC > split > > > started in Philadelphia and the AMEC Zion Church was a split that came > > out > > > of New York. It was to AMEC Zion, James Lawson was born. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > However, Lawson returned to The United Methodist Church, created by a > > 1939 > > > merger of several branches of the Methodist Church, which set up five > > > regional ?jurisdictions? of Methodists in the US, organized to maintain > > > regionally identity and a sixth, called the ?Central Jurisdiction? > which > > > combined the Black annual conferences, thus building segregation into > the > > > constitution of the Church.The Methodists went through a long and > painful > > > process, carried out in accordance with the Methodist Code of > Discipline, > > > which mandates the principle of Majority, to re-integrate the white and > > > Black, but it was not till after 1964 that Black conferences started to > > > merge into white conferences. At the local level, congregations > continued > > > much as before. So it was within the Black section of the segregated > > United > > > Methodist Church, that James Lawson became a Methodist. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > James Snr. was a militant preacher; he packed a 38 pistol and set up > > > branches of the NAACP wherever he was assigned to preach. After serving > > at > > > St. James AMEZ Church in Massillon, Ohio, he transferred to the > Lexington > > > Annual Conference of the Central Jurisdiction of the United Methodist > > > Church. James Snr. was no pacifist and according to Lawson he ?refused > to > > > take any guff from anyone, particularly on the point of race? and > > ?insisted > > > that he was going to be treated as a man.? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lawson?s mother, Philane May Cover, on the other hand, was decidedly > > > nonviolent. Lawson?s challenge, which was to form his character, was to > > > reconcile his father?s militancy with his mother?s nonviolence. Lawson > > grew > > > up in Massillon. One day, at the age of 10, Lawson was asked by his > > mother > > > to run an errand: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A little white child in an automobile yelled ?nigger? out the opened > > > window. I walked over ... and, since I was in a hurry running my > mother?s > > > errand, I smacked the child and went on my way. When the Lawson kids > got > > > called ?nigger? on the streets or at school, we usually fought. I don?t > > > know where we got that from, except that we figured that it was > something > > > to fight over. (Lawson, cited in King, 1999) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On the return trip home, aware of possible repercussions, Lawson tried > to > > > find the parents of the offending child, to talk to them, but the car > was > > > gone. Once home, he told his mother of the incident. Lawson?s mother > > > replied, ?Jimmy, what good did that do?? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > She talked about who I was, the fact of God?s love, that we were a > family > > > of love and that such an incident could not hurt me, because of who I > > was. > > > I don?t remember anyone else being around, but a stillness took over my > > > being at that moment. It was, as I realized much later on, a mystical > > > experience. In a very real way, my life stood still. I realized in that > > > stillness that I had changed forever. One of the phrases my mother used > > in > > > her conversation with me was that ?there must be a better way?. I > > > determined, from then on, that I would find the better way. (Lawson, > > cited > > > in King, 1999, pp. 187-188) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > He first became acquainted with Gandhi?s experiments in nonviolence as > a > > > child, thanks to the African-American press which the family discussed > > > around the dinner table, and had read Gandhi?s autobiography as a > > teenager. > > > At Baldwin Wallace College, a liberal arts Methodistcollege in Berea, > > Ohio, > > > he studied Thoreau, Gandhi and Tolstoy, and the pacifist theologians > > > Dietrich Bonhoeffer and Reinhold Niebuhr. At age 19, he became a draft > > > resister, refusing service in the Korean War. Executive director of > > > Fellowship Of Reconciliation (FOR), A. J. Muste,frequently visited to > > > lecture at the College: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > All of us in history classes were required to hear Muste. I was > thrilled. > > > He made me realize that I was not alone in my experimentation, that > there > > > was a world movement, and a national movement. ... He acquainted me > with > > > the Fellowship Of Reconciliation, which I joined on the spot in 1947. > > That > > > meant that I got exposed to their book list. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > After hearing a lecture by A. J. Muste, he joined FOR and CORE. Muste > was > > > instrumental thereafter in strengthening Lawson?s nonviolent > orientation, > > > directing him towards Gandhi and later facilitating his entry into the > > > sit-in and boycott movement beginning in the South. In the late 1940s > and > > > early 1950s Lawson had organized sit-ins and protests directed at > > > establishments that discriminated against blacks in Massillon, long > > before > > > the Montgomery bus-boycott. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > He was also active with the National Conference of Methodist Youth. > > > Although a member of a segregated Methodist Church, he found plenty of > > > support for his stands against racial discrimination and war from his > > white > > > colleagues and church fellows. While he was in prison serving thirteen > > > months of a two and a half year term for draft resistance in 1952, he > was > > > re-elected as Vice-President of the NCMY. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Wesleyan Methodism was central to Lawson?s outlook. Just as John Wesley > > had > > > sought to cleanse individuals of iniquity, so could society be purged > of > > > the social sins of slavery, segregation, poverty, and war.Generations > of > > > African American Methodists from Harriet Tubman (AMEZ) and Henry M. > > Turner > > > (AME) in the nineteenth century, to Rosa Parks (AME) and James Farmer > > > (MEC), were led to social justice activism by this Methodist heritage. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lawson used his prison time to read and think. Writing from prison in > > 1952 > > > aged 23 years old and yet to enter the seminary, Lawson said he aspired > > to > > > emulate ?the life of Jesus, St. Francis, George Fox, Gandhi, Buddha... > > and > > > other great religious persons.? These figures attached little > importance > > to > > > ?theology but (to their) experience with God.?Further, he noted > > ?religious > > > failures today are in (the arena of) experience and practice, not > > > theology.? When Lawson entered prison, he was a Christian pacifist.He > > told > > > Mary King however, that his ?first commitment was to work on race,? and > > > conscientious objection came second.By the time of his release, he had > > > advanced to Gandhian nonviolence. He wondered ?why can?t a mass > > non-violent > > > revolution be staged throughout the South where the segregation pattern > > is > > > much like the ?untouchables? of India? Such a movement would have to > > start > > > with one person who had the Christian vision to make such a revolution > a > > > reality in his own life.? Gandhian nonviolence became the synthesizing > > > factor for Lawson?s religious thinking: the militancy of his father?s > > > Methodism and the Christian pacifism that he drew from his mother. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Muste arranged for Lawson to visit India after his release from prison > > with > > > a letter of introduction to activists in the Gandhian movement, and he > > > remained in India from May 1953 to 1956, working at Hislop College in > > > Nagpur, reading Indian literature and working with Gandhi?s movement. > > > Lawson?s practice would remain deeply religious; his nonviolence was > > > saturated with the message of Christian love, and blended with > principles > > > synthesized from a broad range of religious and secular sources, both > > > Eastern and Western. His aim was the ?mass education and training of > > people > > > in the use of nonviolent direct action techniques.? Lawson insisted > that > > > ?you are fighting a system, not an individual, not a race, or not the > > > people of another country, but a system.? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > He continued his study of pacifism and Gandhian nonviolence at Oberlin > > > College, Ohio. While still in India, he had read about Martin Luther > King > > > and his successful leadership of the Montgomery bus boycott.King?s > > lecture > > > at Oberlin on February 6, 1957, fortified his long-held intention to > work > > > in the South for transformative social change. After King?s lecture to > a > > > packed audience, he and Lawson talked together at dinner.Though Lawson > > was > > > contemplating study for a Ph.D., King told him ?don?t wait, but come > > south > > > now!? adding that there was no one else like Lawson.Muste arranged for > > FOR > > > to hire Lawson as southern field secretary to be stationed at Nashville > > in > > > January 1958. Upon his arrival, he found that Glenn Smiley, national > > field > > > director of FOR, had arranged for Lawson to run a full schedule of > > > workshops ? including one to take place early that year at the first > > annual > > > meeting of the SCLC in Columbia, South Carolina. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > At the SCLC meeting, King made an exuberant introduction of Lawson as > > FOR?s > > > new regional representative and discussed the organization?s role in > > > Montgomery, telling delegates to be sure to attend Lawson?s workshop on > > > nonviolence. King took his seat in the first pew, waiting for the > > > three-hour session to start: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Martin did that at every SCLC meeting as long as he lived. He would ask > > me > > > to conduct an afternoon workshop, usually two or three hours, and he > > would > > > arrange for it to be ?at-large? so that everyone could attend, with > > nothing > > > else to compete. He put it on the schedule himself. A few minutes > early, > > he > > > would show up and sit alone, as an example, in the front row. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Back in Nashville, Lawson continued with Monday evening workshops > during > > > the autumn of 1959 in which he trained the students who were to be the > > core > > > of the Nashville sit-in movement. As a result of his involvement with > the > > > sit-ins Lawson was expelled from Vanderbilt, but he enrolled with > Boston > > > University to finish his degree in theology,while continuing to work > with > > > the students. Several professors in the School of Theology resigned > over > > > his expulsion. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The techniques that the students deployed were drawn from Lawson?s > > > workshops. In 1958 and 1959, Lawson mobilized all that he knew about > > > Christian pacifism, Gandhian nonviolence, and Methodist social ministry > > and > > > blended them into an unprecedented curriculum that influenced the civil > > > rights movement in Nashville and beyond. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Blending Christianity and interreligious sources, he did not present > its > > > philosophy and practice as a secular doctrine, but as the essence of > > > religion itself. Core to nonviolence was mirroring God?s love for > > humankind > > > and exhibiting it through concrete relationships of human solidarity > and > > > community. ?Nonviolence,? Lawson taught, is the aggressive, forgiving, > > > patient, long-suffering Christ-like and Christ-commanded love or > > good-will > > > for all humankind even in the face of tension, fear, hatred, or demonic > > > evil.? Moreover, ?it is the readiness to absorb suffering with > > forgiveness > > > and courage rather than to inflict suffering on others.? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lawson divided his instruction into four modules: how nonviolence > reacts, > > > training for nonviolence, the virtues of nonviolence, and the methods > of > > > nonviolence. Practitioners prepared themselves by jettisoning anger, > > > hostility and fear thus ?minimizing the effect of an attack,? valuing > > love, > > > courage, fearlessness, and forgiveness, and pursuing redemptive > suffering > > > which ?releases unknown elements for good.? Preparation included > > meditation > > > and prayer, study of the scriptures, practicing nonviolence through > > > challenges to segregation in bus transportation and in other public > > > facilities.The practice steps included fact-finding, negotiation, > > education > > > of the community, and various methods of nonviolent direct action > > including > > > sit-ins, boycotts, strikes, and civil disobedience. Lawson provided an > > > extensive bibliography including relevant verses from the Bible, the > > > Bhagavad Gita, and from the Chinese philosopher, Mo Ti and the Hebrew > > > prophet, Isaiah. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The Nashville sit-ins and those led by students in other southern > cities > > > convinced Ella Baker of the SCLC to call a conference in April, 1960, > at > > > Shaw University in Raleigh, North Carolina. Out of this meeting emerged > > the > > > Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee.Lawson delivered an opening > > > keynote address that helped to frame SNCC?s nonviolent > trajectory.Later, > > > Lawson summarized discussions and consensus that emerged out of the > > > conference, and his synopsis received the approval of everyone there. > > > Lawson?s overall comments said that ?nonviolence as it grows from > > > Judaic-Christian tradition seeks a social order of justice permeated by > > > love.? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It was Lawson who delivered the keynote address and framed SNCC?s > > > nonviolent orientation. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The whole group, perhaps 120 participants, all in the room, asked me to > > > draft a statement. Eventually, three different drafts emerged. The > > > Nashville group was cohesive. The extant draft was the third, > influenced > > by > > > the Nashville group, after two earlier conversations. (Interview with > > King, > > > June 2014) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lawson?s synopsis was approved by the Conference. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In a private email message Mary King told me: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > He [James Lawson] was reading from the FOR booklist from a young age, > > but I > > > don?t think that he was influenced on notions of Consensus by Quakers, > > > because the connection was too abstract. Let me underscore that he says > > it > > > was for him Methodist origins. (Private email, 15 April 2014) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In his interview with Mary King, Lawson confirmed that the origin of > > > Consensus in SNCC was the Nashville Central Committee, confirming what > > Mary > > > King had told me in April. As to the roots Consensus in Lawson?s own > > > experience, he emphasized that: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It was the Methodist youth and student movements with which I had grown > > up, > > > and this is how they made decisions. They knew the rules of > parliamentary > > > procedures, but they wanted to find a common mind. (Interview with > King, > > > June 2014) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The Methodist Church to this very day still mandates Majority > decisions, > > > but this would never have entailed children voting ? in general > > youngsters > > > in these organizations were simply told what to do. The Black > > congregations > > > had operated separately for more than a century, so there was some room > > for > > > Lawson to develop a consensual model of collaboration in working with > > young > > > people. It is also possible the Black congregations, like other Black > > > Churches in America, drew on other traditions of decision making. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > > > > Andy Blunden > > > > > > > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > > > > > > > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > > > > > > > > From dkellogg60@gmail.com Wed Jan 25 12:42:29 2017 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2017 05:42:29 +0900 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's "talking" versus "speaking" In-Reply-To: <1485369691280.7805@iped.uio.no> References: <628ebbd3-8b51-8e15-47d0-9164e8352c36@mira.net> <58866d1f.90966b0a.1b7d5.c1c8@mx.google.com> <289C4B7F-0A9A-4A10-BB1F-0619858FFBAA@umn.edu> <1485241782176.85472@iped.uio.no> <1485368397236.71956@iped.uio.no> <1485369691280.7805@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: When people (including people on this list) use the word text, they usually don't literally mean ink and paper. For example, Obama said (and Trump repeated it in his CIA speech a few days ago), the Constitution is a precious thing but "in the end" it is just parchment if people don't believe in who they are. A more technical way to express this idea is to say that a text is a semantic rather than a lexicogrammatical or a phono/graphological one. But Vygotsky argues that after about age one, children develop human, cutural-historical consciousness, and this consciousness is "systemic" (it involves the ability to choose, such as being able to choose to treat the visual purview as ink and paper or as a set of signs) and it is "semantic" (it involves seeing objects as meaningful; that is, as standing for something more). So what this means is that human consciousness is not simply a neurological or even a "cognitive" phenomenon, like animal consciousness. It's a semantic one. It's not just that texts are made by human minds. Sociogenetically, ontogenetically, and even "microgenetically", human minds are made of text. Halliday says that experience is "the reality that we construe for ourselves through language". That's why text really is pertinent to a discussion of perizhivanie. We could use the Dilthey definition and treat perizhivanie as "man's presence in his present". But how would we study it? On the other hand, if we treat perizhivanie as a reality that we construe for ourselves through language the path is much clearer. Perezhivanie is a moment of text, and the structure of perizhivanie can be studied through the structure of text. When I sat down to analyze Trump's speech, I had to ignore a lot of the non-textual material it presented. Take, for example, Trump's gesticulations. He has a tic of using his left hand to form a circle (suggesting female genitalia, I suppose) and his right hand to to display an erect index finger. This is distracting and probably about as important as the fact that he sniffled through the presidential debates: these are not central to the reality that Trump construes through language. On the other hand (no pun intended), he uses those gesticulations to "beat" the cadence of stresses, particularly in the last four syllables of each paragraph, as Mussolini and Hitler were wont to do. Obama remarked that Trump's way of communicating is "powerful stuff". That's not an analysis--but it's probably not a compliment either. It is just the way Obama construes the way Trump is able to construe Trump's reality through language. David Kellogg Macquarie University On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 3:41 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > David's analyses also give more than just text, I believe. > A > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil > Sent: 25 January 2017 19:19 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's "talking" versus "speaking" > > Chris, > I think you are very right, everything about this situation is not so much > about the formal text... but still, as others have been pointing out > throughout the discussion, particularly in the parallel thread on the role > of the Learning Sciences, we need to do what we can, locally, globally, and > elsewhere. And so one way to do something we know how to do is analysing > the speech not as text, but as *contexture*. We remarked bringing up > Martin's points, and also using an example, that the point is to see > societal possibilities of hearing a speech. And that includes bringing in > so much more than just formal text. One example was Roth's analysis of a > song by rap artist Eminem, http://www.qualitative- > research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/1213 . > A > > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of Christopher Schuck > Sent: 24 January 2017 16:22 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's "talking" versus "speaking" > > Another irony that hasn't been mentioned is that this distictive speaking/ > talking style flagged by McWhorter made him unusually effective as a > campaigner where the goal was to create chaos and premature action, yet > would undermine his ability to be an effective (or safe) president and > doesn't "fit." This is relevant insofar as it emphasizes the new experience > of hearing him speak this way *as president* as opposed to > president-wannabe. In the inauguration speech, this person who is known for > talking not speaking attempts to speak formally, which creates yet another > split between taking that pseudo-formal language literally and taking it > ironically. > > So it is not just the difference between reading him literally and reading > him ironically, but that what is formal and what is literal (as well as > what is informal and what is indirect, and whether he is a "formal" leader > or informal television personality) become tangled up with each other as he > transitions from celebrity to this official role.That is one reason why I > wonder whether looking at the formal text of this official speech (however > fascinating) is such a useful way to explore the perezhivanie of the Trump > experience, because it's so uniquely not about the written text. I suspect > even many of Trump's supporters were not particularly interested in the > speech. > > On Tuesday, January 24, 2017, Alfredo Jornet Gil > wrote: > > > Richard, > > what this linguist says and you comment on Trump's talk is pretty close > to > > what I was just writing to Francine in the main "trump's speech" thread > > about hearing him literally and hearing him as irony. If you stick to > > hearing in the same he seems to treat his recipients, then you may have > to > > believe that each word conveys an idea and that one word suffices to give > > the idea, like "it's true". It seems to be enough. As per your question, > > yes, it's a very scary question. It also is very scary that he may say, > > "it's true" and so be it. > > Alfredo > > ________________________________________ > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > on behalf of Richard Beach > > Sent: 23 January 2017 23:09 > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Trump's "talking" versus "speaking" > > > > In a New York Times op-ed > 01/21/opinion/sunday/how-to-listen-to-donald-trump-every-day > > -for-years.html>, the linguist, John McWhorter, distinguishes between > > Trump?s informal, spontaneous ?talking? versus ?speaking? that involves > > employing a more formal register associated with written language. He > cites > > the example of Trump?s talking: ?Look, having nuclear ? my uncle was a > > great professor and scientist and engineer, Dr. John Trump at M.I.T.; > good > > genes, very good genes, O.K., very smart, the Wharton School of Finance, > > very good, very smart ? you know, if you?re a conservative Republican, > if I > > were a liberal, if, like, O.K. ?? > > > > > > What?s problematic here is that Trump?s off-the-cuff ?talking,? as well > as > > his use of tweets, can convey messages with problematic uptakes from > > others, resulting in taking action without careful thought or > consultation > > with others. As McWhorter notes: ?All understand that his speech is > > structurally ungraceful. It may be harder to grasp that Mr. Trump, as > > someone just talking rather than artfully communicating ideas, has no > sense > > of the tacit understanding that a politician?s utterances are more > signals > > than statements, vehicles meant to convey larger messages.? > > > > When one of his hotels is another country is attacked by ?terrorists,? > > will Trump, as someone who perceives himself as the prime actor, > > spontaneously declare war with little or no consideration of the > > consequences of his actions? > > > > > > > > Richard Beach, Professor Emeritus of English Education, University of > > Minnesota > > rbeach@umn.edu > > Websites: Digital writing , Media > > literacy , Teaching > literature > > , Identity-focused ELA Teaching > < > > http://identities.pbworks.com/>, Common Core State Standards < > > http://englishccss.pbworks.com/>, Apps for literacy learning < > > http://usingipads.pbworks.com/>, Teaching about climate change < > > http://climatechangeela.pbworks.com/> > > > > > > > On Jan 23, 2017, at 12:52 PM, lpscholar2@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > Andrew, Andy, > > > I also want to pursue the example of James Lawson. > > > What struck me was his relationship to both parents as formative. > > > Moving to Trump?s inauguration, what struck me was the bodily gesture > he > > was expressing walking down the hallway just prior to speaking. > > > This body language that i was reading before he spoke a word. > > > I hope some of you watched the Frontline documentary on PBS EXPLORING > > both Trump?s and Clinton?s early family life. > > > > > > Trump?s father was only interested in ?winners? and to come second was > > to be a ?loser?. The father sent Trump as a young man to a military > academy > > that would teach his son how to be a ?winner? a lesson that Trump > inhabits > > and is incarnating in his every gesture. > > > > > > His emotional, cognitive, and performative symmetry captured in his > > facial expression as he walked forward to give his inaugural address. > > > > > > In other words, James Lawson, Donald Trump, and Martin Packer?s book > > review i see as overlapping themes. > > > When we explore ?expression? and ?intentionality? and ?language? i want > > to include the family upbringing as formative. > > > > > > Now as an aside, Simmel would say both James and Donald are inhabiting > > (fictions) that INform their experiences, but that may be a leap too far. > > Simmel was following the philosopher Vasinger (spelling?) who focused on > > how we live our lives (as is) or (as though) but to take this turn would > be > > for another thread. > > > > > > > > > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > > > From: Andrew Babson > > > Sent: January 23, 2017 9:08 AM > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: James Lawson and perezhivanie > > > > > > Andy, thank you for the timely post, especially as we move forward in > the > > > shadow of authoritarianism here in the USA. Lawson's example of > choosing > > > non-violent protest, following Gandhi, is helpful. Consider the > > > effectiveness of millions of people last weekend peacefully taking to > the > > > streets with few if any arrests (side note: we all went as a family > here > > in > > > Philly, it was great). Contrast the Black Bloc member's sucker punch of > > > neo-nazi Richard Spencer: people are cheering it, but those same people > > > probably realize it's not a scalable strategy. Different tours de > force, > > > different effects, the gender connotations of which are interesting. > > > > > > *P **erezhivanie > > > *is a new term to me, > > which I > > > link here to the XMCA blog for those other also unfamiliar with it. It > > > seems like a pretty clear gloss of a term I do know well, *Erlebnis, > > > *"experience" > > > (I dislike the gloss of that Dilthey-an term as "lived" > experience...but > > > that's for another discussion). > > > > > > It's fascinating to learn about Lawson's vocational decision-making > > > process, and to consider the possible effects of violent and > non-violent > > > dissent. But perhaps you could clarify for us Andy why you thought > > Lawson's > > > story was an example of *perezhivanie*? Where's the point of analytical > > > traction? If it means more than "experience", how can we apply that > > broader > > > meaning here? It seems like he had a Pauline metanoia/conversion > > > experience. Is that what you mean? > > > > > > Andrew > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------ > > > Andrew Babson, Ph.D. > > > Lecturer > > > Graduate School of Education > > > University of Pennsylvania > > > > > > On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 4:40 AM, Andy Blunden > wrote: > > > > > > James Lawson is the Methodist preacher who trained the young members of > > the > > > SNCC in non-violent action and wrote their constitution. I paste below > > and > > > attach an excerpt from my book "The Origins of Collective Decision > > Making" > > > which narrates Lawson's life up until April 1960. Perezhivanie was not > > the > > > topic under discussion so it is not mentioned in the text, but xmca-ers > > > should be able to see it, an example of perezhivanie: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > James Lawson was born in 1928, in Uniontown, Pennsylvania. His father, > > > James Snr., was the grandson of an escaped slave, and a Minister for > the > > > African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church in New England. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Via the Free African Society(FAS) the Methodists had recruited freed > > slaves > > > in Philadelphiain 1787, but as a result of a racist incident, some left > > to > > > found the African Methodist Episcopal Church(AMEC). Nonetheless, many > > > African Americans stayed with the United Methodist Church. The AMEC > split > > > started in Philadelphia and the AMEC Zion Church was a split that came > > out > > > of New York. It was to AMEC Zion, James Lawson was born. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > However, Lawson returned to The United Methodist Church, created by a > > 1939 > > > merger of several branches of the Methodist Church, which set up five > > > regional ?jurisdictions? of Methodists in the US, organized to maintain > > > regionally identity and a sixth, called the ?Central Jurisdiction? > which > > > combined the Black annual conferences, thus building segregation into > the > > > constitution of the Church.The Methodists went through a long and > painful > > > process, carried out in accordance with the Methodist Code of > Discipline, > > > which mandates the principle of Majority, to re-integrate the white and > > > Black, but it was not till after 1964 that Black conferences started to > > > merge into white conferences. At the local level, congregations > continued > > > much as before. So it was within the Black section of the segregated > > United > > > Methodist Church, that James Lawson became a Methodist. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > James Snr. was a militant preacher; he packed a 38 pistol and set up > > > branches of the NAACP wherever he was assigned to preach. After serving > > at > > > St. James AMEZ Church in Massillon, Ohio, he transferred to the > Lexington > > > Annual Conference of the Central Jurisdiction of the United Methodist > > > Church. James Snr. was no pacifist and according to Lawson he ?refused > to > > > take any guff from anyone, particularly on the point of race? and > > ?insisted > > > that he was going to be treated as a man.? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lawson?s mother, Philane May Cover, on the other hand, was decidedly > > > nonviolent. Lawson?s challenge, which was to form his character, was to > > > reconcile his father?s militancy with his mother?s nonviolence. Lawson > > grew > > > up in Massillon. One day, at the age of 10, Lawson was asked by his > > mother > > > to run an errand: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A little white child in an automobile yelled ?nigger? out the opened > > > window. I walked over ... and, since I was in a hurry running my > mother?s > > > errand, I smacked the child and went on my way. When the Lawson kids > got > > > called ?nigger? on the streets or at school, we usually fought. I don?t > > > know where we got that from, except that we figured that it was > something > > > to fight over. (Lawson, cited in King, 1999) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On the return trip home, aware of possible repercussions, Lawson tried > to > > > find the parents of the offending child, to talk to them, but the car > was > > > gone. Once home, he told his mother of the incident. Lawson?s mother > > > replied, ?Jimmy, what good did that do?? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > She talked about who I was, the fact of God?s love, that we were a > family > > > of love and that such an incident could not hurt me, because of who I > > was. > > > I don?t remember anyone else being around, but a stillness took over my > > > being at that moment. It was, as I realized much later on, a mystical > > > experience. In a very real way, my life stood still. I realized in that > > > stillness that I had changed forever. One of the phrases my mother used > > in > > > her conversation with me was that ?there must be a better way?. I > > > determined, from then on, that I would find the better way. (Lawson, > > cited > > > in King, 1999, pp. 187-188) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > He first became acquainted with Gandhi?s experiments in nonviolence as > a > > > child, thanks to the African-American press which the family discussed > > > around the dinner table, and had read Gandhi?s autobiography as a > > teenager. > > > At Baldwin Wallace College, a liberal arts Methodistcollege in Berea, > > Ohio, > > > he studied Thoreau, Gandhi and Tolstoy, and the pacifist theologians > > > Dietrich Bonhoeffer and Reinhold Niebuhr. At age 19, he became a draft > > > resister, refusing service in the Korean War. Executive director of > > > Fellowship Of Reconciliation (FOR), A. J. Muste,frequently visited to > > > lecture at the College: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > All of us in history classes were required to hear Muste. I was > thrilled. > > > He made me realize that I was not alone in my experimentation, that > there > > > was a world movement, and a national movement. ... He acquainted me > with > > > the Fellowship Of Reconciliation, which I joined on the spot in 1947. > > That > > > meant that I got exposed to their book list. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > After hearing a lecture by A. J. Muste, he joined FOR and CORE. Muste > was > > > instrumental thereafter in strengthening Lawson?s nonviolent > orientation, > > > directing him towards Gandhi and later facilitating his entry into the > > > sit-in and boycott movement beginning in the South. In the late 1940s > and > > > early 1950s Lawson had organized sit-ins and protests directed at > > > establishments that discriminated against blacks in Massillon, long > > before > > > the Montgomery bus-boycott. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > He was also active with the National Conference of Methodist Youth. > > > Although a member of a segregated Methodist Church, he found plenty of > > > support for his stands against racial discrimination and war from his > > white > > > colleagues and church fellows. While he was in prison serving thirteen > > > months of a two and a half year term for draft resistance in 1952, he > was > > > re-elected as Vice-President of the NCMY. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Wesleyan Methodism was central to Lawson?s outlook. Just as John Wesley > > had > > > sought to cleanse individuals of iniquity, so could society be purged > of > > > the social sins of slavery, segregation, poverty, and war.Generations > of > > > African American Methodists from Harriet Tubman (AMEZ) and Henry M. > > Turner > > > (AME) in the nineteenth century, to Rosa Parks (AME) and James Farmer > > > (MEC), were led to social justice activism by this Methodist heritage. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lawson used his prison time to read and think. Writing from prison in > > 1952 > > > aged 23 years old and yet to enter the seminary, Lawson said he aspired > > to > > > emulate ?the life of Jesus, St. Francis, George Fox, Gandhi, Buddha... > > and > > > other great religious persons.? These figures attached little > importance > > to > > > ?theology but (to their) experience with God.?Further, he noted > > ?religious > > > failures today are in (the arena of) experience and practice, not > > > theology.? When Lawson entered prison, he was a Christian pacifist.He > > told > > > Mary King however, that his ?first commitment was to work on race,? and > > > conscientious objection came second.By the time of his release, he had > > > advanced to Gandhian nonviolence. He wondered ?why can?t a mass > > non-violent > > > revolution be staged throughout the South where the segregation pattern > > is > > > much like the ?untouchables? of India? Such a movement would have to > > start > > > with one person who had the Christian vision to make such a revolution > a > > > reality in his own life.? Gandhian nonviolence became the synthesizing > > > factor for Lawson?s religious thinking: the militancy of his father?s > > > Methodism and the Christian pacifism that he drew from his mother. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Muste arranged for Lawson to visit India after his release from prison > > with > > > a letter of introduction to activists in the Gandhian movement, and he > > > remained in India from May 1953 to 1956, working at Hislop College in > > > Nagpur, reading Indian literature and working with Gandhi?s movement. > > > Lawson?s practice would remain deeply religious; his nonviolence was > > > saturated with the message of Christian love, and blended with > principles > > > synthesized from a broad range of religious and secular sources, both > > > Eastern and Western. His aim was the ?mass education and training of > > people > > > in the use of nonviolent direct action techniques.? Lawson insisted > that > > > ?you are fighting a system, not an individual, not a race, or not the > > > people of another country, but a system.? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > He continued his study of pacifism and Gandhian nonviolence at Oberlin > > > College, Ohio. While still in India, he had read about Martin Luther > King > > > and his successful leadership of the Montgomery bus boycott.King?s > > lecture > > > at Oberlin on February 6, 1957, fortified his long-held intention to > work > > > in the South for transformative social change. After King?s lecture to > a > > > packed audience, he and Lawson talked together at dinner.Though Lawson > > was > > > contemplating study for a Ph.D., King told him ?don?t wait, but come > > south > > > now!? adding that there was no one else like Lawson.Muste arranged for > > FOR > > > to hire Lawson as southern field secretary to be stationed at Nashville > > in > > > January 1958. Upon his arrival, he found that Glenn Smiley, national > > field > > > director of FOR, had arranged for Lawson to run a full schedule of > > > workshops ? including one to take place early that year at the first > > annual > > > meeting of the SCLC in Columbia, South Carolina. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > At the SCLC meeting, King made an exuberant introduction of Lawson as > > FOR?s > > > new regional representative and discussed the organization?s role in > > > Montgomery, telling delegates to be sure to attend Lawson?s workshop on > > > nonviolence. King took his seat in the first pew, waiting for the > > > three-hour session to start: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Martin did that at every SCLC meeting as long as he lived. He would ask > > me > > > to conduct an afternoon workshop, usually two or three hours, and he > > would > > > arrange for it to be ?at-large? so that everyone could attend, with > > nothing > > > else to compete. He put it on the schedule himself. A few minutes > early, > > he > > > would show up and sit alone, as an example, in the front row. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Back in Nashville, Lawson continued with Monday evening workshops > during > > > the autumn of 1959 in which he trained the students who were to be the > > core > > > of the Nashville sit-in movement. As a result of his involvement with > the > > > sit-ins Lawson was expelled from Vanderbilt, but he enrolled with > Boston > > > University to finish his degree in theology,while continuing to work > with > > > the students. Several professors in the School of Theology resigned > over > > > his expulsion. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The techniques that the students deployed were drawn from Lawson?s > > > workshops. In 1958 and 1959, Lawson mobilized all that he knew about > > > Christian pacifism, Gandhian nonviolence, and Methodist social ministry > > and > > > blended them into an unprecedented curriculum that influenced the civil > > > rights movement in Nashville and beyond. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Blending Christianity and interreligious sources, he did not present > its > > > philosophy and practice as a secular doctrine, but as the essence of > > > religion itself. Core to nonviolence was mirroring God?s love for > > humankind > > > and exhibiting it through concrete relationships of human solidarity > and > > > community. ?Nonviolence,? Lawson taught, is the aggressive, forgiving, > > > patient, long-suffering Christ-like and Christ-commanded love or > > good-will > > > for all humankind even in the face of tension, fear, hatred, or demonic > > > evil.? Moreover, ?it is the readiness to absorb suffering with > > forgiveness > > > and courage rather than to inflict suffering on others.? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lawson divided his instruction into four modules: how nonviolence > reacts, > > > training for nonviolence, the virtues of nonviolence, and the methods > of > > > nonviolence. Practitioners prepared themselves by jettisoning anger, > > > hostility and fear thus ?minimizing the effect of an attack,? valuing > > love, > > > courage, fearlessness, and forgiveness, and pursuing redemptive > suffering > > > which ?releases unknown elements for good.? Preparation included > > meditation > > > and prayer, study of the scriptures, practicing nonviolence through > > > challenges to segregation in bus transportation and in other public > > > facilities.The practice steps included fact-finding, negotiation, > > education > > > of the community, and various methods of nonviolent direct action > > including > > > sit-ins, boycotts, strikes, and civil disobedience. Lawson provided an > > > extensive bibliography including relevant verses from the Bible, the > > > Bhagavad Gita, and from the Chinese philosopher, Mo Ti and the Hebrew > > > prophet, Isaiah. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The Nashville sit-ins and those led by students in other southern > cities > > > convinced Ella Baker of the SCLC to call a conference in April, 1960, > at > > > Shaw University in Raleigh, North Carolina. Out of this meeting emerged > > the > > > Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee.Lawson delivered an opening > > > keynote address that helped to frame SNCC?s nonviolent > trajectory.Later, > > > Lawson summarized discussions and consensus that emerged out of the > > > conference, and his synopsis received the approval of everyone there. > > > Lawson?s overall comments said that ?nonviolence as it grows from > > > Judaic-Christian tradition seeks a social order of justice permeated by > > > love.? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It was Lawson who delivered the keynote address and framed SNCC?s > > > nonviolent orientation. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The whole group, perhaps 120 participants, all in the room, asked me to > > > draft a statement. Eventually, three different drafts emerged. The > > > Nashville group was cohesive. The extant draft was the third, > influenced > > by > > > the Nashville group, after two earlier conversations. (Interview with > > King, > > > June 2014) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lawson?s synopsis was approved by the Conference. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In a private email message Mary King told me: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > He [James Lawson] was reading from the FOR booklist from a young age, > > but I > > > don?t think that he was influenced on notions of Consensus by Quakers, > > > because the connection was too abstract. Let me underscore that he says > > it > > > was for him Methodist origins. (Private email, 15 April 2014) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In his interview with Mary King, Lawson confirmed that the origin of > > > Consensus in SNCC was the Nashville Central Committee, confirming what > > Mary > > > King had told me in April. As to the roots Consensus in Lawson?s own > > > experience, he emphasized that: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It was the Methodist youth and student movements with which I had grown > > up, > > > and this is how they made decisions. They knew the rules of > parliamentary > > > procedures, but they wanted to find a common mind. (Interview with > King, > > > June 2014) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The Methodist Church to this very day still mandates Majority > decisions, > > > but this would never have entailed children voting ? in general > > youngsters > > > in these organizations were simply told what to do. The Black > > congregations > > > had operated separately for more than a century, so there was some room > > for > > > Lawson to develop a consensual model of collaboration in working with > > young > > > people. It is also possible the Black congregations, like other Black > > > Churches in America, drew on other traditions of decision making. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > > > > Andy Blunden > > > > > > > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > > > > > > > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > > > > > > > > > From smago@uga.edu Tue Jan 24 03:36:06 2017 From: smago@uga.edu (Peter Smagorinsky) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2017 11:36:06 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] JoLLE GA Funder is LIVE Message-ID: Hi all! I just received news that our GA Funder is live. All donations support the Journal of Language and Literacy Education, particularly our upcoming conference. Thanks for any amount you can contribute! https://dar.uga.edu/funder/campaigns/jolle-2017-conference/#description Rachel Kaminski Sanders Doctoral Student & Graduate Assistant Language and Literacy Education, The University of Georgia Conference Chair, Journal of Language and Literacy Education 110 Carlton Street, Aderhold Hall, Office 301J, Athens, GA 30602 [1474474690830_image001.jpg] -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: OutlookEmoji-1474474690830_image001.jpg.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 2929 bytes Desc: OutlookEmoji-1474474690830_image001.jpg.jpg Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20170124/174b3827/attachment.jpg From Peg.Griffin@att.net Wed Jan 25 16:42:51 2017 From: Peg.Griffin@att.net (Peg Griffin) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2017 19:42:51 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Cambridge Atlantica site that Peg referred to In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <003601d2776d$2cc0a910$8641fb30$@att.net> Hee hee hee, Mike Cole, you rogue! This is the official Cambridge Analytica site https://cambridgeanalytica.org/ But Mike direct you to a meatier sit about it! Peg -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 1:41 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] The Cambridge Atlantica site that Peg referred to https://antidotezine.com/2017/01/22/trump-knows-you/ From jgregmcverry@gmail.com Wed Jan 25 16:55:03 2017 From: jgregmcverry@gmail.com (Greg Mcverry) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2017 00:55:03 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's "talking" versus "speaking" In-Reply-To: References: <628ebbd3-8b51-8e15-47d0-9164e8352c36@mira.net> <58866d1f.90966b0a.1b7d5.c1c8@mx.google.com> <289C4B7F-0A9A-4A10-BB1F-0619858FFBAA@umn.edu> <1485241782176.85472@iped.uio.no> <1485368397236.71956@iped.uio.no> <1485369691280.7805@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: Reminds me of one of the more salient and important philosophical discussions on the difference between hearing and listening: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hohb_gOI0dQ On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 3:44 PM David Kellogg wrote: > When people (including people on this list) use the word text, they usually > don't literally mean ink and paper. For example, Obama said (and Trump > repeated it in his CIA speech a few days ago), the Constitution is a > precious thing but "in the end" it is just parchment if people don't > believe in who they are. A more technical way to express this idea is to > say that a text is a semantic rather than a lexicogrammatical or a > phono/graphological one. > > But Vygotsky argues that after about age one, children develop human, > cutural-historical consciousness, and this consciousness is "systemic" (it > involves the ability to choose, such as being able to choose to treat the > visual purview as ink and paper or as a set of signs) and it is "semantic" > (it involves seeing objects as meaningful; that is, as standing for > something more). So what this means is that human consciousness is not > simply a neurological or even a "cognitive" phenomenon, like animal > consciousness. It's a semantic one. It's not just that texts are made by > human minds. Sociogenetically, ontogenetically, and even > "microgenetically", human minds are made of text. > > Halliday says that experience is "the reality that we construe for > ourselves through language". That's why text really is pertinent to a > discussion of perizhivanie. We could use the Dilthey definition and treat > perizhivanie as "man's presence in his present". But how would we study it? > On the other hand, if we treat perizhivanie as a reality that we construe > for ourselves through language the path is much clearer. Perezhivanie is a > moment of text, and the structure of perizhivanie can be studied through > the structure of text. > > When I sat down to analyze Trump's speech, I had to ignore a lot of the > non-textual material it presented. Take, for example, Trump's > gesticulations. He has a tic of using his left hand to form a circle > (suggesting female genitalia, I suppose) and his right hand to to display > an erect index finger. This is distracting and probably about as important > as the fact that he sniffled through the presidential debates: these are > not central to the reality that Trump construes through language. On the > other hand (no pun intended), he uses those gesticulations to "beat" the > cadence of stresses, particularly in the last four syllables of each > paragraph, as Mussolini and Hitler were wont to do. Obama remarked that > Trump's way of communicating is "powerful stuff". That's not an > analysis--but it's probably not a compliment either. It is just the way > Obama construes the way Trump is able to construe Trump's reality through > language. > > David Kellogg > Macquarie University > > > On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 3:41 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > wrote: > > > David's analyses also give more than just text, I believe. > > A > > ________________________________________ > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil > > Sent: 25 January 2017 19:19 > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's "talking" versus "speaking" > > > > Chris, > > I think you are very right, everything about this situation is not so > much > > about the formal text... but still, as others have been pointing out > > throughout the discussion, particularly in the parallel thread on the > role > > of the Learning Sciences, we need to do what we can, locally, globally, > and > > elsewhere. And so one way to do something we know how to do is analysing > > the speech not as text, but as *contexture*. We remarked bringing up > > Martin's points, and also using an example, that the point is to see > > societal possibilities of hearing a speech. And that includes bringing in > > so much more than just formal text. One example was Roth's analysis of a > > song by rap artist Eminem, http://www.qualitative- > > research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/1213 . > > A > > > > ________________________________________ > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > on behalf of Christopher Schuck > > Sent: 24 January 2017 16:22 > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's "talking" versus "speaking" > > > > Another irony that hasn't been mentioned is that this distictive > speaking/ > > talking style flagged by McWhorter made him unusually effective as a > > campaigner where the goal was to create chaos and premature action, yet > > would undermine his ability to be an effective (or safe) president and > > doesn't "fit." This is relevant insofar as it emphasizes the new > experience > > of hearing him speak this way *as president* as opposed to > > president-wannabe. In the inauguration speech, this person who is known > for > > talking not speaking attempts to speak formally, which creates yet > another > > split between taking that pseudo-formal language literally and taking it > > ironically. > > > > So it is not just the difference between reading him literally and > reading > > him ironically, but that what is formal and what is literal (as well as > > what is informal and what is indirect, and whether he is a "formal" > leader > > or informal television personality) become tangled up with each other as > he > > transitions from celebrity to this official role.That is one reason why I > > wonder whether looking at the formal text of this official speech > (however > > fascinating) is such a useful way to explore the perezhivanie of the > Trump > > experience, because it's so uniquely not about the written text. I > suspect > > even many of Trump's supporters were not particularly interested in the > > speech. > > > > On Tuesday, January 24, 2017, Alfredo Jornet Gil > > wrote: > > > > > Richard, > > > what this linguist says and you comment on Trump's talk is pretty close > > to > > > what I was just writing to Francine in the main "trump's speech" thread > > > about hearing him literally and hearing him as irony. If you stick to > > > hearing in the same he seems to treat his recipients, then you may have > > to > > > believe that each word conveys an idea and that one word suffices to > give > > > the idea, like "it's true". It seems to be enough. As per your > question, > > > yes, it's a very scary question. It also is very scary that he may say, > > > "it's true" and so be it. > > > Alfredo > > > ________________________________________ > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > on behalf of Richard Beach > > > Sent: 23 January 2017 23:09 > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Trump's "talking" versus "speaking" > > > > > > In a New York Times op-ed > > 01/21/opinion/sunday/how-to-listen-to-donald-trump-every-day > > > -for-years.html>, the linguist, John McWhorter, distinguishes between > > > Trump?s informal, spontaneous ?talking? versus ?speaking? that involves > > > employing a more formal register associated with written language. He > > cites > > > the example of Trump?s talking: ?Look, having nuclear ? my uncle was a > > > great professor and scientist and engineer, Dr. John Trump at M.I.T.; > > good > > > genes, very good genes, O.K., very smart, the Wharton School of > Finance, > > > very good, very smart ? you know, if you?re a conservative Republican, > > if I > > > were a liberal, if, like, O.K. ?? > > > > > > > > > What?s problematic here is that Trump?s off-the-cuff ?talking,? as well > > as > > > his use of tweets, can convey messages with problematic uptakes from > > > others, resulting in taking action without careful thought or > > consultation > > > with others. As McWhorter notes: ?All understand that his speech is > > > structurally ungraceful. It may be harder to grasp that Mr. Trump, as > > > someone just talking rather than artfully communicating ideas, has no > > sense > > > of the tacit understanding that a politician?s utterances are more > > signals > > > than statements, vehicles meant to convey larger messages.? > > > > > > When one of his hotels is another country is attacked by ?terrorists,? > > > will Trump, as someone who perceives himself as the prime actor, > > > spontaneously declare war with little or no consideration of the > > > consequences of his actions? > > > > > > > > > > > > Richard Beach, Professor Emeritus of English Education, University of > > > Minnesota > > > rbeach@umn.edu > > > Websites: Digital writing , Media > > > literacy , Teaching > > literature > > > , Identity-focused ELA > Teaching > > < > > > http://identities.pbworks.com/>, Common Core State Standards < > > > http://englishccss.pbworks.com/>, Apps for literacy learning < > > > http://usingipads.pbworks.com/>, Teaching about climate change < > > > http://climatechangeela.pbworks.com/> > > > > > > > > > > On Jan 23, 2017, at 12:52 PM, lpscholar2@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > Andrew, Andy, > > > > I also want to pursue the example of James Lawson. > > > > What struck me was his relationship to both parents as formative. > > > > Moving to Trump?s inauguration, what struck me was the bodily gesture > > he > > > was expressing walking down the hallway just prior to speaking. > > > > This body language that i was reading before he spoke a word. > > > > I hope some of you watched the Frontline documentary on PBS EXPLORING > > > both Trump?s and Clinton?s early family life. > > > > > > > > Trump?s father was only interested in ?winners? and to come second > was > > > to be a ?loser?. The father sent Trump as a young man to a military > > academy > > > that would teach his son how to be a ?winner? a lesson that Trump > > inhabits > > > and is incarnating in his every gesture. > > > > > > > > His emotional, cognitive, and performative symmetry captured in his > > > facial expression as he walked forward to give his inaugural address. > > > > > > > > In other words, James Lawson, Donald Trump, and Martin Packer?s book > > > review i see as overlapping themes. > > > > When we explore ?expression? and ?intentionality? and ?language? i > want > > > to include the family upbringing as formative. > > > > > > > > Now as an aside, Simmel would say both James and Donald are > inhabiting > > > (fictions) that INform their experiences, but that may be a leap too > far. > > > Simmel was following the philosopher Vasinger (spelling?) who focused > on > > > how we live our lives (as is) or (as though) but to take this turn > would > > be > > > for another thread. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > > > > > From: Andrew Babson > > > > Sent: January 23, 2017 9:08 AM > > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: James Lawson and perezhivanie > > > > > > > > Andy, thank you for the timely post, especially as we move forward in > > the > > > > shadow of authoritarianism here in the USA. Lawson's example of > > choosing > > > > non-violent protest, following Gandhi, is helpful. Consider the > > > > effectiveness of millions of people last weekend peacefully taking to > > the > > > > streets with few if any arrests (side note: we all went as a family > > here > > > in > > > > Philly, it was great). Contrast the Black Bloc member's sucker punch > of > > > > neo-nazi Richard Spencer: people are cheering it, but those same > people > > > > probably realize it's not a scalable strategy. Different tours de > > force, > > > > different effects, the gender connotations of which are interesting. > > > > > > > > *P **erezhivanie > > > > *is a new term to me, > > > which I > > > > link here to the XMCA blog for those other also unfamiliar with it. > It > > > > seems like a pretty clear gloss of a term I do know well, *Erlebnis, > > > > *"experience" > > > > (I dislike the gloss of that Dilthey-an term as "lived" > > experience...but > > > > that's for another discussion). > > > > > > > > It's fascinating to learn about Lawson's vocational decision-making > > > > process, and to consider the possible effects of violent and > > non-violent > > > > dissent. But perhaps you could clarify for us Andy why you thought > > > Lawson's > > > > story was an example of *perezhivanie*? Where's the point of > analytical > > > > traction? If it means more than "experience", how can we apply that > > > broader > > > > meaning here? It seems like he had a Pauline metanoia/conversion > > > > experience. Is that what you mean? > > > > > > > > Andrew > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------ > > > > Andrew Babson, Ph.D. > > > > Lecturer > > > > Graduate School of Education > > > > University of Pennsylvania > > > > > > > > On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 4:40 AM, Andy Blunden > > wrote: > > > > > > > > James Lawson is the Methodist preacher who trained the young members > of > > > the > > > > SNCC in non-violent action and wrote their constitution. I paste > below > > > and > > > > attach an excerpt from my book "The Origins of Collective Decision > > > Making" > > > > which narrates Lawson's life up until April 1960. Perezhivanie was > not > > > the > > > > topic under discussion so it is not mentioned in the text, but > xmca-ers > > > > should be able to see it, an example of perezhivanie: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > James Lawson was born in 1928, in Uniontown, Pennsylvania. His > father, > > > > James Snr., was the grandson of an escaped slave, and a Minister for > > the > > > > African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church in New England. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Via the Free African Society(FAS) the Methodists had recruited freed > > > slaves > > > > in Philadelphiain 1787, but as a result of a racist incident, some > left > > > to > > > > found the African Methodist Episcopal Church(AMEC). Nonetheless, many > > > > African Americans stayed with the United Methodist Church. The AMEC > > split > > > > started in Philadelphia and the AMEC Zion Church was a split that > came > > > out > > > > of New York. It was to AMEC Zion, James Lawson was born. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > However, Lawson returned to The United Methodist Church, created by a > > > 1939 > > > > merger of several branches of the Methodist Church, which set up five > > > > regional ?jurisdictions? of Methodists in the US, organized to > maintain > > > > regionally identity and a sixth, called the ?Central Jurisdiction? > > which > > > > combined the Black annual conferences, thus building segregation into > > the > > > > constitution of the Church.The Methodists went through a long and > > painful > > > > process, carried out in accordance with the Methodist Code of > > Discipline, > > > > which mandates the principle of Majority, to re-integrate the white > and > > > > Black, but it was not till after 1964 that Black conferences started > to > > > > merge into white conferences. At the local level, congregations > > continued > > > > much as before. So it was within the Black section of the segregated > > > United > > > > Methodist Church, that James Lawson became a Methodist. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > James Snr. was a militant preacher; he packed a 38 pistol and set up > > > > branches of the NAACP wherever he was assigned to preach. After > serving > > > at > > > > St. James AMEZ Church in Massillon, Ohio, he transferred to the > > Lexington > > > > Annual Conference of the Central Jurisdiction of the United Methodist > > > > Church. James Snr. was no pacifist and according to Lawson he > ?refused > > to > > > > take any guff from anyone, particularly on the point of race? and > > > ?insisted > > > > that he was going to be treated as a man.? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lawson?s mother, Philane May Cover, on the other hand, was decidedly > > > > nonviolent. Lawson?s challenge, which was to form his character, was > to > > > > reconcile his father?s militancy with his mother?s nonviolence. > Lawson > > > grew > > > > up in Massillon. One day, at the age of 10, Lawson was asked by his > > > mother > > > > to run an errand: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A little white child in an automobile yelled ?nigger? out the opened > > > > window. I walked over ... and, since I was in a hurry running my > > mother?s > > > > errand, I smacked the child and went on my way. When the Lawson kids > > got > > > > called ?nigger? on the streets or at school, we usually fought. I > don?t > > > > know where we got that from, except that we figured that it was > > something > > > > to fight over. (Lawson, cited in King, 1999) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On the return trip home, aware of possible repercussions, Lawson > tried > > to > > > > find the parents of the offending child, to talk to them, but the car > > was > > > > gone. Once home, he told his mother of the incident. Lawson?s mother > > > > replied, ?Jimmy, what good did that do?? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > She talked about who I was, the fact of God?s love, that we were a > > family > > > > of love and that such an incident could not hurt me, because of who I > > > was. > > > > I don?t remember anyone else being around, but a stillness took over > my > > > > being at that moment. It was, as I realized much later on, a mystical > > > > experience. In a very real way, my life stood still. I realized in > that > > > > stillness that I had changed forever. One of the phrases my mother > used > > > in > > > > her conversation with me was that ?there must be a better way?. I > > > > determined, from then on, that I would find the better way. (Lawson, > > > cited > > > > in King, 1999, pp. 187-188) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > He first became acquainted with Gandhi?s experiments in nonviolence > as > > a > > > > child, thanks to the African-American press which the family > discussed > > > > around the dinner table, and had read Gandhi?s autobiography as a > > > teenager. > > > > At Baldwin Wallace College, a liberal arts Methodistcollege in Berea, > > > Ohio, > > > > he studied Thoreau, Gandhi and Tolstoy, and the pacifist theologians > > > > Dietrich Bonhoeffer and Reinhold Niebuhr. At age 19, he became a > draft > > > > resister, refusing service in the Korean War. Executive director of > > > > Fellowship Of Reconciliation (FOR), A. J. Muste,frequently visited to > > > > lecture at the College: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > All of us in history classes were required to hear Muste. I was > > thrilled. > > > > He made me realize that I was not alone in my experimentation, that > > there > > > > was a world movement, and a national movement. ... He acquainted me > > with > > > > the Fellowship Of Reconciliation, which I joined on the spot in 1947. > > > That > > > > meant that I got exposed to their book list. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > After hearing a lecture by A. J. Muste, he joined FOR and CORE. Muste > > was > > > > instrumental thereafter in strengthening Lawson?s nonviolent > > orientation, > > > > directing him towards Gandhi and later facilitating his entry into > the > > > > sit-in and boycott movement beginning in the South. In the late 1940s > > and > > > > early 1950s Lawson had organized sit-ins and protests directed at > > > > establishments that discriminated against blacks in Massillon, long > > > before > > > > the Montgomery bus-boycott. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > He was also active with the National Conference of Methodist Youth. > > > > Although a member of a segregated Methodist Church, he found plenty > of > > > > support for his stands against racial discrimination and war from his > > > white > > > > colleagues and church fellows. While he was in prison serving > thirteen > > > > months of a two and a half year term for draft resistance in 1952, he > > was > > > > re-elected as Vice-President of the NCMY. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Wesleyan Methodism was central to Lawson?s outlook. Just as John > Wesley > > > had > > > > sought to cleanse individuals of iniquity, so could society be purged > > of > > > > the social sins of slavery, segregation, poverty, and war.Generations > > of > > > > African American Methodists from Harriet Tubman (AMEZ) and Henry M. > > > Turner > > > > (AME) in the nineteenth century, to Rosa Parks (AME) and James Farmer > > > > (MEC), were led to social justice activism by this Methodist > heritage. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lawson used his prison time to read and think. Writing from prison in > > > 1952 > > > > aged 23 years old and yet to enter the seminary, Lawson said he > aspired > > > to > > > > emulate ?the life of Jesus, St. Francis, George Fox, Gandhi, > Buddha... > > > and > > > > other great religious persons.? These figures attached little > > importance > > > to > > > > ?theology but (to their) experience with God.?Further, he noted > > > ?religious > > > > failures today are in (the arena of) experience and practice, not > > > > theology.? When Lawson entered prison, he was a Christian pacifist.He > > > told > > > > Mary King however, that his ?first commitment was to work on race,? > and > > > > conscientious objection came second.By the time of his release, he > had > > > > advanced to Gandhian nonviolence. He wondered ?why can?t a mass > > > non-violent > > > > revolution be staged throughout the South where the segregation > pattern > > > is > > > > much like the ?untouchables? of India? Such a movement would have to > > > start > > > > with one person who had the Christian vision to make such a > revolution > > a > > > > reality in his own life.? Gandhian nonviolence became the > synthesizing > > > > factor for Lawson?s religious thinking: the militancy of his father?s > > > > Methodism and the Christian pacifism that he drew from his mother. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Muste arranged for Lawson to visit India after his release from > prison > > > with > > > > a letter of introduction to activists in the Gandhian movement, and > he > > > > remained in India from May 1953 to 1956, working at Hislop College in > > > > Nagpur, reading Indian literature and working with Gandhi?s movement. > > > > Lawson?s practice would remain deeply religious; his nonviolence was > > > > saturated with the message of Christian love, and blended with > > principles > > > > synthesized from a broad range of religious and secular sources, both > > > > Eastern and Western. His aim was the ?mass education and training of > > > people > > > > in the use of nonviolent direct action techniques.? Lawson insisted > > that > > > > ?you are fighting a system, not an individual, not a race, or not the > > > > people of another country, but a system.? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > He continued his study of pacifism and Gandhian nonviolence at > Oberlin > > > > College, Ohio. While still in India, he had read about Martin Luther > > King > > > > and his successful leadership of the Montgomery bus boycott.King?s > > > lecture > > > > at Oberlin on February 6, 1957, fortified his long-held intention to > > work > > > > in the South for transformative social change. After King?s lecture > to > > a > > > > packed audience, he and Lawson talked together at dinner.Though > Lawson > > > was > > > > contemplating study for a Ph.D., King told him ?don?t wait, but come > > > south > > > > now!? adding that there was no one else like Lawson.Muste arranged > for > > > FOR > > > > to hire Lawson as southern field secretary to be stationed at > Nashville > > > in > > > > January 1958. Upon his arrival, he found that Glenn Smiley, national > > > field > > > > director of FOR, had arranged for Lawson to run a full schedule of > > > > workshops ? including one to take place early that year at the first > > > annual > > > > meeting of the SCLC in Columbia, South Carolina. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > At the SCLC meeting, King made an exuberant introduction of Lawson as > > > FOR?s > > > > new regional representative and discussed the organization?s role in > > > > Montgomery, telling delegates to be sure to attend Lawson?s workshop > on > > > > nonviolence. King took his seat in the first pew, waiting for the > > > > three-hour session to start: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Martin did that at every SCLC meeting as long as he lived. He would > ask > > > me > > > > to conduct an afternoon workshop, usually two or three hours, and he > > > would > > > > arrange for it to be ?at-large? so that everyone could attend, with > > > nothing > > > > else to compete. He put it on the schedule himself. A few minutes > > early, > > > he > > > > would show up and sit alone, as an example, in the front row. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Back in Nashville, Lawson continued with Monday evening workshops > > during > > > > the autumn of 1959 in which he trained the students who were to be > the > > > core > > > > of the Nashville sit-in movement. As a result of his involvement with > > the > > > > sit-ins Lawson was expelled from Vanderbilt, but he enrolled with > > Boston > > > > University to finish his degree in theology,while continuing to work > > with > > > > the students. Several professors in the School of Theology resigned > > over > > > > his expulsion. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The techniques that the students deployed were drawn from Lawson?s > > > > workshops. In 1958 and 1959, Lawson mobilized all that he knew about > > > > Christian pacifism, Gandhian nonviolence, and Methodist social > ministry > > > and > > > > blended them into an unprecedented curriculum that influenced the > civil > > > > rights movement in Nashville and beyond. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Blending Christianity and interreligious sources, he did not present > > its > > > > philosophy and practice as a secular doctrine, but as the essence of > > > > religion itself. Core to nonviolence was mirroring God?s love for > > > humankind > > > > and exhibiting it through concrete relationships of human solidarity > > and > > > > community. ?Nonviolence,? Lawson taught, is the aggressive, > forgiving, > > > > patient, long-suffering Christ-like and Christ-commanded love or > > > good-will > > > > for all humankind even in the face of tension, fear, hatred, or > demonic > > > > evil.? Moreover, ?it is the readiness to absorb suffering with > > > forgiveness > > > > and courage rather than to inflict suffering on others.? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lawson divided his instruction into four modules: how nonviolence > > reacts, > > > > training for nonviolence, the virtues of nonviolence, and the methods > > of > > > > nonviolence. Practitioners prepared themselves by jettisoning anger, > > > > hostility and fear thus ?minimizing the effect of an attack,? valuing > > > love, > > > > courage, fearlessness, and forgiveness, and pursuing redemptive > > suffering > > > > which ?releases unknown elements for good.? Preparation included > > > meditation > > > > and prayer, study of the scriptures, practicing nonviolence through > > > > challenges to segregation in bus transportation and in other public > > > > facilities.The practice steps included fact-finding, negotiation, > > > education > > > > of the community, and various methods of nonviolent direct action > > > including > > > > sit-ins, boycotts, strikes, and civil disobedience. Lawson provided > an > > > > extensive bibliography including relevant verses from the Bible, the > > > > Bhagavad Gita, and from the Chinese philosopher, Mo Ti and the Hebrew > > > > prophet, Isaiah. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The Nashville sit-ins and those led by students in other southern > > cities > > > > convinced Ella Baker of the SCLC to call a conference in April, 1960, > > at > > > > Shaw University in Raleigh, North Carolina. Out of this meeting > emerged > > > the > > > > Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee.Lawson delivered an opening > > > > keynote address that helped to frame SNCC?s nonviolent > > trajectory.Later, > > > > Lawson summarized discussions and consensus that emerged out of the > > > > conference, and his synopsis received the approval of everyone there. > > > > Lawson?s overall comments said that ?nonviolence as it grows from > > > > Judaic-Christian tradition seeks a social order of justice permeated > by > > > > love.? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It was Lawson who delivered the keynote address and framed SNCC?s > > > > nonviolent orientation. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The whole group, perhaps 120 participants, all in the room, asked me > to > > > > draft a statement. Eventually, three different drafts emerged. The > > > > Nashville group was cohesive. The extant draft was the third, > > influenced > > > by > > > > the Nashville group, after two earlier conversations. (Interview with > > > King, > > > > June 2014) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lawson?s synopsis was approved by the Conference. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In a private email message Mary King told me: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > He [James Lawson] was reading from the FOR booklist from a young age, > > > but I > > > > don?t think that he was influenced on notions of Consensus by > Quakers, > > > > because the connection was too abstract. Let me underscore that he > says > > > it > > > > was for him Methodist origins. (Private email, 15 April 2014) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In his interview with Mary King, Lawson confirmed that the origin of > > > > Consensus in SNCC was the Nashville Central Committee, confirming > what > > > Mary > > > > King had told me in April. As to the roots Consensus in Lawson?s own > > > > experience, he emphasized that: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It was the Methodist youth and student movements with which I had > grown > > > up, > > > > and this is how they made decisions. They knew the rules of > > parliamentary > > > > procedures, but they wanted to find a common mind. (Interview with > > King, > > > > June 2014) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The Methodist Church to this very day still mandates Majority > > decisions, > > > > but this would never have entailed children voting ? in general > > > youngsters > > > > in these organizations were simply told what to do. The Black > > > congregations > > > > had operated separately for more than a century, so there was some > room > > > for > > > > Lawson to develop a consensual model of collaboration in working with > > > young > > > > people. It is also possible the Black congregations, like other Black > > > > Churches in America, drew on other traditions of decision making. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > > > > > > > Andy Blunden > > > > > > > > > > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From Peg.Griffin@att.net Wed Jan 25 17:36:16 2017 From: Peg.Griffin@att.net (Peg Griffin) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2017 20:36:16 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Cambridge Atlantica site that Peg referred to In-Reply-To: <003601d2776d$2cc0a910$8641fb30$@att.net> References: <003601d2776d$2cc0a910$8641fb30$@att.net> Message-ID: <003a01d27774$a0aeaf00$e20c0d00$@att.net> And here's a Guardian story https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/nov/23/donald-trump-cambridge-analytica-steve-bannon for those interested in the post-election ties among the Mercers (father and daughter), Bannon, Conway, and Cambridge Analytica. -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Peg Griffin Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 7:43 PM To: 'eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity' Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Cambridge Atlantica site that Peg referred to Hee hee hee, Mike Cole, you rogue! This is the official Cambridge Analytica site https://cambridgeanalytica.org/ But Mike direct you to a meatier sit about it! Peg -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 1:41 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] The Cambridge Atlantica site that Peg referred to https://antidotezine.com/2017/01/22/trump-knows-you/ From schuckcschuck@gmail.com Wed Jan 25 22:02:46 2017 From: schuckcschuck@gmail.com (Christopher Schuck) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2017 01:02:46 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's "talking" versus "speaking" In-Reply-To: References: <628ebbd3-8b51-8e15-47d0-9164e8352c36@mira.net> <58866d1f.90966b0a.1b7d5.c1c8@mx.google.com> <289C4B7F-0A9A-4A10-BB1F-0619858FFBAA@umn.edu> <1485241782176.85472@iped.uio.no> <1485368397236.71956@iped.uio.no> <1485369691280.7805@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: Thank you very much for those elaborations and for sharing some of the considerations that went into what you chose to leave out of your analysis, David. Would it be OK to share your running transcript with my other listserv of psychologists (none of them to my knowledge psycholinguists), as an example of how one might approach Trump from a more cultural-historical or semiotic perspective? Their discussions so far tend to be couched in more psychological terms and have not been especially focused on language as such - I think they would find it interesting. Your mention of Dilthey reminds me of something I have always been a little confused about, which is the distinction between semiotic and hermeneutic analysis of the meanings generated by text, and how that difference might apply in the current situation. I take the limitation of "man's presence in his present" to capture perezhivanie, at least partly, as concerning the limitations of description and perhaps phenomenology to account for that active construal of meaning. But I also gather that reading such a text in the "hermeneutic" sense of alternate interpretations and understandings is not quite what we're after, either. I don't want to get too far afield from the current topic, so perhaps a discussion for another time. Chris On Wednesday, January 25, 2017, David Kellogg wrote: > When people (including people on this list) use the word text, they usually > don't literally mean ink and paper. For example, Obama said (and Trump > repeated it in his CIA speech a few days ago), the Constitution is a > precious thing but "in the end" it is just parchment if people don't > believe in who they are. A more technical way to express this idea is to > say that a text is a semantic rather than a lexicogrammatical or a > phono/graphological one. > > But Vygotsky argues that after about age one, children develop human, > cutural-historical consciousness, and this consciousness is "systemic" (it > involves the ability to choose, such as being able to choose to treat the > visual purview as ink and paper or as a set of signs) and it is "semantic" > (it involves seeing objects as meaningful; that is, as standing for > something more). So what this means is that human consciousness is not > simply a neurological or even a "cognitive" phenomenon, like animal > consciousness. It's a semantic one. It's not just that texts are made by > human minds. Sociogenetically, ontogenetically, and even > "microgenetically", human minds are made of text. > > Halliday says that experience is "the reality that we construe for > ourselves through language". That's why text really is pertinent to a > discussion of perizhivanie. We could use the Dilthey definition and treat > perizhivanie as "man's presence in his present". But how would we study it? > On the other hand, if we treat perizhivanie as a reality that we construe > for ourselves through language the path is much clearer. Perezhivanie is a > moment of text, and the structure of perizhivanie can be studied through > the structure of text. > > When I sat down to analyze Trump's speech, I had to ignore a lot of the > non-textual material it presented. Take, for example, Trump's > gesticulations. He has a tic of using his left hand to form a circle > (suggesting female genitalia, I suppose) and his right hand to to display > an erect index finger. This is distracting and probably about as important > as the fact that he sniffled through the presidential debates: these are > not central to the reality that Trump construes through language. On the > other hand (no pun intended), he uses those gesticulations to "beat" the > cadence of stresses, particularly in the last four syllables of each > paragraph, as Mussolini and Hitler were wont to do. Obama remarked that > Trump's way of communicating is "powerful stuff". That's not an > analysis--but it's probably not a compliment either. It is just the way > Obama construes the way Trump is able to construe Trump's reality through > language. > > David Kellogg > Macquarie University > > > On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 3:41 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > > wrote: > > > David's analyses also give more than just text, I believe. > > A > > ________________________________________ > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu < > xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil > > > Sent: 25 January 2017 19:19 > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's "talking" versus "speaking" > > > > Chris, > > I think you are very right, everything about this situation is not so > much > > about the formal text... but still, as others have been pointing out > > throughout the discussion, particularly in the parallel thread on the > role > > of the Learning Sciences, we need to do what we can, locally, globally, > and > > elsewhere. And so one way to do something we know how to do is analysing > > the speech not as text, but as *contexture*. We remarked bringing up > > Martin's points, and also using an example, that the point is to see > > societal possibilities of hearing a speech. And that includes bringing in > > so much more than just formal text. One example was Roth's analysis of a > > song by rap artist Eminem, http://www.qualitative- > > research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/1213 . > > A > > > > ________________________________________ > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu < > xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > on behalf of Christopher Schuck > > > Sent: 24 January 2017 16:22 > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's "talking" versus "speaking" > > > > Another irony that hasn't been mentioned is that this distictive > speaking/ > > talking style flagged by McWhorter made him unusually effective as a > > campaigner where the goal was to create chaos and premature action, yet > > would undermine his ability to be an effective (or safe) president and > > doesn't "fit." This is relevant insofar as it emphasizes the new > experience > > of hearing him speak this way *as president* as opposed to > > president-wannabe. In the inauguration speech, this person who is known > for > > talking not speaking attempts to speak formally, which creates yet > another > > split between taking that pseudo-formal language literally and taking it > > ironically. > > > > So it is not just the difference between reading him literally and > reading > > him ironically, but that what is formal and what is literal (as well as > > what is informal and what is indirect, and whether he is a "formal" > leader > > or informal television personality) become tangled up with each other as > he > > transitions from celebrity to this official role.That is one reason why I > > wonder whether looking at the formal text of this official speech > (however > > fascinating) is such a useful way to explore the perezhivanie of the > Trump > > experience, because it's so uniquely not about the written text. I > suspect > > even many of Trump's supporters were not particularly interested in the > > speech. > > > > On Tuesday, January 24, 2017, Alfredo Jornet Gil > > ');>> > wrote: > > > > > Richard, > > > what this linguist says and you comment on Trump's talk is pretty close > > to > > > what I was just writing to Francine in the main "trump's speech" thread > > > about hearing him literally and hearing him as irony. If you stick to > > > hearing in the same he seems to treat his recipients, then you may have > > to > > > believe that each word conveys an idea and that one word suffices to > give > > > the idea, like "it's true". It seems to be enough. As per your > question, > > > yes, it's a very scary question. It also is very scary that he may say, > > > "it's true" and so be it. > > > Alfredo > > > ________________________________________ > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu < > xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > on behalf of Richard Beach > > > > Sent: 23 January 2017 23:09 > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Trump's "talking" versus "speaking" > > > > > > In a New York Times op-ed > > 01/21/opinion/sunday/how-to-listen-to-donald-trump-every-day > > > -for-years.html>, the linguist, John McWhorter, distinguishes between > > > Trump?s informal, spontaneous ?talking? versus ?speaking? that involves > > > employing a more formal register associated with written language. He > > cites > > > the example of Trump?s talking: ?Look, having nuclear ? my uncle was a > > > great professor and scientist and engineer, Dr. John Trump at M.I.T.; > > good > > > genes, very good genes, O.K., very smart, the Wharton School of > Finance, > > > very good, very smart ? you know, if you?re a conservative Republican, > > if I > > > were a liberal, if, like, O.K. ?? > > > > > > > > > What?s problematic here is that Trump?s off-the-cuff ?talking,? as well > > as > > > his use of tweets, can convey messages with problematic uptakes from > > > others, resulting in taking action without careful thought or > > consultation > > > with others. As McWhorter notes: ?All understand that his speech is > > > structurally ungraceful. It may be harder to grasp that Mr. Trump, as > > > someone just talking rather than artfully communicating ideas, has no > > sense > > > of the tacit understanding that a politician?s utterances are more > > signals > > > than statements, vehicles meant to convey larger messages.? > > > > > > When one of his hotels is another country is attacked by ?terrorists,? > > > will Trump, as someone who perceives himself as the prime actor, > > > spontaneously declare war with little or no consideration of the > > > consequences of his actions? > > > > > > > > > > > > Richard Beach, Professor Emeritus of English Education, University of > > > Minnesota > > > rbeach@umn.edu > > > Websites: Digital writing , Media > > > literacy , Teaching > > literature > > > , Identity-focused ELA > Teaching > > < > > > http://identities.pbworks.com/>, Common Core State Standards < > > > http://englishccss.pbworks.com/>, Apps for literacy learning < > > > http://usingipads.pbworks.com/>, Teaching about climate change < > > > http://climatechangeela.pbworks.com/> > > > > > > > > > > On Jan 23, 2017, at 12:52 PM, lpscholar2@gmail.com > wrote: > > > > > > > > Andrew, Andy, > > > > I also want to pursue the example of James Lawson. > > > > What struck me was his relationship to both parents as formative. > > > > Moving to Trump?s inauguration, what struck me was the bodily gesture > > he > > > was expressing walking down the hallway just prior to speaking. > > > > This body language that i was reading before he spoke a word. > > > > I hope some of you watched the Frontline documentary on PBS EXPLORING > > > both Trump?s and Clinton?s early family life. > > > > > > > > Trump?s father was only interested in ?winners? and to come second > was > > > to be a ?loser?. The father sent Trump as a young man to a military > > academy > > > that would teach his son how to be a ?winner? a lesson that Trump > > inhabits > > > and is incarnating in his every gesture. > > > > > > > > His emotional, cognitive, and performative symmetry captured in his > > > facial expression as he walked forward to give his inaugural address. > > > > > > > > In other words, James Lawson, Donald Trump, and Martin Packer?s book > > > review i see as overlapping themes. > > > > When we explore ?expression? and ?intentionality? and ?language? i > want > > > to include the family upbringing as formative. > > > > > > > > Now as an aside, Simmel would say both James and Donald are > inhabiting > > > (fictions) that INform their experiences, but that may be a leap too > far. > > > Simmel was following the philosopher Vasinger (spelling?) who focused > on > > > how we live our lives (as is) or (as though) but to take this turn > would > > be > > > for another thread. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > > > > > From: Andrew Babson > > > > Sent: January 23, 2017 9:08 AM > > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: James Lawson and perezhivanie > > > > > > > > Andy, thank you for the timely post, especially as we move forward in > > the > > > > shadow of authoritarianism here in the USA. Lawson's example of > > choosing > > > > non-violent protest, following Gandhi, is helpful. Consider the > > > > effectiveness of millions of people last weekend peacefully taking to > > the > > > > streets with few if any arrests (side note: we all went as a family > > here > > > in > > > > Philly, it was great). Contrast the Black Bloc member's sucker punch > of > > > > neo-nazi Richard Spencer: people are cheering it, but those same > people > > > > probably realize it's not a scalable strategy. Different tours de > > force, > > > > different effects, the gender connotations of which are interesting. > > > > > > > > *P **erezhivanie > > > > *is a new term to me, > > > which I > > > > link here to the XMCA blog for those other also unfamiliar with it. > It > > > > seems like a pretty clear gloss of a term I do know well, *Erlebnis, > > > > *"experience" > > > > (I dislike the gloss of that Dilthey-an term as "lived" > > experience...but > > > > that's for another discussion). > > > > > > > > It's fascinating to learn about Lawson's vocational decision-making > > > > process, and to consider the possible effects of violent and > > non-violent > > > > dissent. But perhaps you could clarify for us Andy why you thought > > > Lawson's > > > > story was an example of *perezhivanie*? Where's the point of > analytical > > > > traction? If it means more than "experience", how can we apply that > > > broader > > > > meaning here? It seems like he had a Pauline metanoia/conversion > > > > experience. Is that what you mean? > > > > > > > > Andrew > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------ > > > > Andrew Babson, Ph.D. > > > > Lecturer > > > > Graduate School of Education > > > > University of Pennsylvania > > > > > > > > On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 4:40 AM, Andy Blunden > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > James Lawson is the Methodist preacher who trained the young members > of > > > the > > > > SNCC in non-violent action and wrote their constitution. I paste > below > > > and > > > > attach an excerpt from my book "The Origins of Collective Decision > > > Making" > > > > which narrates Lawson's life up until April 1960. Perezhivanie was > not > > > the > > > > topic under discussion so it is not mentioned in the text, but > xmca-ers > > > > should be able to see it, an example of perezhivanie: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > James Lawson was born in 1928, in Uniontown, Pennsylvania. His > father, > > > > James Snr., was the grandson of an escaped slave, and a Minister for > > the > > > > African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church in New England. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Via the Free African Society(FAS) the Methodists had recruited freed > > > slaves > > > > in Philadelphiain 1787, but as a result of a racist incident, some > left > > > to > > > > found the African Methodist Episcopal Church(AMEC). Nonetheless, many > > > > African Americans stayed with the United Methodist Church. The AMEC > > split > > > > started in Philadelphia and the AMEC Zion Church was a split that > came > > > out > > > > of New York. It was to AMEC Zion, James Lawson was born. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > However, Lawson returned to The United Methodist Church, created by a > > > 1939 > > > > merger of several branches of the Methodist Church, which set up five > > > > regional ?jurisdictions? of Methodists in the US, organized to > maintain > > > > regionally identity and a sixth, called the ?Central Jurisdiction? > > which > > > > combined the Black annual conferences, thus building segregation into > > the > > > > constitution of the Church.The Methodists went through a long and > > painful > > > > process, carried out in accordance with the Methodist Code of > > Discipline, > > > > which mandates the principle of Majority, to re-integrate the white > and > > > > Black, but it was not till after 1964 that Black conferences started > to > > > > merge into white conferences. At the local level, congregations > > continued > > > > much as before. So it was within the Black section of the segregated > > > United > > > > Methodist Church, that James Lawson became a Methodist. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > James Snr. was a militant preacher; he packed a 38 pistol and set up > > > > branches of the NAACP wherever he was assigned to preach. After > serving > > > at > > > > St. James AMEZ Church in Massillon, Ohio, he transferred to the > > Lexington > > > > Annual Conference of the Central Jurisdiction of the United Methodist > > > > Church. James Snr. was no pacifist and according to Lawson he > ?refused > > to > > > > take any guff from anyone, particularly on the point of race? and > > > ?insisted > > > > that he was going to be treated as a man.? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lawson?s mother, Philane May Cover, on the other hand, was decidedly > > > > nonviolent. Lawson?s challenge, which was to form his character, was > to > > > > reconcile his father?s militancy with his mother?s nonviolence. > Lawson > > > grew > > > > up in Massillon. One day, at the age of 10, Lawson was asked by his > > > mother > > > > to run an errand: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A little white child in an automobile yelled ?nigger? out the opened > > > > window. I walked over ... and, since I was in a hurry running my > > mother?s > > > > errand, I smacked the child and went on my way. When the Lawson kids > > got > > > > called ?nigger? on the streets or at school, we usually fought. I > don?t > > > > know where we got that from, except that we figured that it was > > something > > > > to fight over. (Lawson, cited in King, 1999) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On the return trip home, aware of possible repercussions, Lawson > tried > > to > > > > find the parents of the offending child, to talk to them, but the car > > was > > > > gone. Once home, he told his mother of the incident. Lawson?s mother > > > > replied, ?Jimmy, what good did that do?? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > She talked about who I was, the fact of God?s love, that we were a > > family > > > > of love and that such an incident could not hurt me, because of who I > > > was. > > > > I don?t remember anyone else being around, but a stillness took over > my > > > > being at that moment. It was, as I realized much later on, a mystical > > > > experience. In a very real way, my life stood still. I realized in > that > > > > stillness that I had changed forever. One of the phrases my mother > used > > > in > > > > her conversation with me was that ?there must be a better way?. I > > > > determined, from then on, that I would find the better way. (Lawson, > > > cited > > > > in King, 1999, pp. 187-188) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > He first became acquainted with Gandhi?s experiments in nonviolence > as > > a > > > > child, thanks to the African-American press which the family > discussed > > > > around the dinner table, and had read Gandhi?s autobiography as a > > > teenager. > > > > At Baldwin Wallace College, a liberal arts Methodistcollege in Berea, > > > Ohio, > > > > he studied Thoreau, Gandhi and Tolstoy, and the pacifist theologians > > > > Dietrich Bonhoeffer and Reinhold Niebuhr. At age 19, he became a > draft > > > > resister, refusing service in the Korean War. Executive director of > > > > Fellowship Of Reconciliation (FOR), A. J. Muste,frequently visited to > > > > lecture at the College: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > All of us in history classes were required to hear Muste. I was > > thrilled. > > > > He made me realize that I was not alone in my experimentation, that > > there > > > > was a world movement, and a national movement. ... He acquainted me > > with > > > > the Fellowship Of Reconciliation, which I joined on the spot in 1947. > > > That > > > > meant that I got exposed to their book list. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > After hearing a lecture by A. J. Muste, he joined FOR and CORE. Muste > > was > > > > instrumental thereafter in strengthening Lawson?s nonviolent > > orientation, > > > > directing him towards Gandhi and later facilitating his entry into > the > > > > sit-in and boycott movement beginning in the South. In the late 1940s > > and > > > > early 1950s Lawson had organized sit-ins and protests directed at > > > > establishments that discriminated against blacks in Massillon, long > > > before > > > > the Montgomery bus-boycott. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > He was also active with the National Conference of Methodist Youth. > > > > Although a member of a segregated Methodist Church, he found plenty > of > > > > support for his stands against racial discrimination and war from his > > > white > > > > colleagues and church fellows. While he was in prison serving > thirteen > > > > months of a two and a half year term for draft resistance in 1952, he > > was > > > > re-elected as Vice-President of the NCMY. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Wesleyan Methodism was central to Lawson?s outlook. Just as John > Wesley > > > had > > > > sought to cleanse individuals of iniquity, so could society be purged > > of > > > > the social sins of slavery, segregation, poverty, and war.Generations > > of > > > > African American Methodists from Harriet Tubman (AMEZ) and Henry M. > > > Turner > > > > (AME) in the nineteenth century, to Rosa Parks (AME) and James Farmer > > > > (MEC), were led to social justice activism by this Methodist > heritage. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lawson used his prison time to read and think. Writing from prison in > > > 1952 > > > > aged 23 years old and yet to enter the seminary, Lawson said he > aspired > > > to > > > > emulate ?the life of Jesus, St. Francis, George Fox, Gandhi, > Buddha... > > > and > > > > other great religious persons.? These figures attached little > > importance > > > to > > > > ?theology but (to their) experience with God.?Further, he noted > > > ?religious > > > > failures today are in (the arena of) experience and practice, not > > > > theology.? When Lawson entered prison, he was a Christian pacifist.He > > > told > > > > Mary King however, that his ?first commitment was to work on race,? > and > > > > conscientious objection came second.By the time of his release, he > had > > > > advanced to Gandhian nonviolence. He wondered ?why can?t a mass > > > non-violent > > > > revolution be staged throughout the South where the segregation > pattern > > > is > > > > much like the ?untouchables? of India? Such a movement would have to > > > start > > > > with one person who had the Christian vision to make such a > revolution > > a > > > > reality in his own life.? Gandhian nonviolence became the > synthesizing > > > > factor for Lawson?s religious thinking: the militancy of his father?s > > > > Methodism and the Christian pacifism that he drew from his mother. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Muste arranged for Lawson to visit India after his release from > prison > > > with > > > > a letter of introduction to activists in the Gandhian movement, and > he > > > > remained in India from May 1953 to 1956, working at Hislop College in > > > > Nagpur, reading Indian literature and working with Gandhi?s movement. > > > > Lawson?s practice would remain deeply religious; his nonviolence was > > > > saturated with the message of Christian love, and blended with > > principles > > > > synthesized from a broad range of religious and secular sources, both > > > > Eastern and Western. His aim was the ?mass education and training of > > > people > > > > in the use of nonviolent direct action techniques.? Lawson insisted > > that > > > > ?you are fighting a system, not an individual, not a race, or not the > > > > people of another country, but a system.? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > He continued his study of pacifism and Gandhian nonviolence at > Oberlin > > > > College, Ohio. While still in India, he had read about Martin Luther > > King > > > > and his successful leadership of the Montgomery bus boycott.King?s > > > lecture > > > > at Oberlin on February 6, 1957, fortified his long-held intention to > > work > > > > in the South for transformative social change. After King?s lecture > to > > a > > > > packed audience, he and Lawson talked together at dinner.Though > Lawson > > > was > > > > contemplating study for a Ph.D., King told him ?don?t wait, but come > > > south > > > > now!? adding that there was no one else like Lawson.Muste arranged > for > > > FOR > > > > to hire Lawson as southern field secretary to be stationed at > Nashville > > > in > > > > January 1958. Upon his arrival, he found that Glenn Smiley, national > > > field > > > > director of FOR, had arranged for Lawson to run a full schedule of > > > > workshops ? including one to take place early that year at the first > > > annual > > > > meeting of the SCLC in Columbia, South Carolina. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > At the SCLC meeting, King made an exuberant introduction of Lawson as > > > FOR?s > > > > new regional representative and discussed the organization?s role in > > > > Montgomery, telling delegates to be sure to attend Lawson?s workshop > on > > > > nonviolence. King took his seat in the first pew, waiting for the > > > > three-hour session to start: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Martin did that at every SCLC meeting as long as he lived. He would > ask > > > me > > > > to conduct an afternoon workshop, usually two or three hours, and he > > > would > > > > arrange for it to be ?at-large? so that everyone could attend, with > > > nothing > > > > else to compete. He put it on the schedule himself. A few minutes > > early, > > > he > > > > would show up and sit alone, as an example, in the front row. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Back in Nashville, Lawson continued with Monday evening workshops > > during > > > > the autumn of 1959 in which he trained the students who were to be > the > > > core > > > > of the Nashville sit-in movement. As a result of his involvement with > > the > > > > sit-ins Lawson was expelled from Vanderbilt, but he enrolled with > > Boston > > > > University to finish his degree in theology,while continuing to work > > with > > > > the students. Several professors in the School of Theology resigned > > over > > > > his expulsion. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The techniques that the students deployed were drawn from Lawson?s > > > > workshops. In 1958 and 1959, Lawson mobilized all that he knew about > > > > Christian pacifism, Gandhian nonviolence, and Methodist social > ministry > > > and > > > > blended them into an unprecedented curriculum that influenced the > civil > > > > rights movement in Nashville and beyond. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Blending Christianity and interreligious sources, he did not present > > its > > > > philosophy and practice as a secular doctrine, but as the essence of > > > > religion itself. Core to nonviolence was mirroring God?s love for > > > humankind > > > > and exhibiting it through concrete relationships of human solidarity > > and > > > > community. ?Nonviolence,? Lawson taught, is the aggressive, > forgiving, > > > > patient, long-suffering Christ-like and Christ-commanded love or > > > good-will > > > > for all humankind even in the face of tension, fear, hatred, or > demonic > > > > evil.? Moreover, ?it is the readiness to absorb suffering with > > > forgiveness > > > > and courage rather than to inflict suffering on others.? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lawson divided his instruction into four modules: how nonviolence > > reacts, > > > > training for nonviolence, the virtues of nonviolence, and the methods > > of > > > > nonviolence. Practitioners prepared themselves by jettisoning anger, > > > > hostility and fear thus ?minimizing the effect of an attack,? valuing > > > love, > > > > courage, fearlessness, and forgiveness, and pursuing redemptive > > suffering > > > > which ?releases unknown elements for good.? Preparation included > > > meditation > > > > and prayer, study of the scriptures, practicing nonviolence through > > > > challenges to segregation in bus transportation and in other public > > > > facilities.The practice steps included fact-finding, negotiation, > > > education > > > > of the community, and various methods of nonviolent direct action > > > including > > > > sit-ins, boycotts, strikes, and civil disobedience. Lawson provided > an > > > > extensive bibliography including relevant verses from the Bible, the > > > > Bhagavad Gita, and from the Chinese philosopher, Mo Ti and the Hebrew > > > > prophet, Isaiah. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The Nashville sit-ins and those led by students in other southern > > cities > > > > convinced Ella Baker of the SCLC to call a conference in April, 1960, > > at > > > > Shaw University in Raleigh, North Carolina. Out of this meeting > emerged > > > the > > > > Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee.Lawson delivered an opening > > > > keynote address that helped to frame SNCC?s nonviolent > > trajectory.Later, > > > > Lawson summarized discussions and consensus that emerged out of the > > > > conference, and his synopsis received the approval of everyone there. > > > > Lawson?s overall comments said that ?nonviolence as it grows from > > > > Judaic-Christian tradition seeks a social order of justice permeated > by > > > > love.? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It was Lawson who delivered the keynote address and framed SNCC?s > > > > nonviolent orientation. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The whole group, perhaps 120 participants, all in the room, asked me > to > > > > draft a statement. Eventually, three different drafts emerged. The > > > > Nashville group was cohesive. The extant draft was the third, > > influenced > > > by > > > > the Nashville group, after two earlier conversations. (Interview with > > > King, > > > > June 2014) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lawson?s synopsis was approved by the Conference. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In a private email message Mary King told me: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > He [James Lawson] was reading from the FOR booklist from a young age, > > > but I > > > > don?t think that he was influenced on notions of Consensus by > Quakers, > > > > because the connection was too abstract. Let me underscore that he > says > > > it > > > > was for him Methodist origins. (Private email, 15 April 2014) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In his interview with Mary King, Lawson confirmed that the origin of > > > > Consensus in SNCC was the Nashville Central Committee, confirming > what > > > Mary > > > > King had told me in April. As to the roots Consensus in Lawson?s own > > > > experience, he emphasized that: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It was the Methodist youth and student movements with which I had > grown > > > up, > > > > and this is how they made decisions. They knew the rules of > > parliamentary > > > > procedures, but they wanted to find a common mind. (Interview with > > King, > > > > June 2014) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The Methodist Church to this very day still mandates Majority > > decisions, > > > > but this would never have entailed children voting ? in general > > > youngsters > > > > in these organizations were simply told what to do. The Black > > > congregations > > > > had operated separately for more than a century, so there was some > room > > > for > > > > Lawson to develop a consensual model of collaboration in working with > > > young > > > > people. It is also possible the Black congregations, like other Black > > > > Churches in America, drew on other traditions of decision making. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > > > > > > > Andy Blunden > > > > > > > > > > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > > > > > > > > > > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective- > decision-making > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From lpscholar2@gmail.com Thu Jan 26 06:43:31 2017 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2017 06:43:31 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's "talking" versus "speaking" In-Reply-To: References: <628ebbd3-8b51-8e15-47d0-9164e8352c36@mira.net> <58866d1f.90966b0a.1b7d5.c1c8@mx.google.com> <289C4B7F-0A9A-4A10-BB1F-0619858FFBAA@umn.edu> <1485241782176.85472@iped.uio.no> <1485368397236.71956@iped.uio.no> <1485369691280.7805@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <588a0b44.197f630a.e4515.a9c2@mx.google.com> Chris, Not to get too far afield (an alternative distance from). However, your question, if on the backburner, i hope comes forward in the future. Peirce explored semiotics but a type of hermeneutical thought has been generated by Royce so there is overlap? Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Christopher Schuck Sent: January 25, 2017 10:05 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's "talking" versus "speaking" Thank you very much for those elaborations and for sharing some of the considerations that went into what you chose to leave out of your analysis, David. Would it be OK to share your running transcript with my other listserv of psychologists (none of them to my knowledge psycholinguists), as an example of how one might approach Trump from a more cultural-historical or semiotic perspective? Their discussions so far tend to be couched in more psychological terms and have not been especially focused on language as such - I think they would find it interesting. Your mention of Dilthey reminds me of something I have always been a little confused about, which is the distinction between semiotic and hermeneutic analysis of the meanings generated by text, and how that difference might apply in the current situation. I take the limitation of "man's presence in his present" to capture perezhivanie, at least partly, as concerning the limitations of description and perhaps phenomenology to account for that active construal of meaning. But I also gather that reading such a text in the "hermeneutic" sense of alternate interpretations and understandings is not quite what we're after, either. I don't want to get too far afield from the current topic, so perhaps a discussion for another time. Chris On Wednesday, January 25, 2017, David Kellogg wrote: > When people (including people on this list) use the word text, they usually > don't literally mean ink and paper. For example, Obama said (and Trump > repeated it in his CIA speech a few days ago), the Constitution is a > precious thing but "in the end" it is just parchment if people don't > believe in who they are. A more technical way to express this idea is to > say that a text is a semantic rather than a lexicogrammatical or a > phono/graphological one. > > But Vygotsky argues that after about age one, children develop human, > cutural-historical consciousness, and this consciousness is "systemic" (it > involves the ability to choose, such as being able to choose to treat the > visual purview as ink and paper or as a set of signs) and it is "semantic" > (it involves seeing objects as meaningful; that is, as standing for > something more). So what this means is that human consciousness is not > simply a neurological or even a "cognitive" phenomenon, like animal > consciousness. It's a semantic one. It's not just that texts are made by > human minds. Sociogenetically, ontogenetically, and even > "microgenetically", human minds are made of text. > > Halliday says that experience is "the reality that we construe for > ourselves through language". That's why text really is pertinent to a > discussion of perizhivanie. We could use the Dilthey definition and treat > perizhivanie as "man's presence in his present". But how would we study it? > On the other hand, if we treat perizhivanie as a reality that we construe > for ourselves through language the path is much clearer. Perezhivanie is a > moment of text, and the structure of perizhivanie can be studied through > the structure of text. > > When I sat down to analyze Trump's speech, I had to ignore a lot of the > non-textual material it presented. Take, for example, Trump's > gesticulations. He has a tic of using his left hand to form a circle > (suggesting female genitalia, I suppose) and his right hand to to display > an erect index finger. This is distracting and probably about as important > as the fact that he sniffled through the presidential debates: these are > not central to the reality that Trump construes through language. On the > other hand (no pun intended), he uses those gesticulations to "beat" the > cadence of stresses, particularly in the last four syllables of each > paragraph, as Mussolini and Hitler were wont to do. Obama remarked that > Trump's way of communicating is "powerful stuff". That's not an > analysis--but it's probably not a compliment either. It is just the way > Obama construes the way Trump is able to construe Trump's reality through > language. > > David Kellogg > Macquarie University > > > On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 3:41 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > > wrote: > > > David's analyses also give more than just text, I believe. > > A > > ________________________________________ > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu < > xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil > > > Sent: 25 January 2017 19:19 > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's "talking" versus "speaking" > > > > Chris, > > I think you are very right, everything about this situation is not so > much > > about the formal text... but still, as others have been pointing out > > throughout the discussion, particularly in the parallel thread on the > role > > of the Learning Sciences, we need to do what we can, locally, globally, > and > > elsewhere. And so one way to do something we know how to do is analysing > > the speech not as text, but as *contexture*. We remarked bringing up > > Martin's points, and also using an example, that the point is to see > > societal possibilities of hearing a speech. And that includes bringing in > > so much more than just formal text. One example was Roth's analysis of a > > song by rap artist Eminem, http://www.qualitative- > > research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/1213 . > > A > > > > ________________________________________ > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu < > xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > on behalf of Christopher Schuck > > > Sent: 24 January 2017 16:22 > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's "talking" versus "speaking" > > > > Another irony that hasn't been mentioned is that this distictive > speaking/ > > talking style flagged by McWhorter made him unusually effective as a > > campaigner where the goal was to create chaos and premature action, yet > > would undermine his ability to be an effective (or safe) president and > > doesn't "fit." This is relevant insofar as it emphasizes the new > experience > > of hearing him speak this way *as president* as opposed to > > president-wannabe. In the inauguration speech, this person who is known > for > > talking not speaking attempts to speak formally, which creates yet > another > > split between taking that pseudo-formal language literally and taking it > > ironically. > > > > So it is not just the difference between reading him literally and > reading > > him ironically, but that what is formal and what is literal (as well as > > what is informal and what is indirect, and whether he is a "formal" > leader > > or informal television personality) become tangled up with each other as > he > > transitions from celebrity to this official role.That is one reason why I > > wonder whether looking at the formal text of this official speech > (however > > fascinating) is such a useful way to explore the perezhivanie of the > Trump > > experience, because it's so uniquely not about the written text. I > suspect > > even many of Trump's supporters were not particularly interested in the > > speech. > > > > On Tuesday, January 24, 2017, Alfredo Jornet Gil > > ');>> > wrote: > > > > > Richard, > > > what this linguist says and you comment on Trump's talk is pretty close > > to > > > what I was just writing to Francine in the main "trump's speech" thread > > > about hearing him literally and hearing him as irony. If you stick to > > > hearing in the same he seems to treat his recipients, then you may have > > to > > > believe that each word conveys an idea and that one word suffices to > give > > > the idea, like "it's true". It seems to be enough. As per your > question, > > > yes, it's a very scary question. It also is very scary that he may say, > > > "it's true" and so be it. > > > Alfredo > > > ________________________________________ > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu < > xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > on behalf of Richard Beach > > > > Sent: 23 January 2017 23:09 > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Trump's "talking" versus "speaking" > > > > > > In a New York Times op-ed > > 01/21/opinion/sunday/how-to-listen-to-donald-trump-every-day > > > -for-years.html>, the linguist, John McWhorter, distinguishes between > > > Trump?s informal, spontaneous ?talking? versus ?speaking? that involves > > > employing a more formal register associated with written language. He > > cites > > > the example of Trump?s talking: ?Look, having nuclear ? my uncle was a > > > great professor and scientist and engineer, Dr. John Trump at M.I.T.; > > good > > > genes, very good genes, O.K., very smart, the Wharton School of > Finance, > > > very good, very smart ? you know, if you?re a conservative Republican, > > if I > > > were a liberal, if, like, O.K. ?? > > > > > > > > > What?s problematic here is that Trump?s off-the-cuff ?talking,? as well > > as > > > his use of tweets, can convey messages with problematic uptakes from > > > others, resulting in taking action without careful thought or > > consultation > > > with others. As McWhorter notes: ?All understand that his speech is > > > structurally ungraceful. It may be harder to grasp that Mr. Trump, as > > > someone just talking rather than artfully communicating ideas, has no > > sense > > > of the tacit understanding that a politician?s utterances are more > > signals > > > than statements, vehicles meant to convey larger messages.? > > > > > > When one of his hotels is another country is attacked by ?terrorists,? > > > will Trump, as someone who perceives himself as the prime actor, > > > spontaneously declare war with little or no consideration of the > > > consequences of his actions? > > > > > > > > > > > > Richard Beach, Professor Emeritus of English Education, University of > > > Minnesota > > > rbeach@umn.edu > > > Websites: Digital writing , Media > > > literacy , Teaching > > literature > > > , Identity-focused ELA > Teaching > > < > > > http://identities.pbworks.com/>, Common Core State Standards < > > > http://englishccss.pbworks.com/>, Apps for literacy learning < > > > http://usingipads.pbworks.com/>, Teaching about climate change < > > > http://climatechangeela.pbworks.com/> > > > > > > > > > > On Jan 23, 2017, at 12:52 PM, lpscholar2@gmail.com > wrote: > > > > > > > > Andrew, Andy, > > > > I also want to pursue the example of James Lawson. > > > > What struck me was his relationship to both parents as formative. > > > > Moving to Trump?s inauguration, what struck me was the bodily gesture > > he > > > was expressing walking down the hallway just prior to speaking. > > > > This body language that i was reading before he spoke a word. > > > > I hope some of you watched the Frontline documentary on PBS EXPLORING > > > both Trump?s and Clinton?s early family life. > > > > > > > > Trump?s father was only interested in ?winners? and to come second > was > > > to be a ?loser?. The father sent Trump as a young man to a military > > academy > > > that would teach his son how to be a ?winner? a lesson that Trump > > inhabits > > > and is incarnating in his every gesture. > > > > > > > > His emotional, cognitive, and performative symmetry captured in his > > > facial expression as he walked forward to give his inaugural address. > > > > > > > > In other words, James Lawson, Donald Trump, and Martin Packer?s book > > > review i see as overlapping themes. > > > > When we explore ?expression? and ?intentionality? and ?language? i > want > > > to include the family upbringing as formative. > > > > > > > > Now as an aside, Simmel would say both James and Donald are > inhabiting > > > (fictions) that INform their experiences, but that may be a leap too > far. > > > Simmel was following the philosopher Vasinger (spelling?) who focused > on > > > how we live our lives (as is) or (as though) but to take this turn > would > > be > > > for another thread. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > > > > > From: Andrew Babson > > > > Sent: January 23, 2017 9:08 AM > > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: James Lawson and perezhivanie > > > > > > > > Andy, thank you for the timely post, especially as we move forward in > > the > > > > shadow of authoritarianism here in the USA. Lawson's example of > > choosing > > > > non-violent protest, following Gandhi, is helpful. Consider the > > > > effectiveness of millions of people last weekend peacefully taking to > > the > > > > streets with few if any arrests (side note: we all went as a family > > here > > > in > > > > Philly, it was great). Contrast the Black Bloc member's sucker punch > of > > > > neo-nazi Richard Spencer: people are cheering it, but those same > people > > > > probably realize it's not a scalable strategy. Different tours de > > force, > > > > different effects, the gender connotations of which are interesting. > > > > > > > > *P **erezhivanie > > > > *is a new term to me, > > > which I > > > > link here to the XMCA blog for those other also unfamiliar with it. > It > > > > seems like a pretty clear gloss of a term I do know well, *Erlebnis, > > > > *"experience" > > > > (I dislike the gloss of that Dilthey-an term as "lived" > > experience...but > > > > that's for another discussion). > > > > > > > > It's fascinating to learn about Lawson's vocational decision-making > > > > process, and to consider the possible effects of violent and > > non-violent > > > > dissent. But perhaps you could clarify for us Andy why you thought > > > Lawson's > > > > story was an example of *perezhivanie*? Where's the point of > analytical > > > > traction? If it means more than "experience", how can we apply that > > > broader > > > > meaning here? It seems like he had a Pauline metanoia/conversion > > > > experience. Is that what you mean? > > > > > > > > Andrew > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------ > > > > Andrew Babson, Ph.D. > > > > Lecturer > > > > Graduate School of Education > > > > University of Pennsylvania > > > > > > > > On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 4:40 AM, Andy Blunden > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > James Lawson is the Methodist preacher who trained the young members > of > > > the > > > > SNCC in non-violent action and wrote their constitution. I paste > below > > > and > > > > attach an excerpt from my book "The Origins of Collective Decision > > > Making" > > > > which narrates Lawson's life up until April 1960. Perezhivanie was > not > > > the > > > > topic under discussion so it is not mentioned in the text, but > xmca-ers > > > > should be able to see it, an example of perezhivanie: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > James Lawson was born in 1928, in Uniontown, Pennsylvania. His > father, > > > > James Snr., was the grandson of an escaped slave, and a Minister for > > the > > > > African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church in New England. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Via the Free African Society(FAS) the Methodists had recruited freed > > > slaves > > > > in Philadelphiain 1787, but as a result of a racist incident, some > left > > > to > > > > found the African Methodist Episcopal Church(AMEC). Nonetheless, many > > > > African Americans stayed with the United Methodist Church. The AMEC > > split > > > > started in Philadelphia and the AMEC Zion Church was a split that > came > > > out > > > > of New York. It was to AMEC Zion, James Lawson was born. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > However, Lawson returned to The United Methodist Church, created by a > > > 1939 > > > > merger of several branches of the Methodist Church, which set up five > > > > regional ?jurisdictions? of Methodists in the US, organized to > maintain > > > > regionally identity and a sixth, called the ?Central Jurisdiction? > > which > > > > combined the Black annual conferences, thus building segregation into > > the > > > > constitution of the Church.The Methodists went through a long and > > painful > > > > process, carried out in accordance with the Methodist Code of > > Discipline, > > > > which mandates the principle of Majority, to re-integrate the white > and > > > > Black, but it was not till after 1964 that Black conferences started > to > > > > merge into white conferences. At the local level, congregations > > continued > > > > much as before. So it was within the Black section of the segregated > > > United > > > > Methodist Church, that James Lawson became a Methodist. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > James Snr. was a militant preacher; he packed a 38 pistol and set up > > > > branches of the NAACP wherever he was assigned to preach. After > serving > > > at > > > > St. James AMEZ Church in Massillon, Ohio, he transferred to the > > Lexington > > > > Annual Conference of the Central Jurisdiction of the United Methodist > > > > Church. James Snr. was no pacifist and according to Lawson he > ?refused > > to > > > > take any guff from anyone, particularly on the point of race? and > > > ?insisted > > > > that he was going to be treated as a man.? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lawson?s mother, Philane May Cover, on the other hand, was decidedly > > > > nonviolent. Lawson?s challenge, which was to form his character, was > to > > > > reconcile his father?s militancy with his mother?s nonviolence. > Lawson > > > grew > > > > up in Massillon. One day, at the age of 10, Lawson was asked by his > > > mother > > > > to run an errand: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A little white child in an automobile yelled ?nigger? out the opened > > > > window. I walked over ... and, since I was in a hurry running my > > mother?s > > > > errand, I smacked the child and went on my way. When the Lawson kids > > got > > > > called ?nigger? on the streets or at school, we usually fought. I > don?t > > > > know where we got that from, except that we figured that it was > > something > > > > to fight over. (Lawson, cited in King, 1999) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On the return trip home, aware of possible repercussions, Lawson > tried > > to > > > > find the parents of the offending child, to talk to them, but the car > > was > > > > gone. Once home, he told his mother of the incident. Lawson?s mother > > > > replied, ?Jimmy, what good did that do?? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > She talked about who I was, the fact of God?s love, that we were a > > family > > > > of love and that such an incident could not hurt me, because of who I > > > was. > > > > I don?t remember anyone else being around, but a stillness took over > my > > > > being at that moment. It was, as I realized much later on, a mystical > > > > experience. In a very real way, my life stood still. I realized in > that > > > > stillness that I had changed forever. One of the phrases my mother > used > > > in > > > > her conversation with me was that ?there must be a better way?. I > > > > determined, from then on, that I would find the better way. (Lawson, > > > cited > > > > in King, 1999, pp. 187-188) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > He first became acquainted with Gandhi?s experiments in nonviolence > as > > a > > > > child, thanks to the African-American press which the family > discussed > > > > around the dinner table, and had read Gandhi?s autobiography as a > > > teenager. > > > > At Baldwin Wallace College, a liberal arts Methodistcollege in Berea, > > > Ohio, > > > > he studied Thoreau, Gandhi and Tolstoy, and the pacifist theologians > > > > Dietrich Bonhoeffer and Reinhold Niebuhr. At age 19, he became a > draft > > > > resister, refusing service in the Korean War. Executive director of > > > > Fellowship Of Reconciliation (FOR), A. J. Muste,frequently visited to > > > > lecture at the College: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > All of us in history classes were required to hear Muste. I was > > thrilled. > > > > He made me realize that I was not alone in my experimentation, that > > there > > > > was a world movement, and a national movement. ... He acquainted me > > with > > > > the Fellowship Of Reconciliation, which I joined on the spot in 1947. > > > That > > > > meant that I got exposed to their book list. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > After hearing a lecture by A. J. Muste, he joined FOR and CORE. Muste > > was > > > > instrumental thereafter in strengthening Lawson?s nonviolent > > orientation, > > > > directing him towards Gandhi and later facilitating his entry into > the > > > > sit-in and boycott movement beginning in the South. In the late 1940s > > and > > > > early 1950s Lawson had organized sit-ins and protests directed at > > > > establishments that discriminated against blacks in Massillon, long > > > before > > > > the Montgomery bus-boycott. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > He was also active with the National Conference of Methodist Youth. > > > > Although a member of a segregated Methodist Church, he found plenty > of > > > > support for his stands against racial discrimination and war from his > > > white > > > > colleagues and church fellows. While he was in prison serving > thirteen > > > > months of a two and a half year term for draft resistance in 1952, he > > was > > > > re-elected as Vice-President of the NCMY. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Wesleyan Methodism was central to Lawson?s outlook. Just as John > Wesley > > > had > > > > sought to cleanse individuals of iniquity, so could society be purged > > of > > > > the social sins of slavery, segregation, poverty, and war.Generations > > of > > > > African American Methodists from Harriet Tubman (AMEZ) and Henry M. > > > Turner > > > > (AME) in the nineteenth century, to Rosa Parks (AME) and James Farmer > > > > (MEC), were led to social justice activism by this Methodist > heritage. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lawson used his prison time to read and think. Writing from prison in > > > 1952 > > > > aged 23 years old and yet to enter the seminary, Lawson said he > aspired > > > to > > > > emulate ?the life of Jesus, St. Francis, George Fox, Gandhi, > Buddha... > > > and > > > > other great religious persons.? These figures attached little > > importance > > > to > > > > ?theology but (to their) experience with God.?Further, he noted > > > ?religious > > > > failures today are in (the arena of) experience and practice, not > > > > theology.? When Lawson entered prison, he was a Christian pacifist.He > > > told > > > > Mary King however, that his ?first commitment was to work on race,? > and > > > > conscientious objection came second.By the time of his release, he > had > > > > advanced to Gandhian nonviolence. He wondered ?why can?t a mass > > > non-violent > > > > revolution be staged throughout the South where the segregation > pattern > > > is > > > > much like the ?untouchables? of India? Such a movement would have to > > > start > > > > with one person who had the Christian vision to make such a > revolution > > a > > > > reality in his own life.? Gandhian nonviolence became the > synthesizing > > > > factor for Lawson?s religious thinking: the militancy of his father?s > > > > Methodism and the Christian pacifism that he drew from his mother. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Muste arranged for Lawson to visit India after his release from > prison > > > with > > > > a letter of introduction to activists in the Gandhian movement, and > he > > > > remained in India from May 1953 to 1956, working at Hislop College in > > > > Nagpur, reading Indian literature and working with Gandhi?s movement. > > > > Lawson?s practice would remain deeply religious; his nonviolence was > > > > saturated with the message of Christian love, and blended with > > principles > > > > synthesized from a broad range of religious and secular sources, both > > > > Eastern and Western. His aim was the ?mass education and training of > > > people > > > > in the use of nonviolent direct action techniques.? Lawson insisted > > that > > > > ?you are fighting a system, not an individual, not a race, or not the > > > > people of another country, but a system.? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > He continued his study of pacifism and Gandhian nonviolence at > Oberlin > > > > College, Ohio. While still in India, he had read about Martin Luther > > King > > > > and his successful leadership of the Montgomery bus boycott.King?s > > > lecture > > > > at Oberlin on February 6, 1957, fortified his long-held intention to > > work > > > > in the South for transformative social change. After King?s lecture > to > > a > > > > packed audience, he and Lawson talked together at dinner.Though > Lawson > > > was > > > > contemplating study for a Ph.D., King told him ?don?t wait, but come > > > south > > > > now!? adding that there was no one else like Lawson.Muste arranged > for > > > FOR > > > > to hire Lawson as southern field secretary to be stationed at > Nashville > > > in > > > > January 1958. Upon his arrival, he found that Glenn Smiley, national > > > field > > > > director of FOR, had arranged for Lawson to run a full schedule of > > > > workshops ? including one to take place early that year at the first > > > annual > > > > meeting of the SCLC in Columbia, South Carolina. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > At the SCLC meeting, King made an exuberant introduction of Lawson as > > > FOR?s > > > > new regional representative and discussed the organization?s role in > > > > Montgomery, telling delegates to be sure to attend Lawson?s workshop > on > > > > nonviolence. King took his seat in the first pew, waiting for the > > > > three-hour session to start: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Martin did that at every SCLC meeting as long as he lived. He would > ask > > > me > > > > to conduct an afternoon workshop, usually two or three hours, and he > > > would > > > > arrange for it to be ?at-large? so that everyone could attend, with > > > nothing > > > > else to compete. He put it on the schedule himself. A few minutes > > early, > > > he > > > > would show up and sit alone, as an example, in the front row. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Back in Nashville, Lawson continued with Monday evening workshops > > during > > > > the autumn of 1959 in which he trained the students who were to be > the > > > core > > > > of the Nashville sit-in movement. As a result of his involvement with > > the > > > > sit-ins Lawson was expelled from Vanderbilt, but he enrolled with > > Boston > > > > University to finish his degree in theology,while continuing to work > > with > > > > the students. Several professors in the School of Theology resigned > > over > > > > his expulsion. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The techniques that the students deployed were drawn from Lawson?s > > > > workshops. In 1958 and 1959, Lawson mobilized all that he knew about > > > > Christian pacifism, Gandhian nonviolence, and Methodist social > ministry > > > and > > > > blended them into an unprecedented curriculum that influenced the > civil > > > > rights movement in Nashville and beyond. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Blending Christianity and interreligious sources, he did not present > > its > > > > philosophy and practice as a secular doctrine, but as the essence of > > > > religion itself. Core to nonviolence was mirroring God?s love for > > > humankind > > > > and exhibiting it through concrete relationships of human solidarity > > and > > > > community. ?Nonviolence,? Lawson taught, is the aggressive, > forgiving, > > > > patient, long-suffering Christ-like and Christ-commanded love or > > > good-will > > > > for all humankind even in the face of tension, fear, hatred, or > demonic > > > > evil.? Moreover, ?it is the readiness to absorb suffering with > > > forgiveness > > > > and courage rather than to inflict suffering on others.? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lawson divided his instruction into four modules: how nonviolence > > reacts, > > > > training for nonviolence, the virtues of nonviolence, and the methods > > of > > > > nonviolence. Practitioners prepared themselves by jettisoning anger, > > > > hostility and fear thus ?minimizing the effect of an attack,? valuing > > > love, > > > > courage, fearlessness, and forgiveness, and pursuing redemptive > > suffering > > > > which ?releases unknown elements for good.? Preparation included > > > meditation > > > > and prayer, study of the scriptures, practicing nonviolence through > > > > challenges to segregation in bus transportation and in other public > > > > facilities.The practice steps included fact-finding, negotiation, > > > education > > > > of the community, and various methods of nonviolent direct action > > > including > > > > sit-ins, boycotts, strikes, and civil disobedience. Lawson provided > an > > > > extensive bibliography including relevant verses from the Bible, the > > > > Bhagavad Gita, and from the Chinese philosopher, Mo Ti and the Hebrew > > > > prophet, Isaiah. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The Nashville sit-ins and those led by students in other southern > > cities > > > > convinced Ella Baker of the SCLC to call a conference in April, 1960, > > at > > > > Shaw University in Raleigh, North Carolina. Out of this meeting > emerged > > > the > > > > Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee.Lawson delivered an opening > > > > keynote address that helped to frame SNCC?s nonviolent > > trajectory.Later, > > > > Lawson summarized discussions and consensus that emerged out of the > > > > conference, and his synopsis received the approval of everyone there. > > > > Lawson?s overall comments said that ?nonviolence as it grows from > > > > Judaic-Christian tradition seeks a social order of justice permeated > by > > > > love.? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It was Lawson who delivered the keynote address and framed SNCC?s > > > > nonviolent orientation. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The whole group, perhaps 120 participants, all in the room, asked me > to > > > > draft a statement. Eventually, three different drafts emerged. The > > > > Nashville group was cohesive. The extant draft was the third, > > influenced > > > by > > > > the Nashville group, after two earlier conversations. (Interview with > > > King, > > > > June 2014) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lawson?s synopsis was approved by the Conference. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In a private email message Mary King told me: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > He [James Lawson] was reading from the FOR booklist from a young age, > > > but I > > > > don?t think that he was influenced on notions of Consensus by > Quakers, > > > > because the connection was too abstract. Let me underscore that he > says > > > it > > > > was for him Methodist origins. (Private email, 15 April 2014) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In his interview with Mary King, Lawson confirmed that the origin of > > > > Consensus in SNCC was the Nashville Central Committee, confirming > what > > > Mary > > > > King had told me in April. As to the roots Consensus in Lawson?s own > > > > experience, he emphasized that: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It was the Methodist youth and student movements with which I had > grown > > > up, > > > > and this is how they made decisions. They knew the rules of > > parliamentary > > > > procedures, but they wanted to find a common mind. (Interview with > > King, > > > > June 2014) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The Methodist Church to this very day still mandates Majority > > decisions, > > > > but this would never have entailed children voting ? in general > > > youngsters > > > > in these organizations were simply told what to do. The Black > > > congregations > > > > had operated separately for more than a century, so there was some > room > > > for > > > > Lawson to develop a consensual model of collaboration in working with > > > young > > > > people. It is also possible the Black congregations, like other Black > > > > Churches in America, drew on other traditions of decision making. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > > > > > > > Andy Blunden > > > > > > > > > > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > > > > > > > > > > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective- > decision-making > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From lpscholar2@gmail.com Thu Jan 26 08:01:34 2017 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2017 08:01:34 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Cambridge Atlantica site that Peg referred to In-Reply-To: <003a01d27774$a0aeaf00$e20c0d00$@att.net> References: <003601d2776d$2cc0a910$8641fb30$@att.net> <003a01d27774$a0aeaf00$e20c0d00$@att.net> Message-ID: <588a1d8b.c280630a.7710d.bdd6@mx.google.com> Peg, Mike, Reading these two articles on BigData and remembering how funding will be given to academic research that slots into being verified (or negated) through BigData is profoundly disturbing and leaves me with a sense of inertia at the scope of the alienation involved in this manipulation. Using Simmel?s back and forth notion of the relation of (distance and intimacy) and finding the proper ratio depending on the events occuring then the proper relation between distance and intimacy will be shifting in scope in each historical era. Will our response to the vast distance incarnated through BIgData require intimate responses as counterpoint?? If this is LIKE the 1930?s, do we have any answers from the past that give glimmers of a way forward that can be responsive at scale to the distancing of BigData? Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Peg Griffin Sent: January 25, 2017 5:39 PM To: 'eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity' Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Cambridge Atlantica site that Peg referred to And here's a Guardian story https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/nov/23/donald-trump-cambridge-analytica-steve-bannon for those interested in the post-election ties among the Mercers (father and daughter), Bannon, Conway, and Cambridge Analytica. -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Peg Griffin Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 7:43 PM To: 'eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity' Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Cambridge Atlantica site that Peg referred to Hee hee hee, Mike Cole, you rogue! This is the official Cambridge Analytica site https://cambridgeanalytica.org/ But Mike direct you to a meatier sit about it! Peg -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 1:41 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] The Cambridge Atlantica site that Peg referred to https://antidotezine.com/2017/01/22/trump-knows-you/ From glassman.13@osu.edu Thu Jan 26 08:17:30 2017 From: glassman.13@osu.edu (Glassman, Michael) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2017 16:17:30 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Cambridge Atlantica site that Peg referred to In-Reply-To: <588a1d8b.c280630a.7710d.bdd6@mx.google.com> References: <003601d2776d$2cc0a910$8641fb30$@att.net> <003a01d27774$a0aeaf00$e20c0d00$@att.net> <588a1d8b.c280630a.7710d.bdd6@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C7DADC@CIO-KRC-D1MBX04.osuad.osu.edu> Hi Larry, The interesting thing about this is that the person who really came up with the idea of big data, not in its present form but as a way to develop more precise cybernetic feedback loops, Norbert Wiener actually warns against this type of use of data in his book "The Human Use of Human Beings." He found the use of machines and the data they generate as governance systems for advanced human behavior "terrifying." I wonder if the social scientists running around today screaming about the efficacy of -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of lpscholar2@gmail.com Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2017 11:02 AM To: Peg Griffin ; 'eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity' Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Cambridge Atlantica site that Peg referred to Peg, Mike, Reading these two articles on BigData and remembering how funding will be given to academic research that slots into being verified (or negated) through BigData is profoundly disturbing and leaves me with a sense of inertia at the scope of the alienation involved in this manipulation. Using Simmel?s back and forth notion of the relation of (distance and intimacy) and finding the proper ratio depending on the events occuring then the proper relation between distance and intimacy will be shifting in scope in each historical era. Will our response to the vast distance incarnated through BIgData require intimate responses as counterpoint?? If this is LIKE the 1930?s, do we have any answers from the past that give glimmers of a way forward that can be responsive at scale to the distancing of BigData? Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Peg Griffin Sent: January 25, 2017 5:39 PM To: 'eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity' Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Cambridge Atlantica site that Peg referred to And here's a Guardian story https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/nov/23/donald-trump-cambridge-analytica-steve-bannon for those interested in the post-election ties among the Mercers (father and daughter), Bannon, Conway, and Cambridge Analytica. -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Peg Griffin Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 7:43 PM To: 'eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity' Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Cambridge Atlantica site that Peg referred to Hee hee hee, Mike Cole, you rogue! This is the official Cambridge Analytica site https://cambridgeanalytica.org/ But Mike direct you to a meatier sit about it! Peg -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 1:41 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] The Cambridge Atlantica site that Peg referred to https://antidotezine.com/2017/01/22/trump-knows-you/ From glassman.13@osu.edu Thu Jan 26 08:20:22 2017 From: glassman.13@osu.edu (Glassman, Michael) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2017 16:20:22 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Cambridge Atlantica site that Peg referred to In-Reply-To: <588a1d8b.c280630a.7710d.bdd6@mx.google.com> References: <003601d2776d$2cc0a910$8641fb30$@att.net> <003a01d27774$a0aeaf00$e20c0d00$@att.net> <588a1d8b.c280630a.7710d.bdd6@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C7DAE7@CIO-KRC-D1MBX04.osuad.osu.edu> Sorry, sent the previous message before I finished by mistake. Anyway, it would be interesting to know if the social scientists running around screaming big data even know who Norbert Wiener is let alone have read him, especially his warnings. Perhaps historical context is a tad more important than big data. But who ever made any money off of historical context? Returning to the previous idea of what we do in the age of Trump, it might be worthwhile to push back against ideas like this. Michael -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of lpscholar2@gmail.com Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2017 11:02 AM To: Peg Griffin ; 'eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity' Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Cambridge Atlantica site that Peg referred to Peg, Mike, Reading these two articles on BigData and remembering how funding will be given to academic research that slots into being verified (or negated) through BigData is profoundly disturbing and leaves me with a sense of inertia at the scope of the alienation involved in this manipulation. Using Simmel?s back and forth notion of the relation of (distance and intimacy) and finding the proper ratio depending on the events occuring then the proper relation between distance and intimacy will be shifting in scope in each historical era. Will our response to the vast distance incarnated through BIgData require intimate responses as counterpoint?? If this is LIKE the 1930?s, do we have any answers from the past that give glimmers of a way forward that can be responsive at scale to the distancing of BigData? Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Peg Griffin Sent: January 25, 2017 5:39 PM To: 'eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity' Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Cambridge Atlantica site that Peg referred to And here's a Guardian story https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/nov/23/donald-trump-cambridge-analytica-steve-bannon for those interested in the post-election ties among the Mercers (father and daughter), Bannon, Conway, and Cambridge Analytica. -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Peg Griffin Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 7:43 PM To: 'eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity' Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Cambridge Atlantica site that Peg referred to Hee hee hee, Mike Cole, you rogue! This is the official Cambridge Analytica site https://cambridgeanalytica.org/ But Mike direct you to a meatier sit about it! Peg -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 1:41 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] The Cambridge Atlantica site that Peg referred to https://antidotezine.com/2017/01/22/trump-knows-you/ From Peg.Griffin@att.net Thu Jan 26 08:54:22 2017 From: Peg.Griffin@att.net (Peg Griffin) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2017 11:54:22 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Cambridge Atlantica site that Peg referred to In-Reply-To: <588a1d8b.c280630a.7710d.bdd6@mx.google.com> References: <003601d2776d$2cc0a910$8641fb30$@att.net> <003a01d27774$a0aeaf00$e20c0d00$@att.net> <588a1d8b.c280630a.7710d.bdd6@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <002401d277f4$d8da5ac0$8a8f1040$@att.net> At this point, Larry, I'm content to rise to as much concrete as I can get near, until at least the late spring, to get at ideas and contradictions, to keep moving and supporting so I'm in enough places to and bits of the movement to find the productive places for me. A mini-mission of mine right now is to get people to recognize the divide among the big money folks in the US -- the Mercer father daughter beat the Koch brothers within the Republican moneyed. The other side works hard to divide us and take advantage of the disarray, so why not pay attention when they are dividing themselves! No use being a day late and a dollar short about who's who! Maybe it's just that my great uncle was in vaudeville and showed us three yammering nieces a super card game called "52 pick-up." It's not too good too often for too long but everyone once in a while it's not a bad game. PG -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of lpscholar2@gmail.com Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2017 11:02 AM To: Peg Griffin; 'eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity' Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Cambridge Atlantica site that Peg referred to Peg, Mike, Reading these two articles on BigData and remembering how funding will be given to academic research that slots into being verified (or negated) through BigData is profoundly disturbing and leaves me with a sense of inertia at the scope of the alienation involved in this manipulation. Using Simmel?s back and forth notion of the relation of (distance and intimacy) and finding the proper ratio depending on the events occuring then the proper relation between distance and intimacy will be shifting in scope in each historical era. Will our response to the vast distance incarnated through BIgData require intimate responses as counterpoint?? If this is LIKE the 1930?s, do we have any answers from the past that give glimmers of a way forward that can be responsive at scale to the distancing of BigData? Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Peg Griffin Sent: January 25, 2017 5:39 PM To: 'eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity' Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Cambridge Atlantica site that Peg referred to And here's a Guardian story https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/nov/23/donald-trump-cambridge-analytica-steve-bannon for those interested in the post-election ties among the Mercers (father and daughter), Bannon, Conway, and Cambridge Analytica. -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Peg Griffin Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 7:43 PM To: 'eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity' Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Cambridge Atlantica site that Peg referred to Hee hee hee, Mike Cole, you rogue! This is the official Cambridge Analytica site https://cambridgeanalytica.org/ But Mike direct you to a meatier sit about it! Peg -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 1:41 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] The Cambridge Atlantica site that Peg referred to https://antidotezine.com/2017/01/22/trump-knows-you/ From smago@uga.edu Thu Jan 26 09:23:31 2017 From: smago@uga.edu (Peter Smagorinsky) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2017 17:23:31 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Cambridge Atlantica site that Peg referred to In-Reply-To: <588a1d8b.c280630a.7710d.bdd6@mx.google.com> References: <003601d2776d$2cc0a910$8641fb30$@att.net> <003a01d27774$a0aeaf00$e20c0d00$@att.net> <588a1d8b.c280630a.7710d.bdd6@mx.google.com> Message-ID: Peg et al., by coincidence, the following was published in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution yesterday. It's part of a series of public essays I've written in the last 5-6 years as a way to talk about issues outside the academic bubble and more directly to voters, etc. It's behind a pay wall, so I'll include the URL and the essay. http://getschooled.blog.myajc.com/2017/01/24/defeated-by-too-many-students-and-scripted-instruction-a-good-teacher-becomes-an-ex-teacher/ Defeated by too many students and scripted instruction, a good teacher becomes an ex-teacher By Maureen Downey January 24, 2017 | Filed in: Ajc-opinion, College, Culture and schools, Curriculum, Parenting, Students, Teachers, University of Georgia University of Georgia professor Peter Smagorinsky is back with another interesting column today. He delves into why a dedicated and effective teacher left the profession, focusing on the number of students she was required to teach and the scripted format she was told to follow. By Peter Smagorinsky Fiscal conservatives have often criticized government spending as ?throwing money at the problem.? Public education??government schools? in this nomenclature?is often among those considered over-resourced, as stated by Hoover Institute Senior Fellow Eric Hanushek: ?available evidence suggests that there is no relationship between expenditures and the achievement of students and that such traditional remedies as reducing class sizes or hiring better trained teachers are unlikely to improve matters.? Hanushek and others consider ?available evidence? largely to consist of standardized test scores. Bill Gates, for instance, after investing a small fortune in small schools, decided that because test scores didn?t change significantly in the small schools he underwrote, class size is irrelevant. He in turn has invested additional small fortunes (now totaling over $3 billion) in initiatives predicated on the idea that large classes don?t inhibit learning, because test scores remain flat regardless of the number of kids a teacher must manage and instruct each period of the day. These researchers and financiers rely on ?big data? to inform their opinions. These studies rely on statistical evidence, and the bigger the data set, the better. But the bigger the data set, the less the nuance. My own research is much smaller in scope. I mostly study single cases in detail. Although some find studying small samples to have questionable potential for generalization, I find it instructive to look closely at the real people who are reduced to numbers in the sort of research that reigns over educational policy. I recently conducted an interview with a case study participant I?ve been following for seven years, as part of a longitudinal study ? a multi-year project that takes into account how one?s thinking develops over time ?of how teachers develop understandings of how to teach effectively. This was the final interview for this young woman, because following a very frustrating experience in one of Georgia?s elite school districts, she has left the profession for a career in the hospitality industry. I have reported on her here in the past, before her return to Georgia, when she taught English in a school in rural South Carolina. She taught there for three years, experiencing both joy and frustration. As she told me recently, in that district, her typical class size was 20 students. She learned all of her students? names by the second day of school, something she worked hard to accomplish. Her motivation for teaching, she had often said, was to teach kids, more than it was to teach English. Getting to know her students promptly helped her teach them effectively, because she cared about them as people. Not only did she know her own students quickly, she knew many other kids from hall duty and other interactions. Engaging with kids, even on the days when they had other things on their minds than school, was what had made this profession so appealing to her. She and her husband had deliberately planned to move back to Georgia to return home to their families. Getting a job in the same district she?d attended as a student was a dream come true. She began the school year with great anticipation. By the end of one semester, she told her principal that she?d finish the year because she had committed to a contract, but wouldn?t be back after that. In one semester, she?d gotten burned out by the work conditions of what many would regard as a desirable district for a teaching career. Many of her reasons for leaving her job, and the profession, could be traced to a single source: an oppressive student load. In contrast to classes of 20 in which she quickly learned her students? names and personalities, she was assigned classes that averaged 35 students, totaling about 175 for a subject, English, in which teachers should optimally assign and grade a lot of writing. Let?s say that she took one minute each day to devote to each student assigned to her classes. That?s three additional hours a day. There simply aren?t enough hours in the day or week to teach such large numbers in caring, personal ways. But the time per student was only part of the problem. With so many students, she had trouble learning their names quickly, taking weeks instead of days. Meanwhile, with students getting schedule changes for several weeks into each term, the idea of learning so many names of so many students who might be gone tomorrow rendered that essential value of hers obsolete. The great waves of students produced additional problems for her as well. Out of 175 students, you?ll have some hardheads, some kids with unseen problems, some kids working long hours after school, and kids with all manner of other reasons for finding schoolwork to be an afterthought. With small class numbers, those kids can become known relatively quickly, and individual attention can be catered to provide them with an encouraging academic plan. But with enormous classes in which students get lost in the crowd, a teacher might have far less energy for chasing down kids who are disengaged and helping them find a pathway forward in the classroom. If you don?t know them, you can?t possibly know what makes them tick. And the more kids crammed into classrooms, the more likely those kids are to be left behind. Class size was one of two points of frustration she named. The other was the scripted curriculum that required all teachers of a grade level across the whole district to teach the same thing in the same way on the same day, every day. This teacher, in contrast, had gone through a teacher education program that had taught her how to think about teaching her discipline. Taking instructional planning out of teaching might please teachers who are less invested in the intellectual aspects of teaching. But to a teacher who finds planning to be highly stimulating, exciting, enjoyable, and fulfilling, teaching a centrally designed instructional script is immensely frustrating. Like the reduction of real kids to test scores, the implementation of a scripted curriculum takes the engaging, interpersonal, relational career of teaching and reduces it to mechanical operation. A teacher entrusted to exercise her judgment is always playing with ideas, tinkering with lessons, and using her intellect to teach more effectively. Teaching scripted lessons requires no judgment, only fidelity to someone else?s idea of what to do. The teacher I?m featuring is one you would want working with your own children. She?d wanted to be a teacher since starting first grade, and had dedicated college to teacher education. She?d found her first job both stimulating and frustrating; but when she moved to a district with overwhelming numbers of students and a centralized curriculum that removed her own judgment from instructional decisions, she couldn?t do it any more. Does class size matter? The answer depends on where you look for evidence. -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of lpscholar2@gmail.com Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2017 11:02 AM To: Peg Griffin ; 'eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity' Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Cambridge Atlantica site that Peg referred to Peg, Mike, Reading these two articles on BigData and remembering how funding will be given to academic research that slots into being verified (or negated) through BigData is profoundly disturbing and leaves me with a sense of inertia at the scope of the alienation involved in this manipulation. Using Simmel?s back and forth notion of the relation of (distance and intimacy) and finding the proper ratio depending on the events occuring then the proper relation between distance and intimacy will be shifting in scope in each historical era. Will our response to the vast distance incarnated through BIgData require intimate responses as counterpoint?? If this is LIKE the 1930?s, do we have any answers from the past that give glimmers of a way forward that can be responsive at scale to the distancing of BigData? Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Peg Griffin Sent: January 25, 2017 5:39 PM To: 'eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity' Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Cambridge Atlantica site that Peg referred to And here's a Guardian story https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/nov/23/donald-trump-cambridge-analytica-steve-bannon for those interested in the post-election ties among the Mercers (father and daughter), Bannon, Conway, and Cambridge Analytica. -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Peg Griffin Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 7:43 PM To: 'eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity' Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Cambridge Atlantica site that Peg referred to Hee hee hee, Mike Cole, you rogue! This is the official Cambridge Analytica site https://cambridgeanalytica.org/ But Mike direct you to a meatier sit about it! Peg -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 1:41 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] The Cambridge Atlantica site that Peg referred to https://antidotezine.com/2017/01/22/trump-knows-you/ From lpscholar2@gmail.com Thu Jan 26 09:26:37 2017 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2017 09:26:37 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Cambridge Atlantica site that Peg referred to In-Reply-To: <002401d277f4$d8da5ac0$8a8f1040$@att.net> References: <003601d2776d$2cc0a910$8641fb30$@att.net> <003a01d27774$a0aeaf00$e20c0d00$@att.net> <588a1d8b.c280630a.7710d.bdd6@mx.google.com> <002401d277f4$d8da5ac0$8a8f1040$@att.net> Message-ID: <588a317a.1121620a.8e1ba.d866@mx.google.com> Yes, Today, the strategy of dividing, leaving us in disarray, is how i experience the deluge of draconian executive ?orders? that leaves me spinning. Leaves me questioning where to start. Exposing the disarray on the other side in concrete ways (Koch vs Mercer) is a valuable addition to our ways of responding. Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Peg Griffin Sent: January 26, 2017 8:57 AM To: 'eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity' Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Cambridge Atlantica site that Peg referred to At this point, Larry, I'm content to rise to as much concrete as I can get near, until at least the late spring, to get at ideas and contradictions, to keep moving and supporting so I'm in enough places to and bits of the movement to find the productive places for me. A mini-mission of mine right now is to get people to recognize the divide among the big money folks in the US -- the Mercer father daughter beat the Koch brothers within the Republican moneyed. The other side works hard to divide us and take advantage of the disarray, so why not pay attention when they are dividing themselves! No use being a day late and a dollar short about who's who! Maybe it's just that my great uncle was in vaudeville and showed us three yammering nieces a super card game called "52 pick-up." It's not too good too often for too long but everyone once in a while it's not a bad game. PG -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of lpscholar2@gmail.com Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2017 11:02 AM To: Peg Griffin; 'eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity' Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Cambridge Atlantica site that Peg referred to Peg, Mike, Reading these two articles on BigData and remembering how funding will be given to academic research that slots into being verified (or negated) through BigData is profoundly disturbing and leaves me with a sense of inertia at the scope of the alienation involved in this manipulation. Using Simmel?s back and forth notion of the relation of (distance and intimacy) and finding the proper ratio depending on the events occuring then the proper relation between distance and intimacy will be shifting in scope in each historical era. Will our response to the vast distance incarnated through BIgData require intimate responses as counterpoint?? If this is LIKE the 1930?s, do we have any answers from the past that give glimmers of a way forward that can be responsive at scale to the distancing of BigData? Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Peg Griffin Sent: January 25, 2017 5:39 PM To: 'eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity' Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Cambridge Atlantica site that Peg referred to And here's a Guardian story https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/nov/23/donald-trump-cambridge-analytica-steve-bannon for those interested in the post-election ties among the Mercers (father and daughter), Bannon, Conway, and Cambridge Analytica. -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Peg Griffin Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 7:43 PM To: 'eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity' Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Cambridge Atlantica site that Peg referred to Hee hee hee, Mike Cole, you rogue! This is the official Cambridge Analytica site https://cambridgeanalytica.org/ But Mike direct you to a meatier sit about it! Peg -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 1:41 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] The Cambridge Atlantica site that Peg referred to https://antidotezine.com/2017/01/22/trump-knows-you/ From smago@uga.edu Thu Jan 26 09:35:25 2017 From: smago@uga.edu (Peter Smagorinsky) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2017 17:35:25 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Cambridge Atlantica site that Peg referred to In-Reply-To: <588a317a.1121620a.8e1ba.d866@mx.google.com> References: <003601d2776d$2cc0a910$8641fb30$@att.net> <003a01d27774$a0aeaf00$e20c0d00$@att.net> <588a1d8b.c280630a.7710d.bdd6@mx.google.com> <002401d277f4$d8da5ac0$8a8f1040$@att.net> <588a317a.1121620a.8e1ba.d866@mx.google.com> Message-ID: Another coincidence: someone sent me this link this morning on the phenomenon of "gaslighting." https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/here-there-and-everywhere/201701/gaslighting-know-it-and-identify-it-protect-yourself -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of lpscholar2@gmail.com Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2017 12:27 PM To: Peg Griffin ; 'eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity' Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Cambridge Atlantica site that Peg referred to Yes, Today, the strategy of dividing, leaving us in disarray, is how i experience the deluge of draconian executive ?orders? that leaves me spinning. Leaves me questioning where to start. Exposing the disarray on the other side in concrete ways (Koch vs Mercer) is a valuable addition to our ways of responding. Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Peg Griffin Sent: January 26, 2017 8:57 AM To: 'eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity' Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Cambridge Atlantica site that Peg referred to At this point, Larry, I'm content to rise to as much concrete as I can get near, until at least the late spring, to get at ideas and contradictions, to keep moving and supporting so I'm in enough places to and bits of the movement to find the productive places for me. A mini-mission of mine right now is to get people to recognize the divide among the big money folks in the US -- the Mercer father daughter beat the Koch brothers within the Republican moneyed. The other side works hard to divide us and take advantage of the disarray, so why not pay attention when they are dividing themselves! No use being a day late and a dollar short about who's who! Maybe it's just that my great uncle was in vaudeville and showed us three yammering nieces a super card game called "52 pick-up." It's not too good too often for too long but everyone once in a while it's not a bad game. PG -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of lpscholar2@gmail.com Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2017 11:02 AM To: Peg Griffin; 'eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity' Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Cambridge Atlantica site that Peg referred to Peg, Mike, Reading these two articles on BigData and remembering how funding will be given to academic research that slots into being verified (or negated) through BigData is profoundly disturbing and leaves me with a sense of inertia at the scope of the alienation involved in this manipulation. Using Simmel?s back and forth notion of the relation of (distance and intimacy) and finding the proper ratio depending on the events occuring then the proper relation between distance and intimacy will be shifting in scope in each historical era. Will our response to the vast distance incarnated through BIgData require intimate responses as counterpoint?? If this is LIKE the 1930?s, do we have any answers from the past that give glimmers of a way forward that can be responsive at scale to the distancing of BigData? Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Peg Griffin Sent: January 25, 2017 5:39 PM To: 'eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity' Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Cambridge Atlantica site that Peg referred to And here's a Guardian story https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/nov/23/donald-trump-cambridge-analytica-steve-bannon for those interested in the post-election ties among the Mercers (father and daughter), Bannon, Conway, and Cambridge Analytica. -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Peg Griffin Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 7:43 PM To: 'eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity' Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Cambridge Atlantica site that Peg referred to Hee hee hee, Mike Cole, you rogue! This is the official Cambridge Analytica site https://cambridgeanalytica.org/ But Mike direct you to a meatier sit about it! Peg -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 1:41 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] The Cambridge Atlantica site that Peg referred to https://antidotezine.com/2017/01/22/trump-knows-you/ From lholzman@eastsideinstitute.org Thu Jan 26 09:38:27 2017 From: lholzman@eastsideinstitute.org (Lois Holzman) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2017 12:38:27 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: JoLLE GA Funder is LIVE In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <827BEE0F-4BA7-4556-8469-B747FA4782C3@eastsideinstitute.org> Thanks for the opportunity, Peter. Done! Lois Holzman Director, East Side Institute for Group & Short Term Psychotherapy 119 West 23 St, suite 902 New York, NY 10011 Chair, Global Outreach, All Stars Project, UX Tel. +1.212.941.8906 x324 Fax +1.718.797.3966 lholzman@eastsideinstitute.org Social Media Facebook? | LinkedIn | Twitter Blogs Psychology Today | Psychology of Becoming | Mad in America Websites Lois Holzman | East Side?Institute | Performing the World All Stars Project > On Jan 24, 2017, at 6:36 AM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > > Hi all! I just received news that our GA Funder is live. All donations support the Journal of Language and Literacy Education, particularly our upcoming conference. Thanks for any amount you can contribute! > > > > https://dar.uga.edu/funder/campaigns/jolle-2017-conference/#description > > > Rachel Kaminski Sanders > Doctoral Student & Graduate Assistant > Language and Literacy Education, The University of Georgia > Conference Chair, Journal of Language and Literacy Education > 110 Carlton Street, Aderhold Hall, Office 301J, Athens, GA 30602 > [1474474690830_image001.jpg] > From lpscholar2@gmail.com Thu Jan 26 09:54:23 2017 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2017 09:54:23 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Cambridge Atlantica site that Peg referred to In-Reply-To: References: <003601d2776d$2cc0a910$8641fb30$@att.net> <003a01d27774$a0aeaf00$e20c0d00$@att.net> <588a1d8b.c280630a.7710d.bdd6@mx.google.com> <002401d277f4$d8da5ac0$8a8f1040$@att.net> <588a317a.1121620a.8e1ba.d866@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <588a37fd.9d44620a.ad609.e11c@mx.google.com> Peter, Both gaslighting and Bateson?s ?double bind? synching with BigData that individualize their ?target? by de-personalizing. A potent mix, which your case study approach counteracts. Thanks for posting. Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Peter Smagorinsky Sent: January 26, 2017 9:36 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; Peg Griffin Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Cambridge Atlantica site that Peg referred to Another coincidence: someone sent me this link this morning on the phenomenon of "gaslighting." https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/here-there-and-everywhere/201701/gaslighting-know-it-and-identify-it-protect-yourself -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of lpscholar2@gmail.com Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2017 12:27 PM To: Peg Griffin ; 'eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity' Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Cambridge Atlantica site that Peg referred to Yes, Today, the strategy of dividing, leaving us in disarray, is how i experience the deluge of draconian executive ?orders? that leaves me spinning. Leaves me questioning where to start. Exposing the disarray on the other side in concrete ways (Koch vs Mercer) is a valuable addition to our ways of responding. Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Peg Griffin Sent: January 26, 2017 8:57 AM To: 'eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity' Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Cambridge Atlantica site that Peg referred to At this point, Larry, I'm content to rise to as much concrete as I can get near, until at least the late spring, to get at ideas and contradictions, to keep moving and supporting so I'm in enough places to and bits of the movement to find the productive places for me. A mini-mission of mine right now is to get people to recognize the divide among the big money folks in the US -- the Mercer father daughter beat the Koch brothers within the Republican moneyed. The other side works hard to divide us and take advantage of the disarray, so why not pay attention when they are dividing themselves! No use being a day late and a dollar short about who's who! Maybe it's just that my great uncle was in vaudeville and showed us three yammering nieces a super card game called "52 pick-up." It's not too good too often for too long but everyone once in a while it's not a bad game. PG -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of lpscholar2@gmail.com Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2017 11:02 AM To: Peg Griffin; 'eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity' Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Cambridge Atlantica site that Peg referred to Peg, Mike, Reading these two articles on BigData and remembering how funding will be given to academic research that slots into being verified (or negated) through BigData is profoundly disturbing and leaves me with a sense of inertia at the scope of the alienation involved in this manipulation. Using Simmel?s back and forth notion of the relation of (distance and intimacy) and finding the proper ratio depending on the events occuring then the proper relation between distance and intimacy will be shifting in scope in each historical era. Will our response to the vast distance incarnated through BIgData require intimate responses as counterpoint?? If this is LIKE the 1930?s, do we have any answers from the past that give glimmers of a way forward that can be responsive at scale to the distancing of BigData? Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Peg Griffin Sent: January 25, 2017 5:39 PM To: 'eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity' Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Cambridge Atlantica site that Peg referred to And here's a Guardian story https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/nov/23/donald-trump-cambridge-analytica-steve-bannon for those interested in the post-election ties among the Mercers (father and daughter), Bannon, Conway, and Cambridge Analytica. -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Peg Griffin Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 7:43 PM To: 'eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity' Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Cambridge Atlantica site that Peg referred to Hee hee hee, Mike Cole, you rogue! This is the official Cambridge Analytica site https://cambridgeanalytica.org/ But Mike direct you to a meatier sit about it! Peg -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 1:41 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] The Cambridge Atlantica site that Peg referred to https://antidotezine.com/2017/01/22/trump-knows-you/ From helenaworthen@gmail.com Thu Jan 26 10:16:51 2017 From: helenaworthen@gmail.com (Helena Worthen) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2017 10:16:51 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Cambridge Atlantica site that Peg referred to In-Reply-To: <588a317a.1121620a.8e1ba.d866@mx.google.com> References: <003601d2776d$2cc0a910$8641fb30$@att.net> <003a01d27774$a0aeaf00$e20c0d00$@att.net> <588a1d8b.c280630a.7710d.bdd6@mx.google.com> <002401d277f4$d8da5ac0$8a8f1040$@att.net> <588a317a.1121620a.8e1ba.d866@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <71E849D1-5353-4DDA-BA83-F1DF29820355@gmail.com> On the subject of dividing, here is an ugly snapshot of the wedge getting driven in ? the building trades unions finding common ground with Trump as a ?developer.? The other deeply regressive unions are the prison guards and police. http://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2017/01/building-trades-allow-themselves-to-be-played-like-fools I attend monthly discussion groups in the Bay Area organized around readings from the magazine Jacobin. I like these because the other participants are mostly 20s and early 30s, techies or grad students. Very smart, very alert, very well-read and articulate. They are stamped, however, with evidence of never having studied history. (Philosophy, yes ? which is interesting.) To many of them, the building trades and police unions are typical of the political position of labor unions. So they see LIUNA leaders meeting with Trump and smear the whole labor movement with it. H Helena Worthen helenaworthen@gmail.com Berkeley, CA 94707 Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com > On Jan 26, 2017, at 9:26 AM, wrote: > > Yes, > Today, the strategy of dividing, leaving us in disarray, is how i experience the deluge of draconian executive ?orders? that leaves me spinning. > Leaves me questioning where to start. > > Exposing the disarray on the other side in concrete ways (Koch vs Mercer) is a valuable addition to our ways of responding. > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > From: Peg Griffin > Sent: January 26, 2017 8:57 AM > To: 'eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity' > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Cambridge Atlantica site that Peg referred to > > At this point, Larry, I'm content to rise to as much concrete as I can get near, until at least the late spring, to get at ideas and contradictions, to keep moving and supporting so I'm in enough places to and bits of the movement to find the productive places for me. > A mini-mission of mine right now is to get people to recognize the divide among the big money folks in the US -- the Mercer father daughter beat the Koch brothers within the Republican moneyed. > The other side works hard to divide us and take advantage of the disarray, so why not pay attention when they are dividing themselves! > No use being a day late and a dollar short about who's who! > Maybe it's just that my great uncle was in vaudeville and showed us three yammering nieces a super card game called "52 pick-up." It's not too good too often for too long but everyone once in a while it's not a bad game. > PG > -----Original Message----- > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of lpscholar2@gmail.com > Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2017 11:02 AM > To: Peg Griffin; 'eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity' > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Cambridge Atlantica site that Peg referred to > > Peg, Mike, > Reading these two articles on BigData and remembering how funding will be given to academic research that slots into being verified (or negated) through BigData is profoundly disturbing and leaves me with a sense of inertia at the scope of the alienation involved in this manipulation. > > Using Simmel?s back and forth notion of the relation of (distance and intimacy) and finding the proper ratio depending on the events occuring then the proper relation between distance and intimacy will be shifting in scope in each historical era. > Will our response to the vast distance incarnated through BIgData require intimate responses as counterpoint?? > > If this is LIKE the 1930?s, do we have any answers from the past that give glimmers of a way forward that can be responsive at scale to the distancing of BigData? > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > From: Peg Griffin > Sent: January 25, 2017 5:39 PM > To: 'eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity' > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Cambridge Atlantica site that Peg referred to > > And here's a Guardian story https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/nov/23/donald-trump-cambridge-analytica-steve-bannon for those interested in the post-election ties among the Mercers (father and daughter), Bannon, Conway, and Cambridge Analytica. > > -----Original Message----- > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Peg Griffin > Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 7:43 PM > To: 'eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity' > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Cambridge Atlantica site that Peg referred to > > Hee hee hee, Mike Cole, you rogue! This is the official Cambridge Analytica site https://cambridgeanalytica.org/ But Mike direct you to a meatier sit about it! > Peg > > -----Original Message----- > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole > Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 1:41 PM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] The Cambridge Atlantica site that Peg referred to > > https://antidotezine.com/2017/01/22/trump-knows-you/ > > > > > > From hshonerd@gmail.com Thu Jan 26 13:14:01 2017 From: hshonerd@gmail.com (HENRY SHONERD) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2017 14:14:01 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Perizivanie Message-ID: <5120CA46-23D0-40BA-9030-F5333D0802F6@gmail.com> https://www.nytimes.com/?action=click&contentCollection=Well®ion=TopBar&module=HomePage-Button&pgtype=article From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Thu Jan 26 13:44:29 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2017 21:44:29 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Perizivanie In-Reply-To: <5120CA46-23D0-40BA-9030-F5333D0802F6@gmail.com> References: <5120CA46-23D0-40BA-9030-F5333D0802F6@gmail.com> Message-ID: <1485467069259.80216@iped.uio.no> Henry, did you want to link the front page of the washington post or one article (perhaps the main article) in particular? Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of HENRY SHONERD Sent: 26 January 2017 22:14 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Perizivanie https://www.nytimes.com/?action=click&contentCollection=Well®ion=TopBar&module=HomePage-Button&pgtype=article From dkellogg60@gmail.com Thu Jan 26 13:49:24 2017 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2017 06:49:24 +0900 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's "talking" versus "speaking" In-Reply-To: References: <628ebbd3-8b51-8e15-47d0-9164e8352c36@mira.net> <58866d1f.90966b0a.1b7d5.c1c8@mx.google.com> <289C4B7F-0A9A-4A10-BB1F-0619858FFBAA@umn.edu> <1485241782176.85472@iped.uio.no> <1485368397236.71956@iped.uio.no> <1485369691280.7805@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: Sure, Chris; it's all xmca, i.e. public domain. The later version I sent in response to Helena is probably better; the glosses are a little clearer. I think of hermeneutics as one kind of semiotic: the receptive kind. But when I think of human minds as made up of text, what I really mean is that they are engaged in the production of text. But of course text is recyclable. Not that much of it is produced from scratch (and perhaps even less of it is recycled the way we recycle intact beer bottles); most of it is reprocessed from other text. So the production of text inevitably has to involve (but can't be limited to) a hermeneutic dimension. (One of the problems with the new president is that he DOES do a lot of direct recycling from Fox News, and doesn't even wash the beer bottle. But I think we have to recognize that Mr. Trump is not a good example of anything except himself.) David Kellogg Macquarie University On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 3:02 PM, Christopher Schuck wrote: > Thank you very much for those elaborations and for sharing some of the > considerations that went into what you chose to leave out of your analysis, > David. Would it be OK to share your running transcript with my other > listserv of psychologists (none of them to my knowledge psycholinguists), > as an example of how one might approach Trump from a more > cultural-historical or semiotic perspective? Their discussions so far tend > to be couched in more psychological terms and have not been especially > focused on language as such - I think they would find it interesting. > > Your mention of Dilthey reminds me of something I have always been a little > confused about, which is the distinction between semiotic and hermeneutic > analysis of the meanings generated by text, and how that difference might > apply in the current situation. I take the limitation of "man's presence in > his present" to capture perezhivanie, at least partly, as concerning the > limitations of description and perhaps phenomenology to account for that > active construal of meaning. But I also gather that reading such a text in > the "hermeneutic" sense of alternate interpretations and understandings is > not quite what we're after, either. > > I don't want to get too far afield from the current topic, so perhaps a > discussion for another time. > > Chris > > On Wednesday, January 25, 2017, David Kellogg > wrote: > > > When people (including people on this list) use the word text, they > usually > > don't literally mean ink and paper. For example, Obama said (and Trump > > repeated it in his CIA speech a few days ago), the Constitution is a > > precious thing but "in the end" it is just parchment if people don't > > believe in who they are. A more technical way to express this idea is to > > say that a text is a semantic rather than a lexicogrammatical or a > > phono/graphological one. > > > > But Vygotsky argues that after about age one, children develop human, > > cutural-historical consciousness, and this consciousness is "systemic" > (it > > involves the ability to choose, such as being able to choose to treat the > > visual purview as ink and paper or as a set of signs) and it is > "semantic" > > (it involves seeing objects as meaningful; that is, as standing for > > something more). So what this means is that human consciousness is not > > simply a neurological or even a "cognitive" phenomenon, like animal > > consciousness. It's a semantic one. It's not just that texts are made by > > human minds. Sociogenetically, ontogenetically, and even > > "microgenetically", human minds are made of text. > > > > Halliday says that experience is "the reality that we construe for > > ourselves through language". That's why text really is pertinent to a > > discussion of perizhivanie. We could use the Dilthey definition and treat > > perizhivanie as "man's presence in his present". But how would we study > it? > > On the other hand, if we treat perizhivanie as a reality that we construe > > for ourselves through language the path is much clearer. Perezhivanie is > a > > moment of text, and the structure of perizhivanie can be studied through > > the structure of text. > > > > When I sat down to analyze Trump's speech, I had to ignore a lot of the > > non-textual material it presented. Take, for example, Trump's > > gesticulations. He has a tic of using his left hand to form a circle > > (suggesting female genitalia, I suppose) and his right hand to to display > > an erect index finger. This is distracting and probably about as > important > > as the fact that he sniffled through the presidential debates: these are > > not central to the reality that Trump construes through language. On the > > other hand (no pun intended), he uses those gesticulations to "beat" the > > cadence of stresses, particularly in the last four syllables of each > > paragraph, as Mussolini and Hitler were wont to do. Obama remarked that > > Trump's way of communicating is "powerful stuff". That's not an > > analysis--but it's probably not a compliment either. It is just the way > > Obama construes the way Trump is able to construe Trump's reality through > > language. > > > > David Kellogg > > Macquarie University > > > > > > On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 3:41 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > > > > wrote: > > > > > David's analyses also give more than just text, I believe. > > > A > > > ________________________________________ > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu < > > xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil > > > > Sent: 25 January 2017 19:19 > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's "talking" versus "speaking" > > > > > > Chris, > > > I think you are very right, everything about this situation is not so > > much > > > about the formal text... but still, as others have been pointing out > > > throughout the discussion, particularly in the parallel thread on the > > role > > > of the Learning Sciences, we need to do what we can, locally, globally, > > and > > > elsewhere. And so one way to do something we know how to do is > analysing > > > the speech not as text, but as *contexture*. We remarked bringing up > > > Martin's points, and also using an example, that the point is to see > > > societal possibilities of hearing a speech. And that includes bringing > in > > > so much more than just formal text. One example was Roth's analysis of > a > > > song by rap artist Eminem, http://www.qualitative- > > > research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/1213 . > > > A > > > > > > ________________________________________ > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu < > > xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > on behalf of Christopher Schuck > > > > Sent: 24 January 2017 16:22 > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's "talking" versus "speaking" > > > > > > Another irony that hasn't been mentioned is that this distictive > > speaking/ > > > talking style flagged by McWhorter made him unusually effective as a > > > campaigner where the goal was to create chaos and premature action, yet > > > would undermine his ability to be an effective (or safe) president and > > > doesn't "fit." This is relevant insofar as it emphasizes the new > > experience > > > of hearing him speak this way *as president* as opposed to > > > president-wannabe. In the inauguration speech, this person who is known > > for > > > talking not speaking attempts to speak formally, which creates yet > > another > > > split between taking that pseudo-formal language literally and taking > it > > > ironically. > > > > > > So it is not just the difference between reading him literally and > > reading > > > him ironically, but that what is formal and what is literal (as well as > > > what is informal and what is indirect, and whether he is a "formal" > > leader > > > or informal television personality) become tangled up with each other > as > > he > > > transitions from celebrity to this official role.That is one reason > why I > > > wonder whether looking at the formal text of this official speech > > (however > > > fascinating) is such a useful way to explore the perezhivanie of the > > Trump > > > experience, because it's so uniquely not about the written text. I > > suspect > > > even many of Trump's supporters were not particularly interested in the > > > speech. > > > > > > On Tuesday, January 24, 2017, Alfredo Jornet Gil > > > > ');>> > > wrote: > > > > > > > Richard, > > > > what this linguist says and you comment on Trump's talk is pretty > close > > > to > > > > what I was just writing to Francine in the main "trump's speech" > thread > > > > about hearing him literally and hearing him as irony. If you stick to > > > > hearing in the same he seems to treat his recipients, then you may > have > > > to > > > > believe that each word conveys an idea and that one word suffices to > > give > > > > the idea, like "it's true". It seems to be enough. As per your > > question, > > > > yes, it's a very scary question. It also is very scary that he may > say, > > > > "it's true" and so be it. > > > > Alfredo > > > > ________________________________________ > > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu < > > xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > on behalf of Richard Beach > > > > > Sent: 23 January 2017 23:09 > > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Trump's "talking" versus "speaking" > > > > > > > > In a New York Times op-ed > > > 01/21/opinion/sunday/how-to-listen-to-donald-trump-every-day > > > > -for-years.html>, the linguist, John McWhorter, distinguishes between > > > > Trump?s informal, spontaneous ?talking? versus ?speaking? that > involves > > > > employing a more formal register associated with written language. He > > > cites > > > > the example of Trump?s talking: ?Look, having nuclear ? my uncle was > a > > > > great professor and scientist and engineer, Dr. John Trump at M.I.T.; > > > good > > > > genes, very good genes, O.K., very smart, the Wharton School of > > Finance, > > > > very good, very smart ? you know, if you?re a conservative > Republican, > > > if I > > > > were a liberal, if, like, O.K. ?? > > > > > > > > > > > > What?s problematic here is that Trump?s off-the-cuff ?talking,? as > well > > > as > > > > his use of tweets, can convey messages with problematic uptakes from > > > > others, resulting in taking action without careful thought or > > > consultation > > > > with others. As McWhorter notes: ?All understand that his speech is > > > > structurally ungraceful. It may be harder to grasp that Mr. Trump, as > > > > someone just talking rather than artfully communicating ideas, has no > > > sense > > > > of the tacit understanding that a politician?s utterances are more > > > signals > > > > than statements, vehicles meant to convey larger messages.? > > > > > > > > When one of his hotels is another country is attacked by > ?terrorists,? > > > > will Trump, as someone who perceives himself as the prime actor, > > > > spontaneously declare war with little or no consideration of the > > > > consequences of his actions? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Richard Beach, Professor Emeritus of English Education, University of > > > > Minnesota > > > > rbeach@umn.edu > > > > Websites: Digital writing , > Media > > > > literacy , Teaching > > > literature > > > > , Identity-focused ELA > > Teaching > > > < > > > > http://identities.pbworks.com/>, Common Core State Standards < > > > > http://englishccss.pbworks.com/>, Apps for literacy learning < > > > > http://usingipads.pbworks.com/>, Teaching about climate change < > > > > http://climatechangeela.pbworks.com/> > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Jan 23, 2017, at 12:52 PM, lpscholar2@gmail.com > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Andrew, Andy, > > > > > I also want to pursue the example of James Lawson. > > > > > What struck me was his relationship to both parents as formative. > > > > > Moving to Trump?s inauguration, what struck me was the bodily > gesture > > > he > > > > was expressing walking down the hallway just prior to speaking. > > > > > This body language that i was reading before he spoke a word. > > > > > I hope some of you watched the Frontline documentary on PBS > EXPLORING > > > > both Trump?s and Clinton?s early family life. > > > > > > > > > > Trump?s father was only interested in ?winners? and to come second > > was > > > > to be a ?loser?. The father sent Trump as a young man to a military > > > academy > > > > that would teach his son how to be a ?winner? a lesson that Trump > > > inhabits > > > > and is incarnating in his every gesture. > > > > > > > > > > His emotional, cognitive, and performative symmetry captured in his > > > > facial expression as he walked forward to give his inaugural address. > > > > > > > > > > In other words, James Lawson, Donald Trump, and Martin Packer?s > book > > > > review i see as overlapping themes. > > > > > When we explore ?expression? and ?intentionality? and ?language? i > > want > > > > to include the family upbringing as formative. > > > > > > > > > > Now as an aside, Simmel would say both James and Donald are > > inhabiting > > > > (fictions) that INform their experiences, but that may be a leap too > > far. > > > > Simmel was following the philosopher Vasinger (spelling?) who focused > > on > > > > how we live our lives (as is) or (as though) but to take this turn > > would > > > be > > > > for another thread. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > > > > > > > From: Andrew Babson > > > > > Sent: January 23, 2017 9:08 AM > > > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: James Lawson and perezhivanie > > > > > > > > > > Andy, thank you for the timely post, especially as we move forward > in > > > the > > > > > shadow of authoritarianism here in the USA. Lawson's example of > > > choosing > > > > > non-violent protest, following Gandhi, is helpful. Consider the > > > > > effectiveness of millions of people last weekend peacefully taking > to > > > the > > > > > streets with few if any arrests (side note: we all went as a family > > > here > > > > in > > > > > Philly, it was great). Contrast the Black Bloc member's sucker > punch > > of > > > > > neo-nazi Richard Spencer: people are cheering it, but those same > > people > > > > > probably realize it's not a scalable strategy. Different tours de > > > force, > > > > > different effects, the gender connotations of which are > interesting. > > > > > > > > > > *P **erezhivanie > > > > > *is a new term to > me, > > > > which I > > > > > link here to the XMCA blog for those other also unfamiliar with it. > > It > > > > > seems like a pretty clear gloss of a term I do know well, > *Erlebnis, > > > > > *"experience" > > > > > (I dislike the gloss of that Dilthey-an term as "lived" > > > experience...but > > > > > that's for another discussion). > > > > > > > > > > It's fascinating to learn about Lawson's vocational decision-making > > > > > process, and to consider the possible effects of violent and > > > non-violent > > > > > dissent. But perhaps you could clarify for us Andy why you thought > > > > Lawson's > > > > > story was an example of *perezhivanie*? Where's the point of > > analytical > > > > > traction? If it means more than "experience", how can we apply that > > > > broader > > > > > meaning here? It seems like he had a Pauline metanoia/conversion > > > > > experience. Is that what you mean? > > > > > > > > > > Andrew > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------ > > > > > Andrew Babson, Ph.D. > > > > > Lecturer > > > > > Graduate School of Education > > > > > University of Pennsylvania > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 4:40 AM, Andy Blunden > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > James Lawson is the Methodist preacher who trained the young > members > > of > > > > the > > > > > SNCC in non-violent action and wrote their constitution. I paste > > below > > > > and > > > > > attach an excerpt from my book "The Origins of Collective Decision > > > > Making" > > > > > which narrates Lawson's life up until April 1960. Perezhivanie was > > not > > > > the > > > > > topic under discussion so it is not mentioned in the text, but > > xmca-ers > > > > > should be able to see it, an example of perezhivanie: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > James Lawson was born in 1928, in Uniontown, Pennsylvania. His > > father, > > > > > James Snr., was the grandson of an escaped slave, and a Minister > for > > > the > > > > > African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church in New England. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Via the Free African Society(FAS) the Methodists had recruited > freed > > > > slaves > > > > > in Philadelphiain 1787, but as a result of a racist incident, some > > left > > > > to > > > > > found the African Methodist Episcopal Church(AMEC). Nonetheless, > many > > > > > African Americans stayed with the United Methodist Church. The AMEC > > > split > > > > > started in Philadelphia and the AMEC Zion Church was a split that > > came > > > > out > > > > > of New York. It was to AMEC Zion, James Lawson was born. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > However, Lawson returned to The United Methodist Church, created > by a > > > > 1939 > > > > > merger of several branches of the Methodist Church, which set up > five > > > > > regional ?jurisdictions? of Methodists in the US, organized to > > maintain > > > > > regionally identity and a sixth, called the ?Central Jurisdiction? > > > which > > > > > combined the Black annual conferences, thus building segregation > into > > > the > > > > > constitution of the Church.The Methodists went through a long and > > > painful > > > > > process, carried out in accordance with the Methodist Code of > > > Discipline, > > > > > which mandates the principle of Majority, to re-integrate the white > > and > > > > > Black, but it was not till after 1964 that Black conferences > started > > to > > > > > merge into white conferences. At the local level, congregations > > > continued > > > > > much as before. So it was within the Black section of the > segregated > > > > United > > > > > Methodist Church, that James Lawson became a Methodist. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > James Snr. was a militant preacher; he packed a 38 pistol and set > up > > > > > branches of the NAACP wherever he was assigned to preach. After > > serving > > > > at > > > > > St. James AMEZ Church in Massillon, Ohio, he transferred to the > > > Lexington > > > > > Annual Conference of the Central Jurisdiction of the United > Methodist > > > > > Church. James Snr. was no pacifist and according to Lawson he > > ?refused > > > to > > > > > take any guff from anyone, particularly on the point of race? and > > > > ?insisted > > > > > that he was going to be treated as a man.? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lawson?s mother, Philane May Cover, on the other hand, was > decidedly > > > > > nonviolent. Lawson?s challenge, which was to form his character, > was > > to > > > > > reconcile his father?s militancy with his mother?s nonviolence. > > Lawson > > > > grew > > > > > up in Massillon. One day, at the age of 10, Lawson was asked by his > > > > mother > > > > > to run an errand: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A little white child in an automobile yelled ?nigger? out the > opened > > > > > window. I walked over ... and, since I was in a hurry running my > > > mother?s > > > > > errand, I smacked the child and went on my way. When the Lawson > kids > > > got > > > > > called ?nigger? on the streets or at school, we usually fought. I > > don?t > > > > > know where we got that from, except that we figured that it was > > > something > > > > > to fight over. (Lawson, cited in King, 1999) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On the return trip home, aware of possible repercussions, Lawson > > tried > > > to > > > > > find the parents of the offending child, to talk to them, but the > car > > > was > > > > > gone. Once home, he told his mother of the incident. Lawson?s > mother > > > > > replied, ?Jimmy, what good did that do?? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > She talked about who I was, the fact of God?s love, that we were a > > > family > > > > > of love and that such an incident could not hurt me, because of > who I > > > > was. > > > > > I don?t remember anyone else being around, but a stillness took > over > > my > > > > > being at that moment. It was, as I realized much later on, a > mystical > > > > > experience. In a very real way, my life stood still. I realized in > > that > > > > > stillness that I had changed forever. One of the phrases my mother > > used > > > > in > > > > > her conversation with me was that ?there must be a better way?. I > > > > > determined, from then on, that I would find the better way. > (Lawson, > > > > cited > > > > > in King, 1999, pp. 187-188) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > He first became acquainted with Gandhi?s experiments in nonviolence > > as > > > a > > > > > child, thanks to the African-American press which the family > > discussed > > > > > around the dinner table, and had read Gandhi?s autobiography as a > > > > teenager. > > > > > At Baldwin Wallace College, a liberal arts Methodistcollege in > Berea, > > > > Ohio, > > > > > he studied Thoreau, Gandhi and Tolstoy, and the pacifist > theologians > > > > > Dietrich Bonhoeffer and Reinhold Niebuhr. At age 19, he became a > > draft > > > > > resister, refusing service in the Korean War. Executive director of > > > > > Fellowship Of Reconciliation (FOR), A. J. Muste,frequently visited > to > > > > > lecture at the College: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > All of us in history classes were required to hear Muste. I was > > > thrilled. > > > > > He made me realize that I was not alone in my experimentation, that > > > there > > > > > was a world movement, and a national movement. ... He acquainted me > > > with > > > > > the Fellowship Of Reconciliation, which I joined on the spot in > 1947. > > > > That > > > > > meant that I got exposed to their book list. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > After hearing a lecture by A. J. Muste, he joined FOR and CORE. > Muste > > > was > > > > > instrumental thereafter in strengthening Lawson?s nonviolent > > > orientation, > > > > > directing him towards Gandhi and later facilitating his entry into > > the > > > > > sit-in and boycott movement beginning in the South. In the late > 1940s > > > and > > > > > early 1950s Lawson had organized sit-ins and protests directed at > > > > > establishments that discriminated against blacks in Massillon, long > > > > before > > > > > the Montgomery bus-boycott. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > He was also active with the National Conference of Methodist Youth. > > > > > Although a member of a segregated Methodist Church, he found plenty > > of > > > > > support for his stands against racial discrimination and war from > his > > > > white > > > > > colleagues and church fellows. While he was in prison serving > > thirteen > > > > > months of a two and a half year term for draft resistance in 1952, > he > > > was > > > > > re-elected as Vice-President of the NCMY. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Wesleyan Methodism was central to Lawson?s outlook. Just as John > > Wesley > > > > had > > > > > sought to cleanse individuals of iniquity, so could society be > purged > > > of > > > > > the social sins of slavery, segregation, poverty, and > war.Generations > > > of > > > > > African American Methodists from Harriet Tubman (AMEZ) and Henry M. > > > > Turner > > > > > (AME) in the nineteenth century, to Rosa Parks (AME) and James > Farmer > > > > > (MEC), were led to social justice activism by this Methodist > > heritage. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lawson used his prison time to read and think. Writing from prison > in > > > > 1952 > > > > > aged 23 years old and yet to enter the seminary, Lawson said he > > aspired > > > > to > > > > > emulate ?the life of Jesus, St. Francis, George Fox, Gandhi, > > Buddha... > > > > and > > > > > other great religious persons.? These figures attached little > > > importance > > > > to > > > > > ?theology but (to their) experience with God.?Further, he noted > > > > ?religious > > > > > failures today are in (the arena of) experience and practice, not > > > > > theology.? When Lawson entered prison, he was a Christian > pacifist.He > > > > told > > > > > Mary King however, that his ?first commitment was to work on race,? > > and > > > > > conscientious objection came second.By the time of his release, he > > had > > > > > advanced to Gandhian nonviolence. He wondered ?why can?t a mass > > > > non-violent > > > > > revolution be staged throughout the South where the segregation > > pattern > > > > is > > > > > much like the ?untouchables? of India? Such a movement would have > to > > > > start > > > > > with one person who had the Christian vision to make such a > > revolution > > > a > > > > > reality in his own life.? Gandhian nonviolence became the > > synthesizing > > > > > factor for Lawson?s religious thinking: the militancy of his > father?s > > > > > Methodism and the Christian pacifism that he drew from his mother. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Muste arranged for Lawson to visit India after his release from > > prison > > > > with > > > > > a letter of introduction to activists in the Gandhian movement, and > > he > > > > > remained in India from May 1953 to 1956, working at Hislop College > in > > > > > Nagpur, reading Indian literature and working with Gandhi?s > movement. > > > > > Lawson?s practice would remain deeply religious; his nonviolence > was > > > > > saturated with the message of Christian love, and blended with > > > principles > > > > > synthesized from a broad range of religious and secular sources, > both > > > > > Eastern and Western. His aim was the ?mass education and training > of > > > > people > > > > > in the use of nonviolent direct action techniques.? Lawson insisted > > > that > > > > > ?you are fighting a system, not an individual, not a race, or not > the > > > > > people of another country, but a system.? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > He continued his study of pacifism and Gandhian nonviolence at > > Oberlin > > > > > College, Ohio. While still in India, he had read about Martin > Luther > > > King > > > > > and his successful leadership of the Montgomery bus boycott.King?s > > > > lecture > > > > > at Oberlin on February 6, 1957, fortified his long-held intention > to > > > work > > > > > in the South for transformative social change. After King?s lecture > > to > > > a > > > > > packed audience, he and Lawson talked together at dinner.Though > > Lawson > > > > was > > > > > contemplating study for a Ph.D., King told him ?don?t wait, but > come > > > > south > > > > > now!? adding that there was no one else like Lawson.Muste arranged > > for > > > > FOR > > > > > to hire Lawson as southern field secretary to be stationed at > > Nashville > > > > in > > > > > January 1958. Upon his arrival, he found that Glenn Smiley, > national > > > > field > > > > > director of FOR, had arranged for Lawson to run a full schedule of > > > > > workshops ? including one to take place early that year at the > first > > > > annual > > > > > meeting of the SCLC in Columbia, South Carolina. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > At the SCLC meeting, King made an exuberant introduction of Lawson > as > > > > FOR?s > > > > > new regional representative and discussed the organization?s role > in > > > > > Montgomery, telling delegates to be sure to attend Lawson?s > workshop > > on > > > > > nonviolence. King took his seat in the first pew, waiting for the > > > > > three-hour session to start: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Martin did that at every SCLC meeting as long as he lived. He would > > ask > > > > me > > > > > to conduct an afternoon workshop, usually two or three hours, and > he > > > > would > > > > > arrange for it to be ?at-large? so that everyone could attend, with > > > > nothing > > > > > else to compete. He put it on the schedule himself. A few minutes > > > early, > > > > he > > > > > would show up and sit alone, as an example, in the front row. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Back in Nashville, Lawson continued with Monday evening workshops > > > during > > > > > the autumn of 1959 in which he trained the students who were to be > > the > > > > core > > > > > of the Nashville sit-in movement. As a result of his involvement > with > > > the > > > > > sit-ins Lawson was expelled from Vanderbilt, but he enrolled with > > > Boston > > > > > University to finish his degree in theology,while continuing to > work > > > with > > > > > the students. Several professors in the School of Theology resigned > > > over > > > > > his expulsion. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The techniques that the students deployed were drawn from Lawson?s > > > > > workshops. In 1958 and 1959, Lawson mobilized all that he knew > about > > > > > Christian pacifism, Gandhian nonviolence, and Methodist social > > ministry > > > > and > > > > > blended them into an unprecedented curriculum that influenced the > > civil > > > > > rights movement in Nashville and beyond. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Blending Christianity and interreligious sources, he did not > present > > > its > > > > > philosophy and practice as a secular doctrine, but as the essence > of > > > > > religion itself. Core to nonviolence was mirroring God?s love for > > > > humankind > > > > > and exhibiting it through concrete relationships of human > solidarity > > > and > > > > > community. ?Nonviolence,? Lawson taught, is the aggressive, > > forgiving, > > > > > patient, long-suffering Christ-like and Christ-commanded love or > > > > good-will > > > > > for all humankind even in the face of tension, fear, hatred, or > > demonic > > > > > evil.? Moreover, ?it is the readiness to absorb suffering with > > > > forgiveness > > > > > and courage rather than to inflict suffering on others.? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lawson divided his instruction into four modules: how nonviolence > > > reacts, > > > > > training for nonviolence, the virtues of nonviolence, and the > methods > > > of > > > > > nonviolence. Practitioners prepared themselves by jettisoning > anger, > > > > > hostility and fear thus ?minimizing the effect of an attack,? > valuing > > > > love, > > > > > courage, fearlessness, and forgiveness, and pursuing redemptive > > > suffering > > > > > which ?releases unknown elements for good.? Preparation included > > > > meditation > > > > > and prayer, study of the scriptures, practicing nonviolence through > > > > > challenges to segregation in bus transportation and in other public > > > > > facilities.The practice steps included fact-finding, negotiation, > > > > education > > > > > of the community, and various methods of nonviolent direct action > > > > including > > > > > sit-ins, boycotts, strikes, and civil disobedience. Lawson provided > > an > > > > > extensive bibliography including relevant verses from the Bible, > the > > > > > Bhagavad Gita, and from the Chinese philosopher, Mo Ti and the > Hebrew > > > > > prophet, Isaiah. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The Nashville sit-ins and those led by students in other southern > > > cities > > > > > convinced Ella Baker of the SCLC to call a conference in April, > 1960, > > > at > > > > > Shaw University in Raleigh, North Carolina. Out of this meeting > > emerged > > > > the > > > > > Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee.Lawson delivered an > opening > > > > > keynote address that helped to frame SNCC?s nonviolent > > > trajectory.Later, > > > > > Lawson summarized discussions and consensus that emerged out of the > > > > > conference, and his synopsis received the approval of everyone > there. > > > > > Lawson?s overall comments said that ?nonviolence as it grows from > > > > > Judaic-Christian tradition seeks a social order of justice > permeated > > by > > > > > love.? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It was Lawson who delivered the keynote address and framed SNCC?s > > > > > nonviolent orientation. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The whole group, perhaps 120 participants, all in the room, asked > me > > to > > > > > draft a statement. Eventually, three different drafts emerged. The > > > > > Nashville group was cohesive. The extant draft was the third, > > > influenced > > > > by > > > > > the Nashville group, after two earlier conversations. (Interview > with > > > > King, > > > > > June 2014) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lawson?s synopsis was approved by the Conference. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In a private email message Mary King told me: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > He [James Lawson] was reading from the FOR booklist from a young > age, > > > > but I > > > > > don?t think that he was influenced on notions of Consensus by > > Quakers, > > > > > because the connection was too abstract. Let me underscore that he > > says > > > > it > > > > > was for him Methodist origins. (Private email, 15 April 2014) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In his interview with Mary King, Lawson confirmed that the origin > of > > > > > Consensus in SNCC was the Nashville Central Committee, confirming > > what > > > > Mary > > > > > King had told me in April. As to the roots Consensus in Lawson?s > own > > > > > experience, he emphasized that: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It was the Methodist youth and student movements with which I had > > grown > > > > up, > > > > > and this is how they made decisions. They knew the rules of > > > parliamentary > > > > > procedures, but they wanted to find a common mind. (Interview with > > > King, > > > > > June 2014) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The Methodist Church to this very day still mandates Majority > > > decisions, > > > > > but this would never have entailed children voting ? in general > > > > youngsters > > > > > in these organizations were simply told what to do. The Black > > > > congregations > > > > > had operated separately for more than a century, so there was some > > room > > > > for > > > > > Lawson to develop a consensual model of collaboration in working > with > > > > young > > > > > people. It is also possible the Black congregations, like other > Black > > > > > Churches in America, drew on other traditions of decision making. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Andy Blunden > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective- > > decision-making > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Thu Jan 26 13:50:13 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2017 21:50:13 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Perizivanie In-Reply-To: <1485467069259.80216@iped.uio.no> References: <5120CA46-23D0-40BA-9030-F5333D0802F6@gmail.com>, <1485467069259.80216@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <1485467412846.61008@iped.uio.no> Sorry, I mean nytimes, ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil Sent: 26 January 2017 22:44 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Perizivanie Henry, did you want to link the front page of the washington post or one article (perhaps the main article) in particular? Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of HENRY SHONERD Sent: 26 January 2017 22:14 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Perizivanie https://www.nytimes.com/?action=click&contentCollection=Well®ion=TopBar&module=HomePage-Button&pgtype=article From hshonerd@gmail.com Thu Jan 26 14:08:06 2017 From: hshonerd@gmail.com (HENRY SHONERD) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2017 15:08:06 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Perizivanie In-Reply-To: <1485467069259.80216@iped.uio.no> References: <5120CA46-23D0-40BA-9030-F5333D0802F6@gmail.com> <1485467069259.80216@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <3E8417E1-AC36-404F-AA5A-47816D90E33C@gmail.com> Alfredo, My apologies. I thought I had linked to a video on today?s NY Times by Daphne Matziaraki entitled ?4.1 Miles?. An amazing, horrifying 20 minutes of the efforts of Greek coast guard to rescue refugees from the 4.1 miles of water between Turkey and Lesbos. I hope this link will take you to the video: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4.1_Miles . For me, viewing the video was emotional in a way I would understand as perizhivanie. Especially in the context of Trump?s executive order to build that wall. Thank you for asking! Thank you for listening! Henry > On Jan 26, 2017, at 2:44 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > > Henry, did you want to link the front page of the washington post or one article (perhaps the main article) in particular? > Alfredo > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of HENRY SHONERD > Sent: 26 January 2017 22:14 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Perizivanie > > https://www.nytimes.com/?action=click&contentCollection=Well®ion=TopBar&module=HomePage-Button&pgtype=article From hshonerd@gmail.com Thu Jan 26 14:12:57 2017 From: hshonerd@gmail.com (HENRY SHONERD) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2017 15:12:57 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Perizivanie In-Reply-To: <1485467412846.61008@iped.uio.no> References: <5120CA46-23D0-40BA-9030-F5333D0802F6@gmail.com> <1485467069259.80216@iped.uio.no> <1485467412846.61008@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <43FC2CBA-C9A1-4859-A3AC-558593E6462E@gmail.com> No problem, mate. You may have motivated me out of my rut of only reading the NYTimes and the Atlantic. Have thought for a long time I am not enough of an omnivore. H > On Jan 26, 2017, at 2:50 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > > Sorry, I mean nytimes, > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil > Sent: 26 January 2017 22:44 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Perizivanie > > Henry, did you want to link the front page of the washington post or one article (perhaps the main article) in particular? > Alfredo > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of HENRY SHONERD > Sent: 26 January 2017 22:14 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Perizivanie > > https://www.nytimes.com/?action=click&contentCollection=Well®ion=TopBar&module=HomePage-Button&pgtype=article > From schuckcschuck@gmail.com Thu Jan 26 15:08:35 2017 From: schuckcschuck@gmail.com (Christopher Schuck) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2017 18:08:35 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's "talking" versus "speaking" In-Reply-To: References: <628ebbd3-8b51-8e15-47d0-9164e8352c36@mira.net> <58866d1f.90966b0a.1b7d5.c1c8@mx.google.com> <289C4B7F-0A9A-4A10-BB1F-0619858FFBAA@umn.edu> <1485241782176.85472@iped.uio.no> <1485368397236.71956@iped.uio.no> <1485369691280.7805@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: I see, thank you...So perhaps part of what we're trying to do currently on this discussion board that would be more active and future-oriented than a purely hermeneutic endeavor (and thus more capable of potentially effecting real change) is not simply to interpret the texts Trump produces -- to try to understand Trump -- but to *participate *in those texts in the process of trying to transform and reconstruct them in ways that reflect untapped possibilities. We are not reading through the eyes of Trump but through the eyes of others who may be listening to him and responding in various ways. On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 4:49 PM, David Kellogg wrote: > Sure, Chris; it's all xmca, i.e. public domain. The later version I sent in > response to Helena is probably better; the glosses are a little clearer. > > I think of hermeneutics as one kind of semiotic: the receptive kind. But > when I think of human minds as made up of text, what I really mean is that > they are engaged in the production of text. > > But of course text is recyclable. Not that much of it is produced from > scratch (and perhaps even less of it is recycled the way we recycle intact > beer bottles); most of it is reprocessed from other text. So the production > of text inevitably has to involve (but can't be limited to) a hermeneutic > dimension. > > (One of the problems with the new president is that he DOES do a lot of > direct recycling from Fox News, and doesn't even wash the beer bottle. But > I think we have to recognize that Mr. Trump is not a good example of > anything except himself.) > > David Kellogg > Macquarie University > > On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 3:02 PM, Christopher Schuck < > schuckcschuck@gmail.com > > wrote: > > > Thank you very much for those elaborations and for sharing some of the > > considerations that went into what you chose to leave out of your > analysis, > > David. Would it be OK to share your running transcript with my other > > listserv of psychologists (none of them to my knowledge psycholinguists), > > as an example of how one might approach Trump from a more > > cultural-historical or semiotic perspective? Their discussions so far > tend > > to be couched in more psychological terms and have not been especially > > focused on language as such - I think they would find it interesting. > > > > Your mention of Dilthey reminds me of something I have always been a > little > > confused about, which is the distinction between semiotic and hermeneutic > > analysis of the meanings generated by text, and how that difference might > > apply in the current situation. I take the limitation of "man's presence > in > > his present" to capture perezhivanie, at least partly, as concerning the > > limitations of description and perhaps phenomenology to account for that > > active construal of meaning. But I also gather that reading such a text > in > > the "hermeneutic" sense of alternate interpretations and understandings > is > > not quite what we're after, either. > > > > I don't want to get too far afield from the current topic, so perhaps a > > discussion for another time. > > > > Chris > > > > On Wednesday, January 25, 2017, David Kellogg > > wrote: > > > > > When people (including people on this list) use the word text, they > > usually > > > don't literally mean ink and paper. For example, Obama said (and Trump > > > repeated it in his CIA speech a few days ago), the Constitution is a > > > precious thing but "in the end" it is just parchment if people don't > > > believe in who they are. A more technical way to express this idea is > to > > > say that a text is a semantic rather than a lexicogrammatical or a > > > phono/graphological one. > > > > > > But Vygotsky argues that after about age one, children develop human, > > > cutural-historical consciousness, and this consciousness is "systemic" > > (it > > > involves the ability to choose, such as being able to choose to treat > the > > > visual purview as ink and paper or as a set of signs) and it is > > "semantic" > > > (it involves seeing objects as meaningful; that is, as standing for > > > something more). So what this means is that human consciousness is not > > > simply a neurological or even a "cognitive" phenomenon, like animal > > > consciousness. It's a semantic one. It's not just that texts are made > by > > > human minds. Sociogenetically, ontogenetically, and even > > > "microgenetically", human minds are made of text. > > > > > > Halliday says that experience is "the reality that we construe for > > > ourselves through language". That's why text really is pertinent to a > > > discussion of perizhivanie. We could use the Dilthey definition and > treat > > > perizhivanie as "man's presence in his present". But how would we study > > it? > > > On the other hand, if we treat perizhivanie as a reality that we > construe > > > for ourselves through language the path is much clearer. Perezhivanie > is > > a > > > moment of text, and the structure of perizhivanie can be studied > through > > > the structure of text. > > > > > > When I sat down to analyze Trump's speech, I had to ignore a lot of the > > > non-textual material it presented. Take, for example, Trump's > > > gesticulations. He has a tic of using his left hand to form a circle > > > (suggesting female genitalia, I suppose) and his right hand to to > display > > > an erect index finger. This is distracting and probably about as > > important > > > as the fact that he sniffled through the presidential debates: these > are > > > not central to the reality that Trump construes through language. On > the > > > other hand (no pun intended), he uses those gesticulations to "beat" > the > > > cadence of stresses, particularly in the last four syllables of each > > > paragraph, as Mussolini and Hitler were wont to do. Obama remarked that > > > Trump's way of communicating is "powerful stuff". That's not an > > > analysis--but it's probably not a compliment either. It is just the way > > > Obama construes the way Trump is able to construe Trump's reality > through > > > language. > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 3:41 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil < > a.j.gil@iped.uio.no > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > David's analyses also give more than just text, I believe. > > > > A > > > > ________________________________________ > > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu < > > > xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil > > > > > Sent: 25 January 2017 19:19 > > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's "talking" versus "speaking" > > > > > > > > Chris, > > > > I think you are very right, everything about this situation is not so > > > much > > > > about the formal text... but still, as others have been pointing out > > > > throughout the discussion, particularly in the parallel thread on the > > > role > > > > of the Learning Sciences, we need to do what we can, locally, > globally, > > > and > > > > elsewhere. And so one way to do something we know how to do is > > analysing > > > > the speech not as text, but as *contexture*. We remarked bringing up > > > > Martin's points, and also using an example, that the point is to see > > > > societal possibilities of hearing a speech. And that includes > bringing > > in > > > > so much more than just formal text. One example was Roth's analysis > of > > a > > > > song by rap artist Eminem, http://www.qualitative- > > > > research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/1213 . > > > > A > > > > > > > > ________________________________________ > > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu < > > > xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > on behalf of Christopher Schuck > > > > > > Sent: 24 January 2017 16:22 > > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's "talking" versus "speaking" > > > > > > > > Another irony that hasn't been mentioned is that this distictive > > > speaking/ > > > > talking style flagged by McWhorter made him unusually effective as a > > > > campaigner where the goal was to create chaos and premature action, > yet > > > > would undermine his ability to be an effective (or safe) president > and > > > > doesn't "fit." This is relevant insofar as it emphasizes the new > > > experience > > > > of hearing him speak this way *as president* as opposed to > > > > president-wannabe. In the inauguration speech, this person who is > known > > > for > > > > talking not speaking attempts to speak formally, which creates yet > > > another > > > > split between taking that pseudo-formal language literally and taking > > it > > > > ironically. > > > > > > > > So it is not just the difference between reading him literally and > > > reading > > > > him ironically, but that what is formal and what is literal (as well > as > > > > what is informal and what is indirect, and whether he is a "formal" > > > leader > > > > or informal television personality) become tangled up with each other > > as > > > he > > > > transitions from celebrity to this official role.That is one reason > > why I > > > > wonder whether looking at the formal text of this official speech > > > (however > > > > fascinating) is such a useful way to explore the perezhivanie of the > > > Trump > > > > experience, because it's so uniquely not about the written text. I > > > suspect > > > > even many of Trump's supporters were not particularly interested in > the > > > > speech. > > > > > > > > On Tuesday, January 24, 2017, Alfredo Jornet Gil < > a.j.gil@iped.uio.no > > > > > > > ');>> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Richard, > > > > > what this linguist says and you comment on Trump's talk is pretty > > close > > > > to > > > > > what I was just writing to Francine in the main "trump's speech" > > thread > > > > > about hearing him literally and hearing him as irony. If you stick > to > > > > > hearing in the same he seems to treat his recipients, then you may > > have > > > > to > > > > > believe that each word conveys an idea and that one word suffices > to > > > give > > > > > the idea, like "it's true". It seems to be enough. As per your > > > question, > > > > > yes, it's a very scary question. It also is very scary that he may > > say, > > > > > "it's true" and so be it. > > > > > Alfredo > > > > > ________________________________________ > > > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu < > > > xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > > on behalf of Richard Beach > > > > > > Sent: 23 January 2017 23:09 > > > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Trump's "talking" versus "speaking" > > > > > > > > > > In a New York Times op-ed > > > > 01/21/opinion/sunday/how-to-listen-to-donald-trump-every-day > > > > > -for-years.html>, the linguist, John McWhorter, distinguishes > between > > > > > Trump?s informal, spontaneous ?talking? versus ?speaking? that > > involves > > > > > employing a more formal register associated with written language. > He > > > > cites > > > > > the example of Trump?s talking: ?Look, having nuclear ? my uncle > was > > a > > > > > great professor and scientist and engineer, Dr. John Trump at > M.I.T.; > > > > good > > > > > genes, very good genes, O.K., very smart, the Wharton School of > > > Finance, > > > > > very good, very smart ? you know, if you?re a conservative > > Republican, > > > > if I > > > > > were a liberal, if, like, O.K. ?? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What?s problematic here is that Trump?s off-the-cuff ?talking,? as > > well > > > > as > > > > > his use of tweets, can convey messages with problematic uptakes > from > > > > > others, resulting in taking action without careful thought or > > > > consultation > > > > > with others. As McWhorter notes: ?All understand that his speech is > > > > > structurally ungraceful. It may be harder to grasp that Mr. Trump, > as > > > > > someone just talking rather than artfully communicating ideas, has > no > > > > sense > > > > > of the tacit understanding that a politician?s utterances are more > > > > signals > > > > > than statements, vehicles meant to convey larger messages.? > > > > > > > > > > When one of his hotels is another country is attacked by > > ?terrorists,? > > > > > will Trump, as someone who perceives himself as the prime actor, > > > > > spontaneously declare war with little or no consideration of the > > > > > consequences of his actions? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Richard Beach, Professor Emeritus of English Education, University > of > > > > > Minnesota > > > > > rbeach@umn.edu > > > > > Websites: Digital writing , > > Media > > > > > literacy , Teaching > > > > literature > > > > > , Identity-focused ELA > > > Teaching > > > > < > > > > > http://identities.pbworks.com/>, Common Core State Standards < > > > > > http://englishccss.pbworks.com/>, Apps for literacy learning < > > > > > http://usingipads.pbworks.com/>, Teaching about climate change < > > > > > http://climatechangeela.pbworks.com/> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Jan 23, 2017, at 12:52 PM, lpscholar2@gmail.com > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Andrew, Andy, > > > > > > I also want to pursue the example of James Lawson. > > > > > > What struck me was his relationship to both parents as formative. > > > > > > Moving to Trump?s inauguration, what struck me was the bodily > > gesture > > > > he > > > > > was expressing walking down the hallway just prior to speaking. > > > > > > This body language that i was reading before he spoke a word. > > > > > > I hope some of you watched the Frontline documentary on PBS > > EXPLORING > > > > > both Trump?s and Clinton?s early family life. > > > > > > > > > > > > Trump?s father was only interested in ?winners? and to come > second > > > was > > > > > to be a ?loser?. The father sent Trump as a young man to a military > > > > academy > > > > > that would teach his son how to be a ?winner? a lesson that Trump > > > > inhabits > > > > > and is incarnating in his every gesture. > > > > > > > > > > > > His emotional, cognitive, and performative symmetry captured in > his > > > > > facial expression as he walked forward to give his inaugural > address. > > > > > > > > > > > > In other words, James Lawson, Donald Trump, and Martin Packer?s > > book > > > > > review i see as overlapping themes. > > > > > > When we explore ?expression? and ?intentionality? and ?language? > i > > > want > > > > > to include the family upbringing as formative. > > > > > > > > > > > > Now as an aside, Simmel would say both James and Donald are > > > inhabiting > > > > > (fictions) that INform their experiences, but that may be a leap > too > > > far. > > > > > Simmel was following the philosopher Vasinger (spelling?) who > focused > > > on > > > > > how we live our lives (as is) or (as though) but to take this turn > > > would > > > > be > > > > > for another thread. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > > > > > > > > > From: Andrew Babson > > > > > > Sent: January 23, 2017 9:08 AM > > > > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: James Lawson and perezhivanie > > > > > > > > > > > > Andy, thank you for the timely post, especially as we move > forward > > in > > > > the > > > > > > shadow of authoritarianism here in the USA. Lawson's example of > > > > choosing > > > > > > non-violent protest, following Gandhi, is helpful. Consider the > > > > > > effectiveness of millions of people last weekend peacefully > taking > > to > > > > the > > > > > > streets with few if any arrests (side note: we all went as a > family > > > > here > > > > > in > > > > > > Philly, it was great). Contrast the Black Bloc member's sucker > > punch > > > of > > > > > > neo-nazi Richard Spencer: people are cheering it, but those same > > > people > > > > > > probably realize it's not a scalable strategy. Different tours de > > > > force, > > > > > > different effects, the gender connotations of which are > > interesting. > > > > > > > > > > > > *P **erezhivanie > > > > > > *is a new term to > > me, > > > > > which I > > > > > > link here to the XMCA blog for those other also unfamiliar with > it. > > > It > > > > > > seems like a pretty clear gloss of a term I do know well, > > *Erlebnis, > > > > > > *"experience" > > > > > > (I dislike the gloss of that Dilthey-an term as "lived" > > > > experience...but > > > > > > that's for another discussion). > > > > > > > > > > > > It's fascinating to learn about Lawson's vocational > decision-making > > > > > > process, and to consider the possible effects of violent and > > > > non-violent > > > > > > dissent. But perhaps you could clarify for us Andy why you > thought > > > > > Lawson's > > > > > > story was an example of *perezhivanie*? Where's the point of > > > analytical > > > > > > traction? If it means more than "experience", how can we apply > that > > > > > broader > > > > > > meaning here? It seems like he had a Pauline metanoia/conversion > > > > > > experience. Is that what you mean? > > > > > > > > > > > > Andrew > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > Andrew Babson, Ph.D. > > > > > > Lecturer > > > > > > Graduate School of Education > > > > > > University of Pennsylvania > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 4:40 AM, Andy Blunden > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > James Lawson is the Methodist preacher who trained the young > > members > > > of > > > > > the > > > > > > SNCC in non-violent action and wrote their constitution. I paste > > > below > > > > > and > > > > > > attach an excerpt from my book "The Origins of Collective > Decision > > > > > Making" > > > > > > which narrates Lawson's life up until April 1960. Perezhivanie > was > > > not > > > > > the > > > > > > topic under discussion so it is not mentioned in the text, but > > > xmca-ers > > > > > > should be able to see it, an example of perezhivanie: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > James Lawson was born in 1928, in Uniontown, Pennsylvania. His > > > father, > > > > > > James Snr., was the grandson of an escaped slave, and a Minister > > for > > > > the > > > > > > African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church in New England. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Via the Free African Society(FAS) the Methodists had recruited > > freed > > > > > slaves > > > > > > in Philadelphiain 1787, but as a result of a racist incident, > some > > > left > > > > > to > > > > > > found the African Methodist Episcopal Church(AMEC). Nonetheless, > > many > > > > > > African Americans stayed with the United Methodist Church. The > AMEC > > > > split > > > > > > started in Philadelphia and the AMEC Zion Church was a split that > > > came > > > > > out > > > > > > of New York. It was to AMEC Zion, James Lawson was born. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > However, Lawson returned to The United Methodist Church, created > > by a > > > > > 1939 > > > > > > merger of several branches of the Methodist Church, which set up > > five > > > > > > regional ?jurisdictions? of Methodists in the US, organized to > > > maintain > > > > > > regionally identity and a sixth, called the ?Central > Jurisdiction? > > > > which > > > > > > combined the Black annual conferences, thus building segregation > > into > > > > the > > > > > > constitution of the Church.The Methodists went through a long and > > > > painful > > > > > > process, carried out in accordance with the Methodist Code of > > > > Discipline, > > > > > > which mandates the principle of Majority, to re-integrate the > white > > > and > > > > > > Black, but it was not till after 1964 that Black conferences > > started > > > to > > > > > > merge into white conferences. At the local level, congregations > > > > continued > > > > > > much as before. So it was within the Black section of the > > segregated > > > > > United > > > > > > Methodist Church, that James Lawson became a Methodist. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > James Snr. was a militant preacher; he packed a 38 pistol and set > > up > > > > > > branches of the NAACP wherever he was assigned to preach. After > > > serving > > > > > at > > > > > > St. James AMEZ Church in Massillon, Ohio, he transferred to the > > > > Lexington > > > > > > Annual Conference of the Central Jurisdiction of the United > > Methodist > > > > > > Church. James Snr. was no pacifist and according to Lawson he > > > ?refused > > > > to > > > > > > take any guff from anyone, particularly on the point of race? and > > > > > ?insisted > > > > > > that he was going to be treated as a man.? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lawson?s mother, Philane May Cover, on the other hand, was > > decidedly > > > > > > nonviolent. Lawson?s challenge, which was to form his character, > > was > > > to > > > > > > reconcile his father?s militancy with his mother?s nonviolence. > > > Lawson > > > > > grew > > > > > > up in Massillon. One day, at the age of 10, Lawson was asked by > his > > > > > mother > > > > > > to run an errand: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A little white child in an automobile yelled ?nigger? out the > > opened > > > > > > window. I walked over ... and, since I was in a hurry running my > > > > mother?s > > > > > > errand, I smacked the child and went on my way. When the Lawson > > kids > > > > got > > > > > > called ?nigger? on the streets or at school, we usually fought. I > > > don?t > > > > > > know where we got that from, except that we figured that it was > > > > something > > > > > > to fight over. (Lawson, cited in King, 1999) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On the return trip home, aware of possible repercussions, Lawson > > > tried > > > > to > > > > > > find the parents of the offending child, to talk to them, but the > > car > > > > was > > > > > > gone. Once home, he told his mother of the incident. Lawson?s > > mother > > > > > > replied, ?Jimmy, what good did that do?? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > She talked about who I was, the fact of God?s love, that we were > a > > > > family > > > > > > of love and that such an incident could not hurt me, because of > > who I > > > > > was. > > > > > > I don?t remember anyone else being around, but a stillness took > > over > > > my > > > > > > being at that moment. It was, as I realized much later on, a > > mystical > > > > > > experience. In a very real way, my life stood still. I realized > in > > > that > > > > > > stillness that I had changed forever. One of the phrases my > mother > > > used > > > > > in > > > > > > her conversation with me was that ?there must be a better way?. I > > > > > > determined, from then on, that I would find the better way. > > (Lawson, > > > > > cited > > > > > > in King, 1999, pp. 187-188) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > He first became acquainted with Gandhi?s experiments in > nonviolence > > > as > > > > a > > > > > > child, thanks to the African-American press which the family > > > discussed > > > > > > around the dinner table, and had read Gandhi?s autobiography as a > > > > > teenager. > > > > > > At Baldwin Wallace College, a liberal arts Methodistcollege in > > Berea, > > > > > Ohio, > > > > > > he studied Thoreau, Gandhi and Tolstoy, and the pacifist > > theologians > > > > > > Dietrich Bonhoeffer and Reinhold Niebuhr. At age 19, he became a > > > draft > > > > > > resister, refusing service in the Korean War. Executive director > of > > > > > > Fellowship Of Reconciliation (FOR), A. J. Muste,frequently > visited > > to > > > > > > lecture at the College: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > All of us in history classes were required to hear Muste. I was > > > > thrilled. > > > > > > He made me realize that I was not alone in my experimentation, > that > > > > there > > > > > > was a world movement, and a national movement. ... He acquainted > me > > > > with > > > > > > the Fellowship Of Reconciliation, which I joined on the spot in > > 1947. > > > > > That > > > > > > meant that I got exposed to their book list. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > After hearing a lecture by A. J. Muste, he joined FOR and CORE. > > Muste > > > > was > > > > > > instrumental thereafter in strengthening Lawson?s nonviolent > > > > orientation, > > > > > > directing him towards Gandhi and later facilitating his entry > into > > > the > > > > > > sit-in and boycott movement beginning in the South. In the late > > 1940s > > > > and > > > > > > early 1950s Lawson had organized sit-ins and protests directed at > > > > > > establishments that discriminated against blacks in Massillon, > long > > > > > before > > > > > > the Montgomery bus-boycott. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > He was also active with the National Conference of Methodist > Youth. > > > > > > Although a member of a segregated Methodist Church, he found > plenty > > > of > > > > > > support for his stands against racial discrimination and war from > > his > > > > > white > > > > > > colleagues and church fellows. While he was in prison serving > > > thirteen > > > > > > months of a two and a half year term for draft resistance in > 1952, > > he > > > > was > > > > > > re-elected as Vice-President of the NCMY. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Wesleyan Methodism was central to Lawson?s outlook. Just as John > > > Wesley > > > > > had > > > > > > sought to cleanse individuals of iniquity, so could society be > > purged > > > > of > > > > > > the social sins of slavery, segregation, poverty, and > > war.Generations > > > > of > > > > > > African American Methodists from Harriet Tubman (AMEZ) and Henry > M. > > > > > Turner > > > > > > (AME) in the nineteenth century, to Rosa Parks (AME) and James > > Farmer > > > > > > (MEC), were led to social justice activism by this Methodist > > > heritage. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lawson used his prison time to read and think. Writing from > prison > > in > > > > > 1952 > > > > > > aged 23 years old and yet to enter the seminary, Lawson said he > > > aspired > > > > > to > > > > > > emulate ?the life of Jesus, St. Francis, George Fox, Gandhi, > > > Buddha... > > > > > and > > > > > > other great religious persons.? These figures attached little > > > > importance > > > > > to > > > > > > ?theology but (to their) experience with God.?Further, he noted > > > > > ?religious > > > > > > failures today are in (the arena of) experience and practice, not > > > > > > theology.? When Lawson entered prison, he was a Christian > > pacifist.He > > > > > told > > > > > > Mary King however, that his ?first commitment was to work on > race,? > > > and > > > > > > conscientious objection came second.By the time of his release, > he > > > had > > > > > > advanced to Gandhian nonviolence. He wondered ?why can?t a mass > > > > > non-violent > > > > > > revolution be staged throughout the South where the segregation > > > pattern > > > > > is > > > > > > much like the ?untouchables? of India? Such a movement would have > > to > > > > > start > > > > > > with one person who had the Christian vision to make such a > > > revolution > > > > a > > > > > > reality in his own life.? Gandhian nonviolence became the > > > synthesizing > > > > > > factor for Lawson?s religious thinking: the militancy of his > > father?s > > > > > > Methodism and the Christian pacifism that he drew from his > mother. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Muste arranged for Lawson to visit India after his release from > > > prison > > > > > with > > > > > > a letter of introduction to activists in the Gandhian movement, > and > > > he > > > > > > remained in India from May 1953 to 1956, working at Hislop > College > > in > > > > > > Nagpur, reading Indian literature and working with Gandhi?s > > movement. > > > > > > Lawson?s practice would remain deeply religious; his nonviolence > > was > > > > > > saturated with the message of Christian love, and blended with > > > > principles > > > > > > synthesized from a broad range of religious and secular sources, > > both > > > > > > Eastern and Western. His aim was the ?mass education and training > > of > > > > > people > > > > > > in the use of nonviolent direct action techniques.? Lawson > insisted > > > > that > > > > > > ?you are fighting a system, not an individual, not a race, or not > > the > > > > > > people of another country, but a system.? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > He continued his study of pacifism and Gandhian nonviolence at > > > Oberlin > > > > > > College, Ohio. While still in India, he had read about Martin > > Luther > > > > King > > > > > > and his successful leadership of the Montgomery bus > boycott.King?s > > > > > lecture > > > > > > at Oberlin on February 6, 1957, fortified his long-held intention > > to > > > > work > > > > > > in the South for transformative social change. After King?s > lecture > > > to > > > > a > > > > > > packed audience, he and Lawson talked together at dinner.Though > > > Lawson > > > > > was > > > > > > contemplating study for a Ph.D., King told him ?don?t wait, but > > come > > > > > south > > > > > > now!? adding that there was no one else like Lawson.Muste > arranged > > > for > > > > > FOR > > > > > > to hire Lawson as southern field secretary to be stationed at > > > Nashville > > > > > in > > > > > > January 1958. Upon his arrival, he found that Glenn Smiley, > > national > > > > > field > > > > > > director of FOR, had arranged for Lawson to run a full schedule > of > > > > > > workshops ? including one to take place early that year at the > > first > > > > > annual > > > > > > meeting of the SCLC in Columbia, South Carolina. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > At the SCLC meeting, King made an exuberant introduction of > Lawson > > as > > > > > FOR?s > > > > > > new regional representative and discussed the organization?s role > > in > > > > > > Montgomery, telling delegates to be sure to attend Lawson?s > > workshop > > > on > > > > > > nonviolence. King took his seat in the first pew, waiting for the > > > > > > three-hour session to start: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Martin did that at every SCLC meeting as long as he lived. He > would > > > ask > > > > > me > > > > > > to conduct an afternoon workshop, usually two or three hours, and > > he > > > > > would > > > > > > arrange for it to be ?at-large? so that everyone could attend, > with > > > > > nothing > > > > > > else to compete. He put it on the schedule himself. A few minutes > > > > early, > > > > > he > > > > > > would show up and sit alone, as an example, in the front row. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Back in Nashville, Lawson continued with Monday evening workshops > > > > during > > > > > > the autumn of 1959 in which he trained the students who were to > be > > > the > > > > > core > > > > > > of the Nashville sit-in movement. As a result of his involvement > > with > > > > the > > > > > > sit-ins Lawson was expelled from Vanderbilt, but he enrolled with > > > > Boston > > > > > > University to finish his degree in theology,while continuing to > > work > > > > with > > > > > > the students. Several professors in the School of Theology > resigned > > > > over > > > > > > his expulsion. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The techniques that the students deployed were drawn from > Lawson?s > > > > > > workshops. In 1958 and 1959, Lawson mobilized all that he knew > > about > > > > > > Christian pacifism, Gandhian nonviolence, and Methodist social > > > ministry > > > > > and > > > > > > blended them into an unprecedented curriculum that influenced the > > > civil > > > > > > rights movement in Nashville and beyond. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Blending Christianity and interreligious sources, he did not > > present > > > > its > > > > > > philosophy and practice as a secular doctrine, but as the essence > > of > > > > > > religion itself. Core to nonviolence was mirroring God?s love for > > > > > humankind > > > > > > and exhibiting it through concrete relationships of human > > solidarity > > > > and > > > > > > community. ?Nonviolence,? Lawson taught, is the aggressive, > > > forgiving, > > > > > > patient, long-suffering Christ-like and Christ-commanded love or > > > > > good-will > > > > > > for all humankind even in the face of tension, fear, hatred, or > > > demonic > > > > > > evil.? Moreover, ?it is the readiness to absorb suffering with > > > > > forgiveness > > > > > > and courage rather than to inflict suffering on others.? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lawson divided his instruction into four modules: how nonviolence > > > > reacts, > > > > > > training for nonviolence, the virtues of nonviolence, and the > > methods > > > > of > > > > > > nonviolence. Practitioners prepared themselves by jettisoning > > anger, > > > > > > hostility and fear thus ?minimizing the effect of an attack,? > > valuing > > > > > love, > > > > > > courage, fearlessness, and forgiveness, and pursuing redemptive > > > > suffering > > > > > > which ?releases unknown elements for good.? Preparation included > > > > > meditation > > > > > > and prayer, study of the scriptures, practicing nonviolence > through > > > > > > challenges to segregation in bus transportation and in other > public > > > > > > facilities.The practice steps included fact-finding, negotiation, > > > > > education > > > > > > of the community, and various methods of nonviolent direct action > > > > > including > > > > > > sit-ins, boycotts, strikes, and civil disobedience. Lawson > provided > > > an > > > > > > extensive bibliography including relevant verses from the Bible, > > the > > > > > > Bhagavad Gita, and from the Chinese philosopher, Mo Ti and the > > Hebrew > > > > > > prophet, Isaiah. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The Nashville sit-ins and those led by students in other southern > > > > cities > > > > > > convinced Ella Baker of the SCLC to call a conference in April, > > 1960, > > > > at > > > > > > Shaw University in Raleigh, North Carolina. Out of this meeting > > > emerged > > > > > the > > > > > > Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee.Lawson delivered an > > opening > > > > > > keynote address that helped to frame SNCC?s nonviolent > > > > trajectory.Later, > > > > > > Lawson summarized discussions and consensus that emerged out of > the > > > > > > conference, and his synopsis received the approval of everyone > > there. > > > > > > Lawson?s overall comments said that ?nonviolence as it grows from > > > > > > Judaic-Christian tradition seeks a social order of justice > > permeated > > > by > > > > > > love.? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It was Lawson who delivered the keynote address and framed SNCC?s > > > > > > nonviolent orientation. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The whole group, perhaps 120 participants, all in the room, asked > > me > > > to > > > > > > draft a statement. Eventually, three different drafts emerged. > The > > > > > > Nashville group was cohesive. The extant draft was the third, > > > > influenced > > > > > by > > > > > > the Nashville group, after two earlier conversations. (Interview > > with > > > > > King, > > > > > > June 2014) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lawson?s synopsis was approved by the Conference. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In a private email message Mary King told me: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > He [James Lawson] was reading from the FOR booklist from a young > > age, > > > > > but I > > > > > > don?t think that he was influenced on notions of Consensus by > > > Quakers, > > > > > > because the connection was too abstract. Let me underscore that > he > > > says > > > > > it > > > > > > was for him Methodist origins. (Private email, 15 April 2014) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In his interview with Mary King, Lawson confirmed that the origin > > of > > > > > > Consensus in SNCC was the Nashville Central Committee, confirming > > > what > > > > > Mary > > > > > > King had told me in April. As to the roots Consensus in Lawson?s > > own > > > > > > experience, he emphasized that: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It was the Methodist youth and student movements with which I had > > > grown > > > > > up, > > > > > > and this is how they made decisions. They knew the rules of > > > > parliamentary > > > > > > procedures, but they wanted to find a common mind. (Interview > with > > > > King, > > > > > > June 2014) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The Methodist Church to this very day still mandates Majority > > > > decisions, > > > > > > but this would never have entailed children voting ? in general > > > > > youngsters > > > > > > in these organizations were simply told what to do. The Black > > > > > congregations > > > > > > had operated separately for more than a century, so there was > some > > > room > > > > > for > > > > > > Lawson to develop a consensual model of collaboration in working > > with > > > > > young > > > > > > people. It is also possible the Black congregations, like other > > Black > > > > > > Churches in America, drew on other traditions of decision making. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Andy Blunden > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective- > > > decision-making > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From lpscholar2@gmail.com Fri Jan 27 10:45:18 2017 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2017 10:45:18 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's "talking" versus "speaking" In-Reply-To: References: <628ebbd3-8b51-8e15-47d0-9164e8352c36@mira.net> <58866d1f.90966b0a.1b7d5.c1c8@mx.google.com> <289C4B7F-0A9A-4A10-BB1F-0619858FFBAA@umn.edu> <1485241782176.85472@iped.uio.no> <1485368397236.71956@iped.uio.no> <1485369691280.7805@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <588b953f.4319620a.b813.481b@mx.google.com> David, This turn of phrase, Hermeneutics as one kind of semiotic: the RECEPTIVE KIND Opens up the inquiry to how central is the receptive dimension to human being/activity. I would suggest it is under estimated as a ?source? of our responsiveness [not the outcome or destination] to each other and possibly even to objects ?agency; [as Marc Clara uses the term ?agency?in exploring perezhivanie/representation/mediators]. Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From: David Kellogg Sent: January 26, 2017 1:51 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's "talking" versus "speaking" Sure, Chris; it's all xmca, i.e. public domain. The later version I sent in response to Helena is probably better; the glosses are a little clearer. I think of hermeneutics as one kind of semiotic: the receptive kind. But when I think of human minds as made up of text, what I really mean is that they are engaged in the production of text. But of course text is recyclable. Not that much of it is produced from scratch (and perhaps even less of it is recycled the way we recycle intact beer bottles); most of it is reprocessed from other text. So the production of text inevitably has to involve (but can't be limited to) a hermeneutic dimension. (One of the problems with the new president is that he DOES do a lot of direct recycling from Fox News, and doesn't even wash the beer bottle. But I think we have to recognize that Mr. Trump is not a good example of anything except himself.) David Kellogg Macquarie University On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 3:02 PM, Christopher Schuck wrote: > Thank you very much for those elaborations and for sharing some of the > considerations that went into what you chose to leave out of your analysis, > David. Would it be OK to share your running transcript with my other > listserv of psychologists (none of them to my knowledge psycholinguists), > as an example of how one might approach Trump from a more > cultural-historical or semiotic perspective? Their discussions so far tend > to be couched in more psychological terms and have not been especially > focused on language as such - I think they would find it interesting. > > Your mention of Dilthey reminds me of something I have always been a little > confused about, which is the distinction between semiotic and hermeneutic > analysis of the meanings generated by text, and how that difference might > apply in the current situation. I take the limitation of "man's presence in > his present" to capture perezhivanie, at least partly, as concerning the > limitations of description and perhaps phenomenology to account for that > active construal of meaning. But I also gather that reading such a text in > the "hermeneutic" sense of alternate interpretations and understandings is > not quite what we're after, either. > > I don't want to get too far afield from the current topic, so perhaps a > discussion for another time. > > Chris > > On Wednesday, January 25, 2017, David Kellogg > wrote: > > > When people (including people on this list) use the word text, they > usually > > don't literally mean ink and paper. For example, Obama said (and Trump > > repeated it in his CIA speech a few days ago), the Constitution is a > > precious thing but "in the end" it is just parchment if people don't > > believe in who they are. A more technical way to express this idea is to > > say that a text is a semantic rather than a lexicogrammatical or a > > phono/graphological one. > > > > But Vygotsky argues that after about age one, children develop human, > > cutural-historical consciousness, and this consciousness is "systemic" > (it > > involves the ability to choose, such as being able to choose to treat the > > visual purview as ink and paper or as a set of signs) and it is > "semantic" > > (it involves seeing objects as meaningful; that is, as standing for > > something more). So what this means is that human consciousness is not > > simply a neurological or even a "cognitive" phenomenon, like animal > > consciousness. It's a semantic one. It's not just that texts are made by > > human minds. Sociogenetically, ontogenetically, and even > > "microgenetically", human minds are made of text. > > > > Halliday says that experience is "the reality that we construe for > > ourselves through language". That's why text really is pertinent to a > > discussion of perizhivanie. We could use the Dilthey definition and treat > > perizhivanie as "man's presence in his present". But how would we study > it? > > On the other hand, if we treat perizhivanie as a reality that we construe > > for ourselves through language the path is much clearer. Perezhivanie is > a > > moment of text, and the structure of perizhivanie can be studied through > > the structure of text. > > > > When I sat down to analyze Trump's speech, I had to ignore a lot of the > > non-textual material it presented. Take, for example, Trump's > > gesticulations. He has a tic of using his left hand to form a circle > > (suggesting female genitalia, I suppose) and his right hand to to display > > an erect index finger. This is distracting and probably about as > important > > as the fact that he sniffled through the presidential debates: these are > > not central to the reality that Trump construes through language. On the > > other hand (no pun intended), he uses those gesticulations to "beat" the > > cadence of stresses, particularly in the last four syllables of each > > paragraph, as Mussolini and Hitler were wont to do. Obama remarked that > > Trump's way of communicating is "powerful stuff". That's not an > > analysis--but it's probably not a compliment either. It is just the way > > Obama construes the way Trump is able to construe Trump's reality through > > language. > > > > David Kellogg > > Macquarie University > > > > > > On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 3:41 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > > > > wrote: > > > > > David's analyses also give more than just text, I believe. > > > A > > > ________________________________________ > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu < > > xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil > > > > Sent: 25 January 2017 19:19 > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's "talking" versus "speaking" > > > > > > Chris, > > > I think you are very right, everything about this situation is not so > > much > > > about the formal text... but still, as others have been pointing out > > > throughout the discussion, particularly in the parallel thread on the > > role > > > of the Learning Sciences, we need to do what we can, locally, globally, > > and > > > elsewhere. And so one way to do something we know how to do is > analysing > > > the speech not as text, but as *contexture*. We remarked bringing up > > > Martin's points, and also using an example, that the point is to see > > > societal possibilities of hearing a speech. And that includes bringing > in > > > so much more than just formal text. One example was Roth's analysis of > a > > > song by rap artist Eminem, http://www.qualitative- > > > research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/1213 . > > > A > > > > > > ________________________________________ > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu < > > xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > on behalf of Christopher Schuck > > > > Sent: 24 January 2017 16:22 > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's "talking" versus "speaking" > > > > > > Another irony that hasn't been mentioned is that this distictive > > speaking/ > > > talking style flagged by McWhorter made him unusually effective as a > > > campaigner where the goal was to create chaos and premature action, yet > > > would undermine his ability to be an effective (or safe) president and > > > doesn't "fit." This is relevant insofar as it emphasizes the new > > experience > > > of hearing him speak this way *as president* as opposed to > > > president-wannabe. In the inauguration speech, this person who is known > > for > > > talking not speaking attempts to speak formally, which creates yet > > another > > > split between taking that pseudo-formal language literally and taking > it > > > ironically. > > > > > > So it is not just the difference between reading him literally and > > reading > > > him ironically, but that what is formal and what is literal (as well as > > > what is informal and what is indirect, and whether he is a "formal" > > leader > > > or informal television personality) become tangled up with each other > as > > he > > > transitions from celebrity to this official role.That is one reason > why I > > > wonder whether looking at the formal text of this official speech > > (however > > > fascinating) is such a useful way to explore the perezhivanie of the > > Trump > > > experience, because it's so uniquely not about the written text. I > > suspect > > > even many of Trump's supporters were not particularly interested in the > > > speech. > > > > > > On Tuesday, January 24, 2017, Alfredo Jornet Gil > > > > ');>> > > wrote: > > > > > > > Richard, > > > > what this linguist says and you comment on Trump's talk is pretty > close > > > to > > > > what I was just writing to Francine in the main "trump's speech" > thread > > > > about hearing him literally and hearing him as irony. If you stick to > > > > hearing in the same he seems to treat his recipients, then you may > have > > > to > > > > believe that each word conveys an idea and that one word suffices to > > give > > > > the idea, like "it's true". It seems to be enough. As per your > > question, > > > > yes, it's a very scary question. It also is very scary that he may > say, > > > > "it's true" and so be it. > > > > Alfredo > > > > ________________________________________ > > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu < > > xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > on behalf of Richard Beach > > > > > Sent: 23 January 2017 23:09 > > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Trump's "talking" versus "speaking" > > > > > > > > In a New York Times op-ed > > > 01/21/opinion/sunday/how-to-listen-to-donald-trump-every-day > > > > -for-years.html>, the linguist, John McWhorter, distinguishes between > > > > Trump?s informal, spontaneous ?talking? versus ?speaking? that > involves > > > > employing a more formal register associated with written language. He > > > cites > > > > the example of Trump?s talking: ?Look, having nuclear ? my uncle was > a > > > > great professor and scientist and engineer, Dr. John Trump at M.I.T.; > > > good > > > > genes, very good genes, O.K., very smart, the Wharton School of > > Finance, > > > > very good, very smart ? you know, if you?re a conservative > Republican, > > > if I > > > > were a liberal, if, like, O.K. ?? > > > > > > > > > > > > What?s problematic here is that Trump?s off-the-cuff ?talking,? as > well > > > as > > > > his use of tweets, can convey messages with problematic uptakes from > > > > others, resulting in taking action without careful thought or > > > consultation > > > > with others. As McWhorter notes: ?All understand that his speech is > > > > structurally ungraceful. It may be harder to grasp that Mr. Trump, as > > > > someone just talking rather than artfully communicating ideas, has no > > > sense > > > > of the tacit understanding that a politician?s utterances are more > > > signals > > > > than statements, vehicles meant to convey larger messages.? > > > > > > > > When one of his hotels is another country is attacked by > ?terrorists,? > > > > will Trump, as someone who perceives himself as the prime actor, > > > > spontaneously declare war with little or no consideration of the > > > > consequences of his actions? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Richard Beach, Professor Emeritus of English Education, University of > > > > Minnesota > > > > rbeach@umn.edu > > > > Websites: Digital writing , > Media > > > > literacy , Teaching > > > literature > > > > , Identity-focused ELA > > Teaching > > > < > > > > http://identities.pbworks.com/>, Common Core State Standards < > > > > http://englishccss.pbworks.com/>, Apps for literacy learning < > > > > http://usingipads.pbworks.com/>, Teaching about climate change < > > > > http://climatechangeela.pbworks.com/> > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Jan 23, 2017, at 12:52 PM, lpscholar2@gmail.com > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Andrew, Andy, > > > > > I also want to pursue the example of James Lawson. > > > > > What struck me was his relationship to both parents as formative. > > > > > Moving to Trump?s inauguration, what struck me was the bodily > gesture > > > he > > > > was expressing walking down the hallway just prior to speaking. > > > > > This body language that i was reading before he spoke a word. > > > > > I hope some of you watched the Frontline documentary on PBS > EXPLORING > > > > both Trump?s and Clinton?s early family life. > > > > > > > > > > Trump?s father was only interested in ?winners? and to come second > > was > > > > to be a ?loser?. The father sent Trump as a young man to a military > > > academy > > > > that would teach his son how to be a ?winner? a lesson that Trump > > > inhabits > > > > and is incarnating in his every gesture. > > > > > > > > > > His emotional, cognitive, and performative symmetry captured in his > > > > facial expression as he walked forward to give his inaugural address. > > > > > > > > > > In other words, James Lawson, Donald Trump, and Martin Packer?s > book > > > > review i see as overlapping themes. > > > > > When we explore ?expression? and ?intentionality? and ?language? i > > want > > > > to include the family upbringing as formative. > > > > > > > > > > Now as an aside, Simmel would say both James and Donald are > > inhabiting > > > > (fictions) that INform their experiences, but that may be a leap too > > far. > > > > Simmel was following the philosopher Vasinger (spelling?) who focused > > on > > > > how we live our lives (as is) or (as though) but to take this turn > > would > > > be > > > > for another thread. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > > > > > > > From: Andrew Babson > > > > > Sent: January 23, 2017 9:08 AM > > > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: James Lawson and perezhivanie > > > > > > > > > > Andy, thank you for the timely post, especially as we move forward > in > > > the > > > > > shadow of authoritarianism here in the USA. Lawson's example of > > > choosing > > > > > non-violent protest, following Gandhi, is helpful. Consider the > > > > > effectiveness of millions of people last weekend peacefully taking > to > > > the > > > > > streets with few if any arrests (side note: we all went as a family > > > here > > > > in > > > > > Philly, it was great). Contrast the Black Bloc member's sucker > punch > > of > > > > > neo-nazi Richard Spencer: people are cheering it, but those same > > people > > > > > probably realize it's not a scalable strategy. Different tours de > > > force, > > > > > different effects, the gender connotations of which are > interesting. > > > > > > > > > > *P **erezhivanie > > > > > *is a new term to > me, > > > > which I > > > > > link here to the XMCA blog for those other also unfamiliar with it. > > It > > > > > seems like a pretty clear gloss of a term I do know well, > *Erlebnis, > > > > > *"experience" > > > > > (I dislike the gloss of that Dilthey-an term as "lived" > > > experience...but > > > > > that's for another discussion). > > > > > > > > > > It's fascinating to learn about Lawson's vocational decision-making > > > > > process, and to consider the possible effects of violent and > > > non-violent > > > > > dissent. But perhaps you could clarify for us Andy why you thought > > > > Lawson's > > > > > story was an example of *perezhivanie*? Where's the point of > > analytical > > > > > traction? If it means more than "experience", how can we apply that > > > > broader > > > > > meaning here? It seems like he had a Pauline metanoia/conversion > > > > > experience. Is that what you mean? > > > > > > > > > > Andrew > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------ > > > > > Andrew Babson, Ph.D. > > > > > Lecturer > > > > > Graduate School of Education > > > > > University of Pennsylvania > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 4:40 AM, Andy Blunden > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > James Lawson is the Methodist preacher who trained the young > members > > of > > > > the > > > > > SNCC in non-violent action and wrote their constitution. I paste > > below > > > > and > > > > > attach an excerpt from my book "The Origins of Collective Decision > > > > Making" > > > > > which narrates Lawson's life up until April 1960. Perezhivanie was > > not > > > > the > > > > > topic under discussion so it is not mentioned in the text, but > > xmca-ers > > > > > should be able to see it, an example of perezhivanie: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > James Lawson was born in 1928, in Uniontown, Pennsylvania. His > > father, > > > > > James Snr., was the grandson of an escaped slave, and a Minister > for > > > the > > > > > African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church in New England. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Via the Free African Society(FAS) the Methodists had recruited > freed > > > > slaves > > > > > in Philadelphiain 1787, but as a result of a racist incident, some > > left > > > > to > > > > > found the African Methodist Episcopal Church(AMEC). Nonetheless, > many > > > > > African Americans stayed with the United Methodist Church. The AMEC > > > split > > > > > started in Philadelphia and the AMEC Zion Church was a split that > > came > > > > out > > > > > of New York. It was to AMEC Zion, James Lawson was born. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > However, Lawson returned to The United Methodist Church, created > by a > > > > 1939 > > > > > merger of several branches of the Methodist Church, which set up > five > > > > > regional ?jurisdictions? of Methodists in the US, organized to > > maintain > > > > > regionally identity and a sixth, called the ?Central Jurisdiction? > > > which > > > > > combined the Black annual conferences, thus building segregation > into > > > the > > > > > constitution of the Church.The Methodists went through a long and > > > painful > > > > > process, carried out in accordance with the Methodist Code of > > > Discipline, > > > > > which mandates the principle of Majority, to re-integrate the white > > and > > > > > Black, but it was not till after 1964 that Black conferences > started > > to > > > > > merge into white conferences. At the local level, congregations > > > continued > > > > > much as before. So it was within the Black section of the > segregated > > > > United > > > > > Methodist Church, that James Lawson became a Methodist. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > James Snr. was a militant preacher; he packed a 38 pistol and set > up > > > > > branches of the NAACP wherever he was assigned to preach. After > > serving > > > > at > > > > > St. James AMEZ Church in Massillon, Ohio, he transferred to the > > > Lexington > > > > > Annual Conference of the Central Jurisdiction of the United > Methodist > > > > > Church. James Snr. was no pacifist and according to Lawson he > > ?refused > > > to > > > > > take any guff from anyone, particularly on the point of race? and > > > > ?insisted > > > > > that he was going to be treated as a man.? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lawson?s mother, Philane May Cover, on the other hand, was > decidedly > > > > > nonviolent. Lawson?s challenge, which was to form his character, > was > > to > > > > > reconcile his father?s militancy with his mother?s nonviolence. > > Lawson > > > > grew > > > > > up in Massillon. One day, at the age of 10, Lawson was asked by his > > > > mother > > > > > to run an errand: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A little white child in an automobile yelled ?nigger? out the > opened > > > > > window. I walked over ... and, since I was in a hurry running my > > > mother?s > > > > > errand, I smacked the child and went on my way. When the Lawson > kids > > > got > > > > > called ?nigger? on the streets or at school, we usually fought. I > > don?t > > > > > know where we got that from, except that we figured that it was > > > something > > > > > to fight over. (Lawson, cited in King, 1999) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On the return trip home, aware of possible repercussions, Lawson > > tried > > > to > > > > > find the parents of the offending child, to talk to them, but the > car > > > was > > > > > gone. Once home, he told his mother of the incident. Lawson?s > mother > > > > > replied, ?Jimmy, what good did that do?? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > She talked about who I was, the fact of God?s love, that we were a > > > family > > > > > of love and that such an incident could not hurt me, because of > who I > > > > was. > > > > > I don?t remember anyone else being around, but a stillness took > over > > my > > > > > being at that moment. It was, as I realized much later on, a > mystical > > > > > experience. In a very real way, my life stood still. I realized in > > that > > > > > stillness that I had changed forever. One of the phrases my mother > > used > > > > in > > > > > her conversation with me was that ?there must be a better way?. I > > > > > determined, from then on, that I would find the better way. > (Lawson, > > > > cited > > > > > in King, 1999, pp. 187-188) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > He first became acquainted with Gandhi?s experiments in nonviolence > > as > > > a > > > > > child, thanks to the African-American press which the family > > discussed > > > > > around the dinner table, and had read Gandhi?s autobiography as a > > > > teenager. > > > > > At Baldwin Wallace College, a liberal arts Methodistcollege in > Berea, > > > > Ohio, > > > > > he studied Thoreau, Gandhi and Tolstoy, and the pacifist > theologians > > > > > Dietrich Bonhoeffer and Reinhold Niebuhr. At age 19, he became a > > draft > > > > > resister, refusing service in the Korean War. Executive director of > > > > > Fellowship Of Reconciliation (FOR), A. J. Muste,frequently visited > to > > > > > lecture at the College: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > All of us in history classes were required to hear Muste. I was > > > thrilled. > > > > > He made me realize that I was not alone in my experimentation, that > > > there > > > > > was a world movement, and a national movement. ... He acquainted me > > > with > > > > > the Fellowship Of Reconciliation, which I joined on the spot in > 1947. > > > > That > > > > > meant that I got exposed to their book list. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > After hearing a lecture by A. J. Muste, he joined FOR and CORE. > Muste > > > was > > > > > instrumental thereafter in strengthening Lawson?s nonviolent > > > orientation, > > > > > directing him towards Gandhi and later facilitating his entry into > > the > > > > > sit-in and boycott movement beginning in the South. In the late > 1940s > > > and > > > > > early 1950s Lawson had organized sit-ins and protests directed at > > > > > establishments that discriminated against blacks in Massillon, long > > > > before > > > > > the Montgomery bus-boycott. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > He was also active with the National Conference of Methodist Youth. > > > > > Although a member of a segregated Methodist Church, he found plenty > > of > > > > > support for his stands against racial discrimination and war from > his > > > > white > > > > > colleagues and church fellows. While he was in prison serving > > thirteen > > > > > months of a two and a half year term for draft resistance in 1952, > he > > > was > > > > > re-elected as Vice-President of the NCMY. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Wesleyan Methodism was central to Lawson?s outlook. Just as John > > Wesley > > > > had > > > > > sought to cleanse individuals of iniquity, so could society be > purged > > > of > > > > > the social sins of slavery, segregation, poverty, and > war.Generations > > > of > > > > > African American Methodists from Harriet Tubman (AMEZ) and Henry M. > > > > Turner > > > > > (AME) in the nineteenth century, to Rosa Parks (AME) and James > Farmer > > > > > (MEC), were led to social justice activism by this Methodist > > heritage. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lawson used his prison time to read and think. Writing from prison > in > > > > 1952 > > > > > aged 23 years old and yet to enter the seminary, Lawson said he > > aspired > > > > to > > > > > emulate ?the life of Jesus, St. Francis, George Fox, Gandhi, > > Buddha... > > > > and > > > > > other great religious persons.? These figures attached little > > > importance > > > > to > > > > > ?theology but (to their) experience with God.?Further, he noted > > > > ?religious > > > > > failures today are in (the arena of) experience and practice, not > > > > > theology.? When Lawson entered prison, he was a Christian > pacifist.He > > > > told > > > > > Mary King however, that his ?first commitment was to work on race,? > > and > > > > > conscientious objection came second.By the time of his release, he > > had > > > > > advanced to Gandhian nonviolence. He wondered ?why can?t a mass > > > > non-violent > > > > > revolution be staged throughout the South where the segregation > > pattern > > > > is > > > > > much like the ?untouchables? of India? Such a movement would have > to > > > > start > > > > > with one person who had the Christian vision to make such a > > revolution > > > a > > > > > reality in his own life.? Gandhian nonviolence became the > > synthesizing > > > > > factor for Lawson?s religious thinking: the militancy of his > father?s > > > > > Methodism and the Christian pacifism that he drew from his mother. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Muste arranged for Lawson to visit India after his release from > > prison > > > > with > > > > > a letter of introduction to activists in the Gandhian movement, and > > he > > > > > remained in India from May 1953 to 1956, working at Hislop College > in > > > > > Nagpur, reading Indian literature and working with Gandhi?s > movement. > > > > > Lawson?s practice would remain deeply religious; his nonviolence > was > > > > > saturated with the message of Christian love, and blended with > > > principles > > > > > synthesized from a broad range of religious and secular sources, > both > > > > > Eastern and Western. His aim was the ?mass education and training > of > > > > people > > > > > in the use of nonviolent direct action techniques.? Lawson insisted > > > that > > > > > ?you are fighting a system, not an individual, not a race, or not > the > > > > > people of another country, but a system.? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > He continued his study of pacifism and Gandhian nonviolence at > > Oberlin > > > > > College, Ohio. While still in India, he had read about Martin > Luther > > > King > > > > > and his successful leadership of the Montgomery bus boycott.King?s > > > > lecture > > > > > at Oberlin on February 6, 1957, fortified his long-held intention > to > > > work > > > > > in the South for transformative social change. After King?s lecture > > to > > > a > > > > > packed audience, he and Lawson talked together at dinner.Though > > Lawson > > > > was > > > > > contemplating study for a Ph.D., King told him ?don?t wait, but > come > > > > south > > > > > now!? adding that there was no one else like Lawson.Muste arranged > > for > > > > FOR > > > > > to hire Lawson as southern field secretary to be stationed at > > Nashville > > > > in > > > > > January 1958. Upon his arrival, he found that Glenn Smiley, > national > > > > field > > > > > director of FOR, had arranged for Lawson to run a full schedule of > > > > > workshops ? including one to take place early that year at the > first > > > > annual > > > > > meeting of the SCLC in Columbia, South Carolina. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > At the SCLC meeting, King made an exuberant introduction of Lawson > as > > > > FOR?s > > > > > new regional representative and discussed the organization?s role > in > > > > > Montgomery, telling delegates to be sure to attend Lawson?s > workshop > > on > > > > > nonviolence. King took his seat in the first pew, waiting for the > > > > > three-hour session to start: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Martin did that at every SCLC meeting as long as he lived. He would > > ask > > > > me > > > > > to conduct an afternoon workshop, usually two or three hours, and > he > > > > would > > > > > arrange for it to be ?at-large? so that everyone could attend, with > > > > nothing > > > > > else to compete. He put it on the schedule himself. A few minutes > > > early, > > > > he > > > > > would show up and sit alone, as an example, in the front row. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Back in Nashville, Lawson continued with Monday evening workshops > > > during > > > > > the autumn of 1959 in which he trained the students who were to be > > the > > > > core > > > > > of the Nashville sit-in movement. As a result of his involvement > with > > > the > > > > > sit-ins Lawson was expelled from Vanderbilt, but he enrolled with > > > Boston > > > > > University to finish his degree in theology,while continuing to > work > > > with > > > > > the students. Several professors in the School of Theology resigned > > > over > > > > > his expulsion. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The techniques that the students deployed were drawn from Lawson?s > > > > > workshops. In 1958 and 1959, Lawson mobilized all that he knew > about > > > > > Christian pacifism, Gandhian nonviolence, and Methodist social > > ministry > > > > and > > > > > blended them into an unprecedented curriculum that influenced the > > civil > > > > > rights movement in Nashville and beyond. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Blending Christianity and interreligious sources, he did not > present > > > its > > > > > philosophy and practice as a secular doctrine, but as the essence > of > > > > > religion itself. Core to nonviolence was mirroring God?s love for > > > > humankind > > > > > and exhibiting it through concrete relationships of human > solidarity > > > and > > > > > community. ?Nonviolence,? Lawson taught, is the aggressive, > > forgiving, > > > > > patient, long-suffering Christ-like and Christ-commanded love or > > > > good-will > > > > > for all humankind even in the face of tension, fear, hatred, or > > demonic > > > > > evil.? Moreover, ?it is the readiness to absorb suffering with > > > > forgiveness > > > > > and courage rather than to inflict suffering on others.? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lawson divided his instruction into four modules: how nonviolence > > > reacts, > > > > > training for nonviolence, the virtues of nonviolence, and the > methods > > > of > > > > > nonviolence. Practitioners prepared themselves by jettisoning > anger, > > > > > hostility and fear thus ?minimizing the effect of an attack,? > valuing > > > > love, > > > > > courage, fearlessness, and forgiveness, and pursuing redemptive > > > suffering > > > > > which ?releases unknown elements for good.? Preparation included > > > > meditation > > > > > and prayer, study of the scriptures, practicing nonviolence through > > > > > challenges to segregation in bus transportation and in other public > > > > > facilities.The practice steps included fact-finding, negotiation, > > > > education > > > > > of the community, and various methods of nonviolent direct action > > > > including > > > > > sit-ins, boycotts, strikes, and civil disobedience. Lawson provided > > an > > > > > extensive bibliography including relevant verses from the Bible, > the > > > > > Bhagavad Gita, and from the Chinese philosopher, Mo Ti and the > Hebrew > > > > > prophet, Isaiah. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The Nashville sit-ins and those led by students in other southern > > > cities > > > > > convinced Ella Baker of the SCLC to call a conference in April, > 1960, > > > at > > > > > Shaw University in Raleigh, North Carolina. Out of this meeting > > emerged > > > > the > > > > > Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee.Lawson delivered an > opening > > > > > keynote address that helped to frame SNCC?s nonviolent > > > trajectory.Later, > > > > > Lawson summarized discussions and consensus that emerged out of the > > > > > conference, and his synopsis received the approval of everyone > there. > > > > > Lawson?s overall comments said that ?nonviolence as it grows from > > > > > Judaic-Christian tradition seeks a social order of justice > permeated > > by > > > > > love.? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It was Lawson who delivered the keynote address and framed SNCC?s > > > > > nonviolent orientation. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The whole group, perhaps 120 participants, all in the room, asked > me > > to > > > > > draft a statement. Eventually, three different drafts emerged. The > > > > > Nashville group was cohesive. The extant draft was the third, > > > influenced > > > > by > > > > > the Nashville group, after two earlier conversations. (Interview > with > > > > King, > > > > > June 2014) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lawson?s synopsis was approved by the Conference. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In a private email message Mary King told me: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > He [James Lawson] was reading from the FOR booklist from a young > age, > > > > but I > > > > > don?t think that he was influenced on notions of Consensus by > > Quakers, > > > > > because the connection was too abstract. Let me underscore that he > > says > > > > it > > > > > was for him Methodist origins. (Private email, 15 April 2014) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In his interview with Mary King, Lawson confirmed that the origin > of > > > > > Consensus in SNCC was the Nashville Central Committee, confirming > > what > > > > Mary > > > > > King had told me in April. As to the roots Consensus in Lawson?s > own > > > > > experience, he emphasized that: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It was the Methodist youth and student movements with which I had > > grown > > > > up, > > > > > and this is how they made decisions. They knew the rules of > > > parliamentary > > > > > procedures, but they wanted to find a common mind. (Interview with > > > King, > > > > > June 2014) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The Methodist Church to this very day still mandates Majority > > > decisions, > > > > > but this would never have entailed children voting ? in general > > > > youngsters > > > > > in these organizations were simply told what to do. The Black > > > > congregations > > > > > had operated separately for more than a century, so there was some > > room > > > > for > > > > > Lawson to develop a consensual model of collaboration in working > with > > > > young > > > > > people. It is also possible the Black congregations, like other > Black > > > > > Churches in America, drew on other traditions of decision making. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Andy Blunden > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective- > > decision-making > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Fri Jan 27 11:49:20 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2017 19:49:20 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Perizivanie In-Reply-To: <3E8417E1-AC36-404F-AA5A-47816D90E33C@gmail.com> References: <5120CA46-23D0-40BA-9030-F5333D0802F6@gmail.com> <1485467069259.80216@iped.uio.no>, <3E8417E1-AC36-404F-AA5A-47816D90E33C@gmail.com> Message-ID: <1485546561015.7066@iped.uio.no> Henry, thanks for sharing. This is the link to the video: https://www.nytimes.com/video/opinion/100000004674545/41-miles.html Now, watching this is devastating. On talking on aesthetic experience, Dewey speaks of taking in and giving out, of a balance between doing and undergoing. As I watch this video (I could not watch the whole, just watch few minutes), I get paralysed, because there is an absolute excess of undergoing that my doing can do little about, at least for now. I need to step back, or I would freeze there. Indeed, I cannot watch the whole right now. Not sure how to put this with regard to perezhivanie. I can only see those angels I saw crying, terrified, and feel so much pain not to be there helping them feel calmer, safer. I guess for here to be something of a perezhivanie, there must be some work over, and I really haven't got a handle on that work yet. Beth and others spoke of a pivot... I am not sure what this is, but it really hurts for now. Alfredo From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of HENRY SHONERD Sent: 26 January 2017 23:08 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Perizivanie Alfredo, My apologies. I thought I had linked to a video on today?s NY Times by Daphne Matziaraki entitled ?4.1 Miles?. An amazing, horrifying 20 minutes of the efforts of Greek coast guard to rescue refugees from the 4.1 miles of water between Turkey and Lesbos. I hope this link will take you to the video: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4.1_Miles . For me, viewing the video was emotional in a way I would understand as perizhivanie. Especially in the context of Trump?s executive order to build that wall. Thank you for asking! Thank you for listening! Henry > On Jan 26, 2017, at 2:44 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > > Henry, did you want to link the front page of the washington post or one article (perhaps the main article) in particular? > Alfredo > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of HENRY SHONERD > Sent: 26 January 2017 22:14 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Perizivanie > > https://www.nytimes.com/?action=click&contentCollection=Well®ion=TopBar&module=HomePage-Button&pgtype=article From hshonerd@gmail.com Fri Jan 27 16:19:36 2017 From: hshonerd@gmail.com (HENRY SHONERD) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2017 17:19:36 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Perizivanie In-Reply-To: <1485546561015.7066@iped.uio.no> References: <5120CA46-23D0-40BA-9030-F5333D0802F6@gmail.com> <1485467069259.80216@iped.uio.no> <3E8417E1-AC36-404F-AA5A-47816D90E33C@gmail.com> <1485546561015.7066@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <754CD49B-828B-4E15-AC7F-871AFE9790DF@gmail.com> Alfredo, I understand. I don?t know why I was able to watch it all the way through. I caught myself screaming at the horror. I think what made me go on was heroism of the captain of the coast guard vessel, his crew, and the people of Lesbos. I don?t know that I could do what the captain and those people of Lesbos do, but I think they are motivating me in the right direction. I am sure that I could not withstand what the refugees go through. The video has been nominated for a 2017Oscar for the best documentary short subject. It came out in September 2016. I got this info at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4.1_Miles . Henry > On Jan 27, 2017, at 12:49 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > > Henry, > > thanks for sharing. > This is the link to the video: > > https://www.nytimes.com/video/opinion/100000004674545/41-miles.html > > Now, watching this is devastating. > > On talking on aesthetic experience, Dewey speaks of taking in and giving out, of a balance between doing and undergoing. As I watch this video (I could not watch the whole, just watch few minutes), I get paralysed, because there is an absolute excess of undergoing that my doing can do little about, at least for now. I need to step back, or I would freeze there. Indeed, I cannot watch the whole right now. Not sure how to put this with regard to perezhivanie. I can only see those angels I saw crying, terrified, and feel so much pain not to be there helping them feel calmer, safer. I guess for here to be something of a perezhivanie, there must be some work over, and I really haven't got a handle on that work yet. Beth and others spoke of a pivot... I am not sure what this is, but it really hurts for now. > > Alfredo > > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of HENRY SHONERD > Sent: 26 January 2017 23:08 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Perizivanie > > Alfredo, > My apologies. I thought I had linked to a video on today?s NY Times by Daphne Matziaraki entitled ?4.1 Miles?. An amazing, horrifying 20 minutes of the efforts of Greek coast guard to rescue refugees from the 4.1 miles of water between Turkey and Lesbos. I hope this link will take you to the video: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4.1_Miles . For me, viewing the video was emotional in a way I would understand as perizhivanie. Especially in the context of Trump?s executive order to build that wall. Thank you for asking! Thank you for listening! > Henry > >> On Jan 26, 2017, at 2:44 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: >> >> Henry, did you want to link the front page of the washington post or one article (perhaps the main article) in particular? >> Alfredo >> ________________________________________ >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of HENRY SHONERD >> Sent: 26 January 2017 22:14 >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Perizivanie >> >> https://www.nytimes.com/?action=click&contentCollection=Well®ion=TopBar&module=HomePage-Button&pgtype=article > From helenaworthen@gmail.com Fri Jan 27 19:22:58 2017 From: helenaworthen@gmail.com (Helena Worthen) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2017 19:22:58 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism In-Reply-To: References: <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C71964@CIO-KRC-D1MBX04.osuad.osu.edu> <1485073527094.7145@iped.uio.no> <5E5B95EA-374F-48EB-B308-BCE49DA52760@gmail.com> <1485113892233.91870@iped.uio.no> <2c9faf42-cb69-9860-4b9f-ea0f6f0ca307@mira.net> <1485241112188.8167@iped.uio.no> <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C77497@CIO-TNC-D1MBX11.osuad.osu.edu> Message-ID: <6C1BEA31-0E61-479C-964A-A8065131C6BB@gmail.com> Henry ? It was an extremely pleasant surprise, one of those times when you have a set of expectations and you go and find out that other people have gone way AHEAD of what you expected! There were about 30 people up in the faculty lounge, a good mix of Black, Latino, Asian, young people especially, pretty representative of the Laney demographic. There were three of us old white labor people and we sat together near the food and probably did a bit too much of the talking, but the center of gravity of the event was over on the other side of the room where students and people who had been working with community based organizations were squeezed together on sofas. I was blown away when a young man introdced himself as a regional organizer from the AFL CIO who specialized in CBOs and labor unions working effectively together! Since when did Big Labor hire someone to deal with that issue? Thus my main concern, that the study of identity lacked economic teeth, was taken care of. Furthermore, it?s not just a Community and LAbor Studies progam that they are going to build; they are also creating something that sounds like a workers? center. The woman who presented that part of the plan, a full-time ethnic studies professor, was very dynamic and energized. When we asked what the next action would be that we could organize around, the answer was an immigration march to be held on May 1, which is a date that perfectly combines celebrations of labor, immigration, race, etc. It?s a big enough project to require many meetings and many different responsibilities, so there will be plenty of opportunity for people to get to know each other. In other words, it was great. Thanks for asking! Next time you?re in the Bay Area, let?s get together. Helena Worthen helenaworthen@gmail.com Berkeley, CA 94707 Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com > On Jan 24, 2017, at 2:46 PM, HENRY SHONERD wrote: > > Helena, > I look forward to what you find on Thursday at Laney. Oakland is where I lived when I was attending UC Berkeley. I hated being a grad student in economics (though it kept me out of Viet Nam), but my life ?on the ground? (1967-70) shaped much of who I am today. Place matters. I go there every year around Christmas and New Year. If something gets up and going at Laney it will add to the pleasure of my visits to family and friends. I guess what I am trying to say is that it?s personal, which surely adds to the energy. > Henry > >> On Jan 24, 2017, at 1:58 PM, Helena Worthen wrote: >> >> Just in time, I have been gifted with a way to "ascend (out of this discussion) to the concrete." >> >> Mike mentions "forms of action" and says some colleagues are saying "focus energy on academic work." Faculty committee work is part of academic work. >> >> I just got a phone call from a colleague who teaches at California State University and who is, with me and others, on an advisory committee convened to revive the moribund Labor Studies Program at Laney, a community college in Oakland, near where I live. >> >> Everyone is probably aware that Labor Studies programs are target practice for right-wingers. If you're not aware, you aren't surprised. So the program at Laney has been shrinking for years. The idea now is to revive it by joining it with the Community Studies Program, which is an umbrella Ethnic Studies program. This makes sense, right? Latino Studies, Black Studies, Gender Studies, Women's Studies, Asian Studies and Labor Studies intuitively seem to belong together. They address people who are likely to be working for a living. >> >> So our advisory committee will meet Thursday night and the big issue is this: A core required course is going to be "Community and Labor Organizing." This course already exists in the Community Studies program. If it is submitted to the Academic Senate un-changed, it will speed through approval and be offered in Fall 2017. It will also count for transfer to the State University and UC systems. >> >> The catch is that as written, it has to be taught by someone with an advanced Ethnic Studies degree. >> >> The easy thing to do is to shrug and let it through without changing it. But an Ethnic Studies degree does not prepare someone to teach labor organizing. First, there are a lot of technical issues that come up in labor organizing. The tricks and traps of labor legislation are just the beginning. Second, although you might think that labor unions and community based organizations (CBOs) are natural allies, they have a very hard time working with each other in practice because of the way authority runs through them. Someone with only a degree in Ethnic Studies will not know this stuff. >> >> But it's not just a matter of the content of the course. Letting the course go to approval as is would eliminate the possibility that any of the program faculty who come our of labor (who usually have degrees in Philosophy, History, Political Science) would be able to teach that class. >> >> So, is this worth the fight? It looks, on the surface, like a tempest in a teapot. But it's a concrete example of a moment when you can put the teeth of economic justice into the mouth of (block that metaphor). >> >> I will go to the meeting Thursday night arguing in favor re-writing the course description to allow faculty who do not have a degree in Ethnic Studies to teach this course. I will say that it's worth losing a semester because there is something bigger at stake here. This is also academic work. >> >> >> Helena Worthen >> helenaworthen@gmail.com >> Vietnam blog: helenaworthen.wordpress.com >> >> On Jan 24, 2017, at 10:18 AM, mike cole wrote: >> >>> Hi Michael >>> >>> Nice thought from Bateson. And I see that Peg has just posted a link >>> to the book. Its certainly a keeper. >>> >>> But it does not speak to forms of action that people in our current >>> circumstances. Some of my colleagues argue that it is essential for >>> academics in these times to eschew politics in any visible form and >>> to focus energy on the academic work precisely in order combat over >>> simplification that threatens human life. >>> >>> The basic starting point of the LS/US Nationalism paper, as I see it, is >>> that claim that the threat of nationalist/populism is GLOBAL and that it >>> poses huge challenges to LS researchers. So we might not want to get too >>> caught up in examining Trump/US version of this problem without considering >>> the rest of the world and its history. The 20th Century provided at least >>> two clear examples of what happens when this configuration of >>> nationalism/populism arises in modern times - two wars to end all wars. If >>> we are in fact returning to the 1930's in this regard, we are doing so in >>> an unparalleled set of circumstances for homo sapiens. >>> >>> So as professionals/citizens, are there forms of action, lines of research, >>> that might be proposed that would nurture the beautiful in circumstances >>> that do not involve high levels of radiation and mass destruction? Is >>> tending to our intellectual gardens the direction to go? Or are forms of >>> action of the sort proposed by the authors the right direction? And if the >>> latter, what do we know from past experience that might guide our thinking? >>> They set out to open the discussion in a major journal. >>> >>> Seems like the task here is to see what this group might possibly add to >>> their attempts to strategize the future based on our collective experience. >>> >>> Mike >>> >>> PS- Seems like Alfredo's perezhivanie project, as an exercise in >>> international collaboration to both test a basic theoretical claim of >>> Vygotsky's and to so collectively, might combine the academic and the >>> political just a little. And just a little might be a lot. >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 9:40 AM, Glassman, Michael >>> wrote: >>> >>>> So I am re-reading Bateson, somewhat in light of current happenings and I >>>> come across this paragraph near the beginning of Mind and Nature, >>>> >>>> "There seems to be something like a Gresham's law of cultural evolution >>>> according to which the oversimplified will always displace the >>>> sophisticated and the vulgar and hateful will always displace the >>>> beautiful. And yet the beautiful persists." >>>> >>>> Wise words for his time and ours. The information in nature will always >>>> bring us back around to the beautiful if we let it, but it always seems to >>>> slip through our fingers. Maybe another take on the arc of justice. The >>>> trouble of course is every time we let the vulgar and hateful displace the >>>> stakes seem to become much higher. >>>> >>>> Michael >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ >>>> mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Alfredo Jornet Gil >>>> Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2017 1:59 AM >>>> To: ablunden@mira.net; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity < >>>> xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu> >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism >>>> >>>> Francine, >>>> >>>> I agree analysis is only one tool and I hope we can do much more here and >>>> elsewhere. But the overtone window seems to resonate well with our quest >>>> for understanding the possibilities/conditions for hearing Trump's voice >>>> sound like a pleasant flute or like toilette flush. >>>> >>>> I think the idea of Irony also adds to the question of perezhivanie and >>>> Trump in the sense that different perezhivanie will also imply different >>>> forms of generalisation/consciousness. Irony seems to always involve moving >>>> a step up in the types of generalisation or metaphor. >>>> >>>> A good example may be found in considering the "Love Trumps Hate" message >>>> that has been going around in the media. Although I am no linguist, I am >>>> gonna give it a try: If you were to hear the assertion literally, you may >>>> hear an imperative to do love Trump's hate in such a way as to enter into a >>>> double bind situation. To find yourself in this situation, you need to >>>> stick to the transitive form of the subject (you love) with respect to the >>>> object (Trump hate). You kind of have to have faith in this form, respect >>>> the integrity of the object and the integrity of the subject each in its >>>> own terms, and so you may come to feel confused, or perhaps end up hating >>>> just the same way Trump plays he hates. >>>> >>>> On the other hand, to be able to hear "love trumps hate" as a message of >>>> love, as an equivalent (as per Vygotsky's equivalence) for another message >>>> that we also have seen these days, "when they go low we go high," then you >>>> have to take the relation between subject and object in a higher level of >>>> metaphor: you now hear the sentence in a context that modifies both subject >>>> and object; hate and love cannot be exclusive opposites. The sentence then >>>> is heard as intransitive, love and hate no longer are independent. And most >>>> importantly, once you hear the sentence in its intransitive form, love and >>>> hate no longer are the same. >>>> >>>> Similarly, to hear everything Trump said and take it literally takes a >>>> very different act of faith that it takes hearing it literally as an irony. >>>> Alfredo >>>> >>>> >>>> ________________________________________ >>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>> on behalf of Larry Smolucha >>>> Sent: 24 January 2017 02:35 >>>> To: ablunden@mira.net; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism >>>> >>>> Message from Francine: >>>> >>>> >>>> Helena Worthen was right - I am serious about finding (and creating) new >>>> tools for understanding the Trump movement. Analysis is only one tool and >>>> there is no insight when it is overused. Figurative, analogical, >>>> metaphorical thinking gives us other tools. Recognizing IRONY means getting >>>> the punch line in a joke (as Freud >>>> >>>> explained in Jokes and Their Relation to the Unconscious). >>>> >>>> >>>> Is there a termteson in literature for the reversal that commonly occurs >>>> in fairy tales? >>>> >>>> All that is gold does not glitter, not all those who wander are lost . . . >>>> >>>> >>>> 1) The ironic reversals that are taking place as people change their >>>> alignment with >>>> >>>> political parties remind me of a geophysics phenomena - the reversal of >>>> the earth's magnetic field that can happen over hundreds of thousands of >>>> years. Both are disorienting. I will give this more thought, but for the >>>> moment consider this much. When magnetic fields shift it is not all at >>>> once, magnetic currents in the molten layers beneath the earth's solid >>>> crust change polarities, sometimes causing a total >>>> >>>> reversal. Our political parties are commonly referred to as polar >>>> opposites but those >>>> >>>> polarities are not fixed they are fluid. The blue collar working class can >>>> shift from the Democratic Party to the Republican. The Black vote can shift >>>> to the Republicans, the Democrats don't own it. In the 1950's Russian >>>> sympathies were a hallmark of the left, now the left denounces Trumps >>>> outreach to the Russians. [A caveat here - this is two dimensional thinking >>>> because there are only two poles on one geometric plane.] >>>> >>>> >>>> 2) There is another concept, the Overton Window that is a scale of how >>>> radical of a discourse the public will tolerate (also called the window of >>>> discourse). The Window >>>> >>>> opens and closes along a range of discourse from the acceptable to the >>>> unthinkable. What discourse resonates with the general public (strikes a >>>> chord)? What will they regard as taboo (or not politically correct)? Issues >>>> like that. >>>> >>>> >>>> Here are a couple links worth looking at: >>>> >>>> >>>> Donald Trump & The Overton Window --Resetting America's Political < >>>> http://www.nationalreview.com/article/428200/donald- >>>> trump-overton-window-american-political-debate> >>>> www.nationalreview.com/.../donald-trump-overton-window-american-p< >>>> http://www.nationalreview.com/.../donald-trump-overton-window-american-p >>>>> .. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Trump's Win Smashed the 'Overton Window' | LifeZette>>> lifezette.com/polizette/trumps-win-smashed-overton-window/> >>>> www.lifezette.com/polizette/trumps-win-smashed-overton-window/ >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Can any of this be used with the concept of perezhivanie? >>>> >>>> ________________________________ >>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>> on behalf of Andy Blunden >>>> Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 9:37 PM >>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism >>>> >>>> "Irony" - good word to introduce here Francine. >>>> >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>> Andy Blunden >>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy >>>> Andy Blunden's Home Page home.mira.net Andy >>>> Blunden's Home Page with links to pages I maintain and mail-to buttons >>>> >>>> >>>> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making >>>> [http://www.brill.com/sites/default/files/styles/large/ >>>> public/ftp/images/products/295x295/92947.jpg?itok=j5KXqZw3]< >>>> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making> >>>> >>>> The Origins of Collective Decision Making | Brill>>> products/book/origins-collective-decision-making> >>>> www.brill.com >>>> The Origins of Collective Decision Making, identifies three paradigms of >>>> collective decision making - Counsel, Majority and Consensus, and discovers >>>> their origins ... >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 23/01/2017 2:32 PM, Larry Smolucha wrote: >>>>> Message from Francine Smolucha: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> The key to an analysis of the Trump movement is understanding the >>>>> >>>>> fundamental IRONIES that have rocked American politics. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> The workers revolution has resulted in the >>>>> >>>>> workers/unions deserting the Left, the socialists, the Democratic Party. >>>>> >>>>> Trump is a Capitalist regardless of whether he actually has a Republican >>>> ideology. >>>>> >>>>> The workers' movement has been hijacked by a capitalist. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> The other great IRONY is that Trump wants to make Russia a U.S. ally >>>> (again). >>>>> >>>>> The Left, the socialists, the Democratic Party are the ones demonizing >>>>> Russia - >>>>> >>>>> what a reversal! >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Since CHAT derives from Russian psychology (Leontiev and Vygotsky) and >>>> the backlash against Trump is also a backlash against all things Russian - >>>> this puts CHAT in a particularly awkward position. How can a cultural >>>> historical psychology that originated in Russia become the leader in the >>>> anti-Trump discourse? or lead an anti-Trump educational movement? You are >>>> even extolling a Russian concept PEREZHIVANIE. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I think the XMCA needs to examine its own perezhivanie at this time. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ________________________________ >>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>> on behalf of mike cole >>>>> >>>>> Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 3:01 PM >>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>> Cc: Mariane Hedegaard; Reijo Miettinen; Seth Chaiklin >>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >>>>> Nationalism >>>>> >>>>> Helena et al -- >>>>> >>>>> An important emphasis in the article for me was on the fact that >>>>> although the article focused on the American nationalist movement that >>>>> has just pulled of an alt-right coup, similar movements are poised to >>>>> take hold in a lot of places in Europe to join the many already >>>>> entrenched unsavory governments in other parts of the world. >>>>> >>>>> The CRADLE center in Helsinki is under very concerted attack and the >>>>> right wing government appears, from this distance, to be making great >>>>> progress on destroying its legacy. The same process has been in >>>>> Denmark for some time, also with apparent success. >>>>> >>>>> What do our international colleagues who have already felt the hot >>>>> breath of right wing nationalism have to offer in terms of strategies >>>>> of resistence? >>>>> >>>>> Back to "what is to be done," that sombre question from an earlier >>>>> era. The answer last time did not produce what it promised. >>>>> >>>>> mike >>>>> >>>>> mike >>>>> >>>>> On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 12:22 PM, Helena Worthen >>>>> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Thank you, Alfredo - I gave it a read. >>>>>> >>>>>> Sure, of course they're right. But I am very disappointed. >>>>>> >>>>>> I was hoping that the following was only item #1 in a long list of >>>>>> "what the 2016 election made apparent": >>>>>> >>>>>> The 2016 election has made apparent the need for scholarship that >>>>>> explicitly defends and furthers the rights and well-being of people >>>>>> of color, immigrants, Muslims, women, people who are differently >>>>>> abled, LGBTQ communities, and the earth. These are stances that have >>>>>> been limited, at least explicitly, in the Learning Sciences. >>>>>> >>>>>> But the call for inclusion was not just #1, it seems to be the whole >>>>>> thing. In other words, it's all about identity -plus the earth, of >>>> course. >>>>>> While inclusion is necessary, it's not even a start. Yes, research, >>>>>> teaching, publishing, promotion, conferences - everything associated >>>>>> with teaching and learning has to include everyone as equals (see >>>>>> Andy's book) in one way or another - but then what? What are they (we) >>>> supposed to do? >>>>>> Where does the pretty language touch the ground? >>>>>> >>>>>> I was listening to a broadcast of the Women's March in DC on Saturday >>>>>> morning, and Kamala Harris, who was the California State Attorney >>>>>> General and is now a junior Senator from CA, was addressing the >>>>>> rally. She said, "People always ask me to talk about women's issues. >>>>>> I say, 'Oh, I'm SO glad you're interested in economics!! Let's talk >>>>>> about economics." And she ran through a whole set of parallel >>>>>> back-and-forths, always pulling identity questions back to wages, jobs, >>>> earning, supporting your family, etc etc. >>>>>> >>>>>> Much as we need to wipe away any barriers to the Learning Sciences >>>>>> (and the professions and institutions dedicated to them) due to >>>>>> identity, until the Learning Sciences start taking a look at the >>>>>> place where most people spend most of their lives - not school, I >>>>>> mean - but work, they will be engaging in a soft conversation at the >>>>>> edge of the real issue. It's a pleasant conversation but it doesn't >>>>>> put a hand on the levers that translate skill and knowledge into rent >>>> and groceries. >>>>>> >>>>>> H >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Helena Worthen >>>>>> helenaworthen@gmail.com >>>>>> Berkeley, CA 94707 >>>>>> Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Jan 22, 2017, at 11:38 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >>>>>>> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> Here it is, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> http://cognitionandinstruction.com/engagements-the-learning- >>>>>> sciences-in-a-new-era-of-u-s-nationalism/ >>>>>>> Alfredo >>>>>>> ________________________________________ >>>>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>>>> >>>>>> on behalf of Helena Worthen >>>>>>> Sent: 22 January 2017 20:24 >>>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >>>>>> Nationalism >>>>>>> Someone please re-send the link to this article? I think I'm going >>>>>>> to >>>>>> want to read it and respond to Mike's question. >>>>>>> Thanks - H >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Helena Worthen >>>>>>> helenaworthen@gmail.com >>>>>>> Berkeley, CA 94707 >>>>>>> Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Jan 22, 2017, at 12:25 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >>>>>>>> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> Mike, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> thanks a lot for sharing this article. You and Michael, who have >>>>>>>> and >>>>>> know more history, have spoken in terms of reminiscences. I have >>>>>> lived and know less, and the article feels like fresh air. During my >>>>>> PhD, I begun to increasingly feel that I had to due something to act >>>>>> and respond to the increasing ecological and humanitarian globe >>>>>> crises. But how could I do anything if I had children and a PhD to >>>>>> finalise?? What could I do that would also be doing my job as >>>>>> researcher in a department of education? It was very difficult to >>>>>> find anything, partly because almost every academic quest would focus >>>>>> on learning, but so little on social development. How many scientific >>>>>> articles are dedicated to socio-political questions in the most cited >>>> educational journals? I felt very powerless. >>>>>>>> To be able to address these questions within my expertise, is a >>>>>> challenge partly because contrary to Dewey's hope, educational >>>>>> research has only marginally focused on these questions, and yet they >>>>>> may be exactly the question that matter to education. What are we >>>>>> educating for? Indeed, what is education for? I think we face a >>>>>> serious problem when someone (like myself), being an educational >>>>>> researchers/scholar, still has to scratch her head wondering <>>>>> can I make my profession matter to social change and development?>> >>>> Vygotsky would be shocked! >>>>>>>> Alfredo >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>>>>> >>>>>> on behalf of mike cole >>>>>>>> Sent: 19 January 2017 04:51 >>>>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >>>>>> Nationalism >>>>>>>> Yes Michael, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> It feels like the world of the later 1930's about the time I was >>>>>>>> born as that period came down to me through the prism of a family >>>>>>>> of "premature anti fascists." >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> For a great re-creation of those times see the highly ambivalent >>>>>>>> film by Frank Capra, "meet John Doe." It has American big capital >>>>>>>> interconnected with fascism combined with populist collectivism in >>>>>>>> a manner that >>>>>> points at >>>>>>>> the media (as then experienced) as the bad guys in disguise. Happy >>>>>> Ending, >>>>>>>> Beethoven Ode to Joy and all. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> It's come round again, nastier this time. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Mike >>>>>>>> On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 6:20 PM Glassman, Michael >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Mike >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> It was so interesting to read this note after reading the >>>>>>>>> Cognition and Instruction essay. All the way through it I kept >>>>>>>>> thinking we have been here before. It reminded me of the >>>>>>>>> scholars, especially those who had escaped from Germany, trying to >>>>>>>>> make sense of what had happened to >>>>>> their >>>>>>>>> society during World War II. The foremost in my mind was Lewin. >>>>>> Except I >>>>>>>>> wonder if he would say the process of transformative action starts >>>>>>>>> not >>>>>> with >>>>>>>>> emergence of quasi-needs, but our willingness and abilities to >>>>>>>>> step >>>>>> back >>>>>>>>> from our quasi-needs and the ways that they drive us, often to >>>>>>>>> dysfunctional behaviors that it ultimately destructive to both our >>>>>> society >>>>>>>>> and to us as individuals. How hard this is to do, we have to keep >>>>>> going >>>>>>>>> back again and again. The quasi-needs, tribalism, acceptance, >>>>>> standing are >>>>>>>>> always there. It is how they shape us that is critical. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Michael >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto: >>>>>>>>> xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 8:31 PM >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >>>>>>>>> Nationalism >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> In following the perezhivanie thread I encountered the note I >>>>>> re-membered. >>>>>>>>> And interestingly mis-remembered. A translation into my focus on >>>>>>>>> mediational means. He places the starting point of the process of >>>>>>>>> transformative action at the emergence of quasi-needs (from Kurt >>>>>> Lewin). >>>>>>>>> That seems correct to me. The new mediational means emerge under >>>>>>>>> environmental presses. Ever functionalist ego need a goal(!). (The >>>>>> problem >>>>>>>>> with functionalism) In David's words, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Perhaps the place we should look for "exaptations" that can save >>>>>>>>> both >>>>>> our >>>>>>>>> personalities and our environment is not in our evolved needs, but >>>>>>>>> in >>>>>> yet >>>>>>>>> to be designed quasi-needs. Artificial organs, after all, always >>>>>> suggest >>>>>>>>> new and ever more artificial functions, like chess and language. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> This point seems worth keeping in mind as we look at where this >>>>>>>>> group >>>>>> of >>>>>>>>> critical scholars who work within the Learning Sciences >>>>>>>>> disciplinary framework would like to lead us. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> mike >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >> >> > > From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Sat Jan 28 13:21:53 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2017 21:21:53 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie In-Reply-To: <1485369277024.99321@iped.uio.no> References: <1485031482970.89461@iped.uio.no> <1485191332785.92884@iped.uio.no> , <004d01d27664$b19d5110$14d7f330$@att.net>, <1485369277024.99321@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <1485638512486.84306@iped.uio.no> Already during the campaign, I was a couple of times in the US and used to wonder, how will it be living with a person you know will vote the other way. When Trump won, I thought, uff!!, how are they going to share a neighbourhood? Or even a dinner table? I saw this video days ago but forgot sharing it. Today I was reminded of this one: "When your loved ones voted the other way" https://www.nytimes.com/video/us/politics/100000004881605/family-conversations-on-trump.html Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil Sent: 25 January 2017 19:34 To: 'eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity' Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie Peg, thanks for the link! This truly makes for a comparative study! There are so many parallels between the two speeches, and yet the two speeches are so different. I enjoyed this one much better! Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Peg Griffin Sent: 24 January 2017 18:09 To: 'eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity' Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie Maybe young Sophie Cruz provides information relevant to these age differences: "I also want to tell the children not to be afraid because we are not alone. There are still many people that have their hearts filled with love and tenderness to snuggle in this path of life. Let's keep together and fight for their rights! God is with us!" Snuggle. https://mic.com/articles/166246/6-year-old-sophie-cruz-child-of-undocumented-parents-advocated-for-immigrants-at-the-womens-march#.hW1TkWzCd -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 6:54 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie Martin's caution relates to my suggestion that we not restrict the same to our families or students and friends. People experienced the Trump victory in different ways. The example from LSV involves kids of three ages. That still seems an important focus. Our contemporaries are in there 30's + (and ++). Our students are in latest teens or 20+. High school kids are in ++the teens. Middle school kids..... It is my strong impression that there are significant age differences in ones experience of the event that could be elicited pretty easily and compared in the group across other interesting categories of difference such as nationality. A small, positive, collective effort? mike On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 9:08 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > Dear Martin, > > thanks for the nuances you introduce. Yes, I agree with you, it is > totally sensible to hear Trump's words with hope and actually > experience > (perezhivat) them in such a way as to become moving force towards > transformation. I was only approaching the speech from a developmental > stages perspective, where, to hear the speech with contempt given the > speech's formal structure as a type of generalisation, would mean to > hear them within that stage that Andy very appropriately (in my view) > called as "magic". Vygotsky (I think) also used this term to refer to > a stage in child development. > > But I do not wish to say that contempt is the only possible quality, > and so, as you very nicely remark, hope, enthusiasm, empowerment, all > these and their developmental and historical conditions should be > considered as possibilities of hearing Trump's speech. > > Thanks a lot for the resources/links, I am incorporating them to our > joint document. > Alfredo > > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of Martin John Packer > > Sent: 22 January 2017 16:08 > To: xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Trump's speech and Perezhivanie > > Hi Alfredo. > > I think your proposal is very interesting; that we could explore two > different ways of hearing and understanding Trump?s words. But if I > understand you correctly, I don?t agree that ?in the first case, there > is no hope for change, there is contempt.? I have lived in Michigan > and Pennsylvania, and in both states industries that were central to > the economic rise of the working class, auto manufacturing and steel > foundries, collapsed as a result of globalization. I have seen first > hand some of the communities that were almost completely destroyed. I > believe that people who experienced these changes do hear Trump?s > words with hope for change, and if they have contempt it is for > professional politicians who they feel speak but do not act. > > But perhaps you mean it was a lack of hope that *led* people to Trump: > > donald-trump-manufacturing-jobs-hope/496541/> > > The New Yorker has published several articles by George Packer (no > relation) on the appeal that Trump has to the white working class. For > example: > > donald-trump-appeals-to-the-white-working-class> > > Martin > > > > > > On Jan 21, 2017, at 3:44 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > wrote: > > Dear Helena, Andy, all, > > > Unfortunately, I have not been able to find the time to watch the > movie Fate of a Man, but I have followed the very interesting analyses > and conversations about it. I am opening this thread as connexions > between those analyses, perezhivanie, and current tragic social and > political situation in the US and elsewhere. This also connects with > the article that Mike shared on the position of the Learning Sciences > with regard to this situation (how happy I was to see this initiative!). > > > In particular, I wanted to pick up on Helena's very true comment that > "the US is going to have to produce some works of scholarship or art, > or both, that attempt to explain what is happening now here in the US > -- for example, this afternoon, under President Trump." > > > Yesterday, we saw at home Trump's speech. Although we had followed > Trump's campaign and its denigrating tenor, it was yesterday, for the > first time, that my wife and me got this gut feeling of true tragedy, > of a real *drama* as we heard those empty, but to recover the prior > article for discussion, hollowed and hollowing words coming out of > that mouth. It came upon us that there may be lots of people for whom > those words are not hollowed, but actually encouraging, rich, beautiful. How can you hear that as beauty? > > > So, I was wondering, and in following up with our 2016 MCA Issue 4 > discussion, whether we could not actually conduct an analysis of the > sort Marc offers in his article of the perezhivanie. Just as Vygotsky > explains how 3 different children experience the situation of an > alcoholic mother differently, could not we perform an analysis ?of > that perezhivanie in which a person experiences yesterday's situation > as one of encouragement, of freedom and hope. Would that not be a way > to try to understand what is going on? This would not be a piece of > art, but could be something we could do to try to understand and change this situation. > > We could then contrast that perezhivanie with the one many of as have, > in which the situation is experience as a real TRAGEDY. I think in the > first case, there is no hope for change, there is contempt; in the > second, hearing those words as hollowed and hollowing require that you > live the situation as a doubled situation in which you experienced it > from a very different developmental stage. One in which the speech > sounds as a case of involution. > > Should we find the transcribed speech and perform such analysis? > > > Going now to support the Woman's march here in Victoria BC. > > Alfredo > > > > From Anne-Nelly.Perret-Clermont@unine.ch Sun Jan 29 06:32:13 2017 From: Anne-Nelly.Perret-Clermont@unine.ch (PERRET-CLERMONT Anne-Nelly) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2017 14:32:13 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] =?utf-8?q?Qwerty__call_=E2=80=9CReshaping_professional_learning_?= =?utf-8?q?in_the_mobile_and_social_media_landscape=22?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: There is a call going on for a special issue on: ?Reshaping professional learning in the mobile and social media landscape: theories, practices and challenges? All the information is available here: http://www.ckbg.org/qwerty/index.php/qwerty/announcement/view/12 This peer-reviewed journal is open-access, indexed on Emerging Sources Citation Index of Web of Science: http://ip-science.thomsonreuters.com/mjl/ and submitted for inclusion into Scopus. The scientific committee is described here under. Anne-Nelly Perret-Clermont, member of the scientific committee Editor M.BeatriceLigorio(UniversityofBari?AldoMoro?) Associate Editors Carl Bereiter(UniversityofToronto)BrunoBonu(UniversityofMontpellier3) Stefano Cacciamani (UniversityofValled?Aosta)DonatellaCesareni (University of Rome ?Sapienza?)MichaelCole(UniversityofSanDiego) ValentinaGrion(UniversityofPadua)RogerSaljo(UniversityofGothenburg) MarleneScardamalia(UniversityofToronto) Scientific Committee Sanne Akkerman(UniversityofUtrecht)OttaviaAlbanese(UniversityofMilan?Bicocca) AlessandroAntonietti(UniversityofMilan?Cattolica) PietroBoscolo(UniversityofPadua) LorenzoCantoni(UniversityofLugano)FeliceCarugati(UniversityofBologna?AlmaMater)CristianoCastelfranchi(ISTC-CNR) Alberto Cattaneo(SFIVET,Lugano)CarolChan(UniversityofHongKong)CesareCornoldi(UniversityofPadua)CrinaDamsa(UniversityofOslo) FrankDeJong(UniversityofTilburg)OlaErstad(UniversityofOslo) Paolo Ferri(University ofMilan ?Bicocca) AlbertoFornasari(UniversityofBari?AldoMoro?)CarloGalimberti(UniversityofMilan?Cattolica) BegonaGros(UniversityofBarcelona) Kai Hakkarainen(UniversityofHelsinki) VincentHevern(LeMoyneCollege)JimHewitt(UniversityofToronto) Antonio Iannaccone(UniversityofNeuch?tel) LiisaIlomaki(UniversityofHelsinki) SannaJarvela(UniversityofOulu) RichardJoiner(UniversityofBath) Kristiina Kumpulainen (UniversityofHelsinki) MinnaLakkala(UniversityofHelsinki) MaryLamon(UniversityofToronto) Leila Lax (University of Toronto) MarciaLinn(UniversityofBerkeley) Kristine Lund (CNRS) GiuseppeMantovani(UniversityofPadua) GiuseppeMininni(UniversityofBari?AldoMoro?)Anne-NellyPerret-Clermont(UniversityofNeuchatel)DonatellaPersico(ITD-CNR,Genoa) ClotildePontecorvo(UniversityofRome ?Sapienza?)PeterRenshaw(UniversityofQueensland) VittorioScarano(UniversityofSalerno)RogerSchank(SocraticArt) Neil Schwartz(CaliforniaStateUniversityofChico)PiritaSeitamaa-Hakkarainen(UniversityofJoensuu)PatriziaSelleri(UniversityofBologna) Robert-JanSimons(IVLOS,NL) AndreaSmorti(UniversityofFlorence)JeanUnderwood(NottinghamTrent University) JaanValsiner(UniversityofAalborg) Jan vanAalst(UniversityofHongKong) RupertWegerif(UniversityofExeter)AllanYuen(UniversityofHongKong) Cristina Zucchermaglio (UniversityofRome?Sapienza?) Editorial StaffNadiaSansone?headofstaffLucaTateo?deputyheadofstaff Sarah Buglass,LorellaGiannandrea,HannaJ?rvenoja,MariellaLuciani, F.FeldiaLoperfido,KatherineFrancesMcLay,AudreyMazurPalandre,GiuseppeRitella WebResponsible NadiaSansone From greg.a.thompson@gmail.com Sun Jan 29 08:32:08 2017 From: greg.a.thompson@gmail.com (Greg Thompson) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2017 09:32:08 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Professors' petition against recent Executive Orders Message-ID: One small way to take action: https://notoimmigrationban.com/ -greg -- Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Department of Anthropology 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower Brigham Young University Provo, UT 84602 http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Sun Jan 29 08:46:37 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2017 16:46:37 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Professors' petition against recent Executive Orders In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1485708396519.922@iped.uio.no> thanks, signing now! A ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Greg Thompson Sent: 29 January 2017 17:32 To: xmca-l@ucsd.edu Subject: [Xmca-l] Professors' petition against recent Executive Orders One small way to take action: https://notoimmigrationban.com/ -greg -- Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Department of Anthropology 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower Brigham Young University Provo, UT 84602 http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Sun Jan 29 08:46:37 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2017 16:46:37 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Professors' petition against recent Executive Orders In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1485708396519.922@iped.uio.no> thanks, signing now! A ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Greg Thompson Sent: 29 January 2017 17:32 To: xmca-l@ucsd.edu Subject: [Xmca-l] Professors' petition against recent Executive Orders One small way to take action: https://notoimmigrationban.com/ -greg -- Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Department of Anthropology 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower Brigham Young University Provo, UT 84602 http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson From hshonerd@gmail.com Sun Jan 29 10:32:38 2017 From: hshonerd@gmail.com (HENRY SHONERD) Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2017 11:32:38 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism In-Reply-To: <6C1BEA31-0E61-479C-964A-A8065131C6BB@gmail.com> References: <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C71964@CIO-KRC-D1MBX04.osuad.osu.edu> <1485073527094.7145@iped.uio.no> <5E5B95EA-374F-48EB-B308-BCE49DA52760@gmail.com> <1485113892233.91870@iped.uio.no> <2c9faf42-cb69-9860-4b9f-ea0f6f0ca307@mira.net> <1485241112188.8167@iped.uio.no> <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C77497@CIO-TNC-D1MBX11.osuad.osu.edu> <6C1BEA31-0E61-479C-964A-A8065131C6BB@gmail.com> Message-ID: Helen, Nice going! I look forward to coffee, or whatever, the next time we are in Oakland. I?ll shoot you an email beforehand. Keep on rising! Henry > On Jan 27, 2017, at 8:22 PM, Helena Worthen wrote: > > Henry ? > > It was an extremely pleasant surprise, one of those times when you have a set of expectations and you go and find out that other people have gone way AHEAD of what you expected! > > There were about 30 people up in the faculty lounge, a good mix of Black, Latino, Asian, young people especially, pretty representative of the Laney demographic. There were three of us old white labor people and we sat together near the food and probably did a bit too much of the talking, but the center of gravity of the event was over on the other side of the room where students and people who had been working with community based organizations were squeezed together on sofas. > > I was blown away when a young man introdced himself as a regional organizer from the AFL CIO who specialized in CBOs and labor unions working effectively together! Since when did Big Labor hire someone to deal with that issue? Thus my main concern, that the study of identity lacked economic teeth, was taken care of. Furthermore, it?s not just a Community and LAbor Studies progam that they are going to build; they are also creating something that sounds like a workers? center. The woman who presented that part of the plan, a full-time ethnic studies professor, was very dynamic and energized. When we asked what the next action would be that we could organize around, the answer was an immigration march to be held on May 1, which is a date that perfectly combines celebrations of labor, immigration, race, etc. It?s a big enough project to require many meetings and many different responsibilities, so there will be plenty of opportunity for people to get to know each other. > > In other words, it was great. > > Thanks for asking! Next time you?re in the Bay Area, let?s get together. > > Helena Worthen > helenaworthen@gmail.com > Berkeley, CA 94707 > Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com > > > >> On Jan 24, 2017, at 2:46 PM, HENRY SHONERD wrote: >> >> Helena, >> I look forward to what you find on Thursday at Laney. Oakland is where I lived when I was attending UC Berkeley. I hated being a grad student in economics (though it kept me out of Viet Nam), but my life ?on the ground? (1967-70) shaped much of who I am today. Place matters. I go there every year around Christmas and New Year. If something gets up and going at Laney it will add to the pleasure of my visits to family and friends. I guess what I am trying to say is that it?s personal, which surely adds to the energy. >> Henry >> >>> On Jan 24, 2017, at 1:58 PM, Helena Worthen wrote: >>> >>> Just in time, I have been gifted with a way to "ascend (out of this discussion) to the concrete." >>> >>> Mike mentions "forms of action" and says some colleagues are saying "focus energy on academic work." Faculty committee work is part of academic work. >>> >>> I just got a phone call from a colleague who teaches at California State University and who is, with me and others, on an advisory committee convened to revive the moribund Labor Studies Program at Laney, a community college in Oakland, near where I live. >>> >>> Everyone is probably aware that Labor Studies programs are target practice for right-wingers. If you're not aware, you aren't surprised. So the program at Laney has been shrinking for years. The idea now is to revive it by joining it with the Community Studies Program, which is an umbrella Ethnic Studies program. This makes sense, right? Latino Studies, Black Studies, Gender Studies, Women's Studies, Asian Studies and Labor Studies intuitively seem to belong together. They address people who are likely to be working for a living. >>> >>> So our advisory committee will meet Thursday night and the big issue is this: A core required course is going to be "Community and Labor Organizing." This course already exists in the Community Studies program. If it is submitted to the Academic Senate un-changed, it will speed through approval and be offered in Fall 2017. It will also count for transfer to the State University and UC systems. >>> >>> The catch is that as written, it has to be taught by someone with an advanced Ethnic Studies degree. >>> >>> The easy thing to do is to shrug and let it through without changing it. But an Ethnic Studies degree does not prepare someone to teach labor organizing. First, there are a lot of technical issues that come up in labor organizing. The tricks and traps of labor legislation are just the beginning. Second, although you might think that labor unions and community based organizations (CBOs) are natural allies, they have a very hard time working with each other in practice because of the way authority runs through them. Someone with only a degree in Ethnic Studies will not know this stuff. >>> >>> But it's not just a matter of the content of the course. Letting the course go to approval as is would eliminate the possibility that any of the program faculty who come our of labor (who usually have degrees in Philosophy, History, Political Science) would be able to teach that class. >>> >>> So, is this worth the fight? It looks, on the surface, like a tempest in a teapot. But it's a concrete example of a moment when you can put the teeth of economic justice into the mouth of (block that metaphor). >>> >>> I will go to the meeting Thursday night arguing in favor re-writing the course description to allow faculty who do not have a degree in Ethnic Studies to teach this course. I will say that it's worth losing a semester because there is something bigger at stake here. This is also academic work. >>> >>> >>> Helena Worthen >>> helenaworthen@gmail.com >>> Vietnam blog: helenaworthen.wordpress.com >>> >>> On Jan 24, 2017, at 10:18 AM, mike cole wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Michael >>>> >>>> Nice thought from Bateson. And I see that Peg has just posted a link >>>> to the book. Its certainly a keeper. >>>> >>>> But it does not speak to forms of action that people in our current >>>> circumstances. Some of my colleagues argue that it is essential for >>>> academics in these times to eschew politics in any visible form and >>>> to focus energy on the academic work precisely in order combat over >>>> simplification that threatens human life. >>>> >>>> The basic starting point of the LS/US Nationalism paper, as I see it, is >>>> that claim that the threat of nationalist/populism is GLOBAL and that it >>>> poses huge challenges to LS researchers. So we might not want to get too >>>> caught up in examining Trump/US version of this problem without considering >>>> the rest of the world and its history. The 20th Century provided at least >>>> two clear examples of what happens when this configuration of >>>> nationalism/populism arises in modern times - two wars to end all wars. If >>>> we are in fact returning to the 1930's in this regard, we are doing so in >>>> an unparalleled set of circumstances for homo sapiens. >>>> >>>> So as professionals/citizens, are there forms of action, lines of research, >>>> that might be proposed that would nurture the beautiful in circumstances >>>> that do not involve high levels of radiation and mass destruction? Is >>>> tending to our intellectual gardens the direction to go? Or are forms of >>>> action of the sort proposed by the authors the right direction? And if the >>>> latter, what do we know from past experience that might guide our thinking? >>>> They set out to open the discussion in a major journal. >>>> >>>> Seems like the task here is to see what this group might possibly add to >>>> their attempts to strategize the future based on our collective experience. >>>> >>>> Mike >>>> >>>> PS- Seems like Alfredo's perezhivanie project, as an exercise in >>>> international collaboration to both test a basic theoretical claim of >>>> Vygotsky's and to so collectively, might combine the academic and the >>>> political just a little. And just a little might be a lot. >>>> >>>> >>>> On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 9:40 AM, Glassman, Michael >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> So I am re-reading Bateson, somewhat in light of current happenings and I >>>>> come across this paragraph near the beginning of Mind and Nature, >>>>> >>>>> "There seems to be something like a Gresham's law of cultural evolution >>>>> according to which the oversimplified will always displace the >>>>> sophisticated and the vulgar and hateful will always displace the >>>>> beautiful. And yet the beautiful persists." >>>>> >>>>> Wise words for his time and ours. The information in nature will always >>>>> bring us back around to the beautiful if we let it, but it always seems to >>>>> slip through our fingers. Maybe another take on the arc of justice. The >>>>> trouble of course is every time we let the vulgar and hateful displace the >>>>> stakes seem to become much higher. >>>>> >>>>> Michael >>>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ >>>>> mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Alfredo Jornet Gil >>>>> Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2017 1:59 AM >>>>> To: ablunden@mira.net; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity < >>>>> xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu> >>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism >>>>> >>>>> Francine, >>>>> >>>>> I agree analysis is only one tool and I hope we can do much more here and >>>>> elsewhere. But the overtone window seems to resonate well with our quest >>>>> for understanding the possibilities/conditions for hearing Trump's voice >>>>> sound like a pleasant flute or like toilette flush. >>>>> >>>>> I think the idea of Irony also adds to the question of perezhivanie and >>>>> Trump in the sense that different perezhivanie will also imply different >>>>> forms of generalisation/consciousness. Irony seems to always involve moving >>>>> a step up in the types of generalisation or metaphor. >>>>> >>>>> A good example may be found in considering the "Love Trumps Hate" message >>>>> that has been going around in the media. Although I am no linguist, I am >>>>> gonna give it a try: If you were to hear the assertion literally, you may >>>>> hear an imperative to do love Trump's hate in such a way as to enter into a >>>>> double bind situation. To find yourself in this situation, you need to >>>>> stick to the transitive form of the subject (you love) with respect to the >>>>> object (Trump hate). You kind of have to have faith in this form, respect >>>>> the integrity of the object and the integrity of the subject each in its >>>>> own terms, and so you may come to feel confused, or perhaps end up hating >>>>> just the same way Trump plays he hates. >>>>> >>>>> On the other hand, to be able to hear "love trumps hate" as a message of >>>>> love, as an equivalent (as per Vygotsky's equivalence) for another message >>>>> that we also have seen these days, "when they go low we go high," then you >>>>> have to take the relation between subject and object in a higher level of >>>>> metaphor: you now hear the sentence in a context that modifies both subject >>>>> and object; hate and love cannot be exclusive opposites. The sentence then >>>>> is heard as intransitive, love and hate no longer are independent. And most >>>>> importantly, once you hear the sentence in its intransitive form, love and >>>>> hate no longer are the same. >>>>> >>>>> Similarly, to hear everything Trump said and take it literally takes a >>>>> very different act of faith that it takes hearing it literally as an irony. >>>>> Alfredo >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ________________________________________ >>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>> on behalf of Larry Smolucha >>>>> Sent: 24 January 2017 02:35 >>>>> To: ablunden@mira.net; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism >>>>> >>>>> Message from Francine: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Helena Worthen was right - I am serious about finding (and creating) new >>>>> tools for understanding the Trump movement. Analysis is only one tool and >>>>> there is no insight when it is overused. Figurative, analogical, >>>>> metaphorical thinking gives us other tools. Recognizing IRONY means getting >>>>> the punch line in a joke (as Freud >>>>> >>>>> explained in Jokes and Their Relation to the Unconscious). >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Is there a termteson in literature for the reversal that commonly occurs >>>>> in fairy tales? >>>>> >>>>> All that is gold does not glitter, not all those who wander are lost . . . >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> 1) The ironic reversals that are taking place as people change their >>>>> alignment with >>>>> >>>>> political parties remind me of a geophysics phenomena - the reversal of >>>>> the earth's magnetic field that can happen over hundreds of thousands of >>>>> years. Both are disorienting. I will give this more thought, but for the >>>>> moment consider this much. When magnetic fields shift it is not all at >>>>> once, magnetic currents in the molten layers beneath the earth's solid >>>>> crust change polarities, sometimes causing a total >>>>> >>>>> reversal. Our political parties are commonly referred to as polar >>>>> opposites but those >>>>> >>>>> polarities are not fixed they are fluid. The blue collar working class can >>>>> shift from the Democratic Party to the Republican. The Black vote can shift >>>>> to the Republicans, the Democrats don't own it. In the 1950's Russian >>>>> sympathies were a hallmark of the left, now the left denounces Trumps >>>>> outreach to the Russians. [A caveat here - this is two dimensional thinking >>>>> because there are only two poles on one geometric plane.] >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> 2) There is another concept, the Overton Window that is a scale of how >>>>> radical of a discourse the public will tolerate (also called the window of >>>>> discourse). The Window >>>>> >>>>> opens and closes along a range of discourse from the acceptable to the >>>>> unthinkable. What discourse resonates with the general public (strikes a >>>>> chord)? What will they regard as taboo (or not politically correct)? Issues >>>>> like that. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Here are a couple links worth looking at: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Donald Trump & The Overton Window --Resetting America's Political < >>>>> http://www.nationalreview.com/article/428200/donald- >>>>> trump-overton-window-american-political-debate> >>>>> www.nationalreview.com/.../donald-trump-overton-window-american-p< >>>>> http://www.nationalreview.com/.../donald-trump-overton-window-american-p >>>>>> .. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Trump's Win Smashed the 'Overton Window' | LifeZette>>>> lifezette.com/polizette/trumps-win-smashed-overton-window/> >>>>> www.lifezette.com/polizette/trumps-win-smashed-overton-window/ >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Can any of this be used with the concept of perezhivanie? >>>>> >>>>> ________________________________ >>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>> on behalf of Andy Blunden >>>>> Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 9:37 PM >>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. Nationalism >>>>> >>>>> "Irony" - good word to introduce here Francine. >>>>> >>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>> Andy Blunden >>>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy >>>>> Andy Blunden's Home Page home.mira.net Andy >>>>> Blunden's Home Page with links to pages I maintain and mail-to buttons >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making >>>>> [http://www.brill.com/sites/default/files/styles/large/ >>>>> public/ftp/images/products/295x295/92947.jpg?itok=j5KXqZw3]< >>>>> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making> >>>>> >>>>> The Origins of Collective Decision Making | Brill>>>> products/book/origins-collective-decision-making> >>>>> www.brill.com >>>>> The Origins of Collective Decision Making, identifies three paradigms of >>>>> collective decision making - Counsel, Majority and Consensus, and discovers >>>>> their origins ... >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 23/01/2017 2:32 PM, Larry Smolucha wrote: >>>>>> Message from Francine Smolucha: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> The key to an analysis of the Trump movement is understanding the >>>>>> >>>>>> fundamental IRONIES that have rocked American politics. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> The workers revolution has resulted in the >>>>>> >>>>>> workers/unions deserting the Left, the socialists, the Democratic Party. >>>>>> >>>>>> Trump is a Capitalist regardless of whether he actually has a Republican >>>>> ideology. >>>>>> >>>>>> The workers' movement has been hijacked by a capitalist. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> The other great IRONY is that Trump wants to make Russia a U.S. ally >>>>> (again). >>>>>> >>>>>> The Left, the socialists, the Democratic Party are the ones demonizing >>>>>> Russia - >>>>>> >>>>>> what a reversal! >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Since CHAT derives from Russian psychology (Leontiev and Vygotsky) and >>>>> the backlash against Trump is also a backlash against all things Russian - >>>>> this puts CHAT in a particularly awkward position. How can a cultural >>>>> historical psychology that originated in Russia become the leader in the >>>>> anti-Trump discourse? or lead an anti-Trump educational movement? You are >>>>> even extolling a Russian concept PEREZHIVANIE. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I think the XMCA needs to examine its own perezhivanie at this time. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> ________________________________ >>>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>>> on behalf of mike cole >>>>>> >>>>>> Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 3:01 PM >>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>>> Cc: Mariane Hedegaard; Reijo Miettinen; Seth Chaiklin >>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >>>>>> Nationalism >>>>>> >>>>>> Helena et al -- >>>>>> >>>>>> An important emphasis in the article for me was on the fact that >>>>>> although the article focused on the American nationalist movement that >>>>>> has just pulled of an alt-right coup, similar movements are poised to >>>>>> take hold in a lot of places in Europe to join the many already >>>>>> entrenched unsavory governments in other parts of the world. >>>>>> >>>>>> The CRADLE center in Helsinki is under very concerted attack and the >>>>>> right wing government appears, from this distance, to be making great >>>>>> progress on destroying its legacy. The same process has been in >>>>>> Denmark for some time, also with apparent success. >>>>>> >>>>>> What do our international colleagues who have already felt the hot >>>>>> breath of right wing nationalism have to offer in terms of strategies >>>>>> of resistence? >>>>>> >>>>>> Back to "what is to be done," that sombre question from an earlier >>>>>> era. The answer last time did not produce what it promised. >>>>>> >>>>>> mike >>>>>> >>>>>> mike >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 12:22 PM, Helena Worthen >>>>>> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Thank you, Alfredo - I gave it a read. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Sure, of course they're right. But I am very disappointed. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I was hoping that the following was only item #1 in a long list of >>>>>>> "what the 2016 election made apparent": >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The 2016 election has made apparent the need for scholarship that >>>>>>> explicitly defends and furthers the rights and well-being of people >>>>>>> of color, immigrants, Muslims, women, people who are differently >>>>>>> abled, LGBTQ communities, and the earth. These are stances that have >>>>>>> been limited, at least explicitly, in the Learning Sciences. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> But the call for inclusion was not just #1, it seems to be the whole >>>>>>> thing. In other words, it's all about identity -plus the earth, of >>>>> course. >>>>>>> While inclusion is necessary, it's not even a start. Yes, research, >>>>>>> teaching, publishing, promotion, conferences - everything associated >>>>>>> with teaching and learning has to include everyone as equals (see >>>>>>> Andy's book) in one way or another - but then what? What are they (we) >>>>> supposed to do? >>>>>>> Where does the pretty language touch the ground? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I was listening to a broadcast of the Women's March in DC on Saturday >>>>>>> morning, and Kamala Harris, who was the California State Attorney >>>>>>> General and is now a junior Senator from CA, was addressing the >>>>>>> rally. She said, "People always ask me to talk about women's issues. >>>>>>> I say, 'Oh, I'm SO glad you're interested in economics!! Let's talk >>>>>>> about economics." And she ran through a whole set of parallel >>>>>>> back-and-forths, always pulling identity questions back to wages, jobs, >>>>> earning, supporting your family, etc etc. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Much as we need to wipe away any barriers to the Learning Sciences >>>>>>> (and the professions and institutions dedicated to them) due to >>>>>>> identity, until the Learning Sciences start taking a look at the >>>>>>> place where most people spend most of their lives - not school, I >>>>>>> mean - but work, they will be engaging in a soft conversation at the >>>>>>> edge of the real issue. It's a pleasant conversation but it doesn't >>>>>>> put a hand on the levers that translate skill and knowledge into rent >>>>> and groceries. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> H >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Helena Worthen >>>>>>> helenaworthen@gmail.com >>>>>>> Berkeley, CA 94707 >>>>>>> Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Jan 22, 2017, at 11:38 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> Here it is, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> http://cognitionandinstruction.com/engagements-the-learning- >>>>>>> sciences-in-a-new-era-of-u-s-nationalism/ >>>>>>>> Alfredo >>>>>>>> ________________________________________ >>>>>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> on behalf of Helena Worthen >>>>>>>> Sent: 22 January 2017 20:24 >>>>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >>>>>>> Nationalism >>>>>>>> Someone please re-send the link to this article? I think I'm going >>>>>>>> to >>>>>>> want to read it and respond to Mike's question. >>>>>>>> Thanks - H >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Helena Worthen >>>>>>>> helenaworthen@gmail.com >>>>>>>> Berkeley, CA 94707 >>>>>>>> Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Jan 22, 2017, at 12:25 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> Mike, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> thanks a lot for sharing this article. You and Michael, who have >>>>>>>>> and >>>>>>> know more history, have spoken in terms of reminiscences. I have >>>>>>> lived and know less, and the article feels like fresh air. During my >>>>>>> PhD, I begun to increasingly feel that I had to due something to act >>>>>>> and respond to the increasing ecological and humanitarian globe >>>>>>> crises. But how could I do anything if I had children and a PhD to >>>>>>> finalise?? What could I do that would also be doing my job as >>>>>>> researcher in a department of education? It was very difficult to >>>>>>> find anything, partly because almost every academic quest would focus >>>>>>> on learning, but so little on social development. How many scientific >>>>>>> articles are dedicated to socio-political questions in the most cited >>>>> educational journals? I felt very powerless. >>>>>>>>> To be able to address these questions within my expertise, is a >>>>>>> challenge partly because contrary to Dewey's hope, educational >>>>>>> research has only marginally focused on these questions, and yet they >>>>>>> may be exactly the question that matter to education. What are we >>>>>>> educating for? Indeed, what is education for? I think we face a >>>>>>> serious problem when someone (like myself), being an educational >>>>>>> researchers/scholar, still has to scratch her head wondering <>>>>>> can I make my profession matter to social change and development?>> >>>>> Vygotsky would be shocked! >>>>>>>>> Alfredo >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> on behalf of mike cole >>>>>>>>> Sent: 19 January 2017 04:51 >>>>>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >>>>>>> Nationalism >>>>>>>>> Yes Michael, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> It feels like the world of the later 1930's about the time I was >>>>>>>>> born as that period came down to me through the prism of a family >>>>>>>>> of "premature anti fascists." >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> For a great re-creation of those times see the highly ambivalent >>>>>>>>> film by Frank Capra, "meet John Doe." It has American big capital >>>>>>>>> interconnected with fascism combined with populist collectivism in >>>>>>>>> a manner that >>>>>>> points at >>>>>>>>> the media (as then experienced) as the bad guys in disguise. Happy >>>>>>> Ending, >>>>>>>>> Beethoven Ode to Joy and all. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> It's come round again, nastier this time. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Mike >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 6:20 PM Glassman, Michael >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Mike >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> It was so interesting to read this note after reading the >>>>>>>>>> Cognition and Instruction essay. All the way through it I kept >>>>>>>>>> thinking we have been here before. It reminded me of the >>>>>>>>>> scholars, especially those who had escaped from Germany, trying to >>>>>>>>>> make sense of what had happened to >>>>>>> their >>>>>>>>>> society during World War II. The foremost in my mind was Lewin. >>>>>>> Except I >>>>>>>>>> wonder if he would say the process of transformative action starts >>>>>>>>>> not >>>>>>> with >>>>>>>>>> emergence of quasi-needs, but our willingness and abilities to >>>>>>>>>> step >>>>>>> back >>>>>>>>>> from our quasi-needs and the ways that they drive us, often to >>>>>>>>>> dysfunctional behaviors that it ultimately destructive to both our >>>>>>> society >>>>>>>>>> and to us as individuals. How hard this is to do, we have to keep >>>>>>> going >>>>>>>>>> back again and again. The quasi-needs, tribalism, acceptance, >>>>>>> standing are >>>>>>>>>> always there. It is how they shape us that is critical. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Michael >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto: >>>>>>>>>> xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 8:31 PM >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] The Learning Sciences in the era of U.S. >>>>>>>>>> Nationalism >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> In following the perezhivanie thread I encountered the note I >>>>>>> re-membered. >>>>>>>>>> And interestingly mis-remembered. A translation into my focus on >>>>>>>>>> mediational means. He places the starting point of the process of >>>>>>>>>> transformative action at the emergence of quasi-needs (from Kurt >>>>>>> Lewin). >>>>>>>>>> That seems correct to me. The new mediational means emerge under >>>>>>>>>> environmental presses. Ever functionalist ego need a goal(!). (The >>>>>>> problem >>>>>>>>>> with functionalism) In David's words, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Perhaps the place we should look for "exaptations" that can save >>>>>>>>>> both >>>>>>> our >>>>>>>>>> personalities and our environment is not in our evolved needs, but >>>>>>>>>> in >>>>>>> yet >>>>>>>>>> to be designed quasi-needs. Artificial organs, after all, always >>>>>>> suggest >>>>>>>>>> new and ever more artificial functions, like chess and language. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> This point seems worth keeping in mind as we look at where this >>>>>>>>>> group >>>>>>> of >>>>>>>>>> critical scholars who work within the Learning Sciences >>>>>>>>>> disciplinary framework would like to lead us. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> mike >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>> >>> >> >> > > From bferholt@gmail.com Mon Jan 30 09:06:00 2017 From: bferholt@gmail.com (Beth Ferholt) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2017 12:06:00 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Professors' petition against recent Executive Orders In-Reply-To: <1485708396519.922@iped.uio.no> References: <1485708396519.922@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: I am probably not the only one on the list with this story but in case it feels removed to anyone ... one of my colleagues was detained and can now not reenter the country and teach her classes, which begin tomorrow. Beth On Sun, Jan 29, 2017 at 11:46 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > thanks, signing now! > A > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of Greg Thompson > Sent: 29 January 2017 17:32 > To: xmca-l@ucsd.edu > Subject: [Xmca-l] Professors' petition against recent Executive Orders > > One small way to take action: > https://notoimmigrationban.com/ > -greg > > -- > Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. > Assistant Professor > Department of Anthropology > 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower > Brigham Young University > Provo, UT 84602 > http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson > > -- Beth Ferholt Assistant Professor Department of Early Childhood and Art Education Brooklyn College, City University of New York 2900 Bedford Avenue Brooklyn, NY 11210-2889 Email: bferholt@brooklyn.cuny.edu Phone: (718) 951-5205 Fax: (718) 951-4816 From bferholt@gmail.com Mon Jan 30 09:06:00 2017 From: bferholt@gmail.com (Beth Ferholt) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2017 12:06:00 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Professors' petition against recent Executive Orders In-Reply-To: <1485708396519.922@iped.uio.no> References: <1485708396519.922@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: I am probably not the only one on the list with this story but in case it feels removed to anyone ... one of my colleagues was detained and can now not reenter the country and teach her classes, which begin tomorrow. Beth On Sun, Jan 29, 2017 at 11:46 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > thanks, signing now! > A > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of Greg Thompson > Sent: 29 January 2017 17:32 > To: xmca-l@ucsd.edu > Subject: [Xmca-l] Professors' petition against recent Executive Orders > > One small way to take action: > https://notoimmigrationban.com/ > -greg > > -- > Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. > Assistant Professor > Department of Anthropology > 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower > Brigham Young University > Provo, UT 84602 > http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson > > -- Beth Ferholt Assistant Professor Department of Early Childhood and Art Education Brooklyn College, City University of New York 2900 Bedford Avenue Brooklyn, NY 11210-2889 Email: bferholt@brooklyn.cuny.edu Phone: (718) 951-5205 Fax: (718) 951-4816 From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Mon Jan 30 12:57:15 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2017 20:57:15 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Professors' petition against recent Executive Orders In-Reply-To: References: <1485708396519.922@iped.uio.no>, Message-ID: <1485809831485.58226@iped.uio.no> thanks Beth, it is important to share these experiences. I guess she is missed in many places other than her class... I hope the people get the power back (if it was theirs before) sooner than later. A ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Beth Ferholt Sent: 30 January 2017 18:06 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Cc: xmca-l@ucsd.edu Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Professors' petition against recent Executive Orders I am probably not the only one on the list with this story but in case it feels removed to anyone ... one of my colleagues was detained and can now not reenter the country and teach her classes, which begin tomorrow. Beth On Sun, Jan 29, 2017 at 11:46 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > thanks, signing now! > A > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of Greg Thompson > Sent: 29 January 2017 17:32 > To: xmca-l@ucsd.edu > Subject: [Xmca-l] Professors' petition against recent Executive Orders > > One small way to take action: > https://notoimmigrationban.com/ > -greg > > -- > Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. > Assistant Professor > Department of Anthropology > 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower > Brigham Young University > Provo, UT 84602 > http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson > > -- Beth Ferholt Assistant Professor Department of Early Childhood and Art Education Brooklyn College, City University of New York 2900 Bedford Avenue Brooklyn, NY 11210-2889 Email: bferholt@brooklyn.cuny.edu Phone: (718) 951-5205 Fax: (718) 951-4816 From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Mon Jan 30 12:57:15 2017 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2017 20:57:15 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Professors' petition against recent Executive Orders In-Reply-To: References: <1485708396519.922@iped.uio.no>, Message-ID: <1485809831485.58226@iped.uio.no> thanks Beth, it is important to share these experiences. I guess she is missed in many places other than her class... I hope the people get the power back (if it was theirs before) sooner than later. A ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Beth Ferholt Sent: 30 January 2017 18:06 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Cc: xmca-l@ucsd.edu Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Professors' petition against recent Executive Orders I am probably not the only one on the list with this story but in case it feels removed to anyone ... one of my colleagues was detained and can now not reenter the country and teach her classes, which begin tomorrow. Beth On Sun, Jan 29, 2017 at 11:46 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > thanks, signing now! > A > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of Greg Thompson > Sent: 29 January 2017 17:32 > To: xmca-l@ucsd.edu > Subject: [Xmca-l] Professors' petition against recent Executive Orders > > One small way to take action: > https://notoimmigrationban.com/ > -greg > > -- > Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. > Assistant Professor > Department of Anthropology > 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower > Brigham Young University > Provo, UT 84602 > http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson > > -- Beth Ferholt Assistant Professor Department of Early Childhood and Art Education Brooklyn College, City University of New York 2900 Bedford Avenue Brooklyn, NY 11210-2889 Email: bferholt@brooklyn.cuny.edu Phone: (718) 951-5205 Fax: (718) 951-4816 From smago@uga.edu Thu Jan 26 04:05:33 2017 From: smago@uga.edu (Peter Smagorinsky) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2017 12:05:33 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] FW: New Smore to Share! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi, friends! Here is this month's newsletter to share far and wide on your social media accounts. If you want to include a personal plug for the conference above this link, that would be amazing. https://www.smore.com/7ezjz [https://s.smore.com/ss/5888d2c7cc3b7b02a6668990-screenshot-fb_wide.jpg?_v=1485394086] JoLLE January Newsletter www.smore.com Out of the Box and Into the Margins with JoLLE The JoLLE Winter Conference is coming up NEXT WEEK--Friday, February 3 and Saturday,... Heidi Lyn Hadley, Managing Editor Journal of Language and Literacy Education The University of Georgia Aderhold 315 Athens, GA 30602 jollesubmissions@uga.edu Follow JoLLE on Twitter: @Jolle_uga Follow JoLLE on Facebook: Journal of Language & Literacy Education http://jolle.coe.uga.edu/