[Xmca-l] Re: Отв: Re: Отв: Re: Отв: Re: Object oriented activity and communication

[James Ma]

David, sounds like you're talking about "privilege access"?

The video brought back a lot of memories of my childhood!

James



On 26 October 2017 at 11:55, David Kellogg <dkellogg60@gmail.com> wrote:

>  All Vygotsky says is that thinking is represented in the brain differently
> than immediate sensation. Vygotsky didn't have access to MRI scans or
> computerized tomography. In fact these can and do distinguish between verbs
> of sensation and verbs of verbal report. But what Vygotsky did have access
> to is the grammar of reported speech.
>
> In all languages that I know, it is possible to quote the words of another
> person. I can say, for example:
>
> Sasha says "Obviously, this has nothing to do with Marxism".
>
> I can also quote the thoughts of another person.
>
> Sasha thinks, "Obviously, this has nothing to with Marxism."
>
> I can do this even when there are no actual words, just as I can read
> Sasha's thoughts without him speaking them.
>
> However, in no languages that Iknow is it possible to quote the actions or
> the immediate sensations of another person. I cannot say, for example:
>
> "Sasha stood "Up""
>
> "Sasha felt 'Cold'".
>
> When I try to say this, what I end up saying is that Sasha thought a word
> meaning, not that he felt an immediate sensation.
>
> In Chinese we say, "The speaker has gone, and the tea is cold."  This is
> originally a line from the revolutionary opera "Shajiabang", about a woman
> who runs a teahouse used by communists. In this scene, the children are
> acting out a visit by a Chinese quisling and a Japanese officer; they
> accuse the woman of communist sympathies, and she says that all people who
> come to her teahouse have sympathies, but as soon as they go, their tea is
> cold, and she throws it out (6:13).
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uUYvyRMvCNU
>
> There is no way, as Wittgenstein says, to feel the toothache of another
> person; all you can do is to describe it in thoughts and words.
> Paradoxically, when we want to share thoughts, we can do it "immediately",
> because thoughts and words have already made the dialectical leap--the leap
> from idiolect into a sharable dialect.
>
> David Kellogg
>
>
>
>
>
> other verbs). First of all, notice that he is saying that
>
> On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 5:14 PM, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net> wrote:
>
> > That is a tendency within our heritage, David. Some people
> > take the category of "labour" rather than "activity" to be
> > the key category.
> >
> > As I understand it, "labour," or "production," is activity
> > in the case where production and consumption and socially
> > mediated, but I think that activity whose object is an
> > object of consumption should be included within the basic
> > category of Activity Theory, even if there are important
> > psychological differences. Some are also concerned to
> > separate symbolic activity, such as speech or supervision of
> > labour, from the fundamental category, giving tool-use
> > priority over sign use, and use of the term "labour"
> > suggests that. Vygotsky expressed himself firmly against
> > this move.
> >
> > So use of "activity" rather than "labour" or vice versa does
> > reflect certain tensions within the tradition.
> >
> > Andy
> >
> > http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/pdfs/Tool%20and%
> > 20Sign%20in%20Vygotskys%20Development.pdf
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------
> > Andy Blunden
> > http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm
> > On 26/10/2017 6:14 PM, WEBSTER, DAVID S. wrote:
> > > Xmca seems to have a workerist tendency operating - for myself I have
> > always found that the work of generalising (in Vygotsky's sense) is a
> > labour of object-oriented activity. But that's just me
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@
> > mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Alexander Surmava
> > > Sent: 26 October 2017 00:13
> > > To: Alfredo Jornet Gil; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; Mike Cole;
> > ivan-dgf; Martin John Packer; ‪Haydi ‪Zulfei‬‬
> > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Отв: Re: Отв: Re: Отв: Re: Object oriented activity
> > and communication
> > >
> > > Dear Alfredo,
> > >
> > > thank you for your very accurate reaction. You definitely noticed the
> > main thing. Today, in the era of globalization and developed
> technologies,
> > the class antagonism between exploited people and their exploiters,
> between
> > capital and wage labor, assumes the appearance of the opposite between
> > different ethnic groups and cultures. Capital itself has always been a
> > global phenomenon, and a class of capitalists - a cosmopolitan class.
> > Putting military overcoats on workers and sending them to fight and to
> kill
> > each other under nationalist slogans, they continued to cooperate with
> > their exploitation colleagues, somehow continuing to receive dividends
> from
> > their enterprises located on the territory of their "enemy." Today
> Putin's
> > friends and henchmen who curse the "insidious West" take their capitals
> to
> > this West, buy property there, send their children to study there and go
> > there themselves to rest and be treated. And today Mr. Poroshenko - the
> > president of the country that was subje
> > >  cted to the aggression of the neighboring state, owns chocolate
> > factories located on the territory of this country.
> > > In Russia, and in Western Europe, and in the United States, the policy
> > of the ruling classes is based today on inciting against each other the
> > working people of different ethnic groups and confessions, on their
> > juxtaposition of each other as superior and second-class creatures.
> > > And as an ideological justification of the enmity incited by the ruling
> > class towards working people of a different skin color, working people
> > speaking a different language and praying to other gods, public
> > consciousness is infected with totally false ideas constructed allegedly
> on
> > a scientific basis. All this is not new. One hundred years ago, the
> > dominant ideology rested on undisguised racism. Today, the same task is
> > being solved by more sophisticated means, appealing to so-called
> "cultural"
> > differences. Although the old ideology appealing to biological
> differences
> > has not disappeared. Only today it is covered by a new, molecular-genetic
> > argumentation, an appeal not only to livestock farming, but also to the
> > "psychology of culture".
> > > It is possible to unmask this bourgeois lie, not only in words but also
> > in deeds, if we can understand that human development is not the ability
> of
> > individuals to experience (perejivat’) the meaning of words, but to be
> > genuine subjects of object-oriented activity, the subjects of labor.
> > > If we stay on Vygotsky's theoretical positions, which believed that the
> > human psyche begins with acts of sensation that thinking is just a verbal
> > "generalization" of the material that our senses deliver to us, then any
> > wretched ideologist, with a well-suspended language, will seem to us the
> > owner of perfect wisdom, whereas a worker or a peasant doing his own
> work,
> > but not possessing the skill of ideological verbosity, will look
> something
> > inferior.
> > > If someone is shocked by such an evaluation of Vygotsky's theory, open
> > his "Thinking and speach" and reread this key paragraph.
> > >
> > >
> > > "It has been said that the dialectical leap is not only a transition
> > from matter that is incapable of sensation to matter that is capable of
> > sensation, but a transition from sensation to thought. This implies that
> > reality is reflected in consciousness in a qualitatively different way in
> > thinking than it is in immediate sensation. This qualitative difference
> is
> > primarily a function of a generalized reflection of reality. Therefore,
> > generalization in word meaning is an act of thinking in the true sense of
> > the word. At the same time, however, meaning is an inseparable part of
> the
> > word; it belongs not only to the domain of thought but to the domain of
> > speech. A word without meaning is not a word, but an empty sound. A word
> > without meaning no longer belongs to the domain of speech. One cannot say
> > of word meaning what we said earlier of the elements of the word taken
> > separately. Is word meaning speech or is it thought? It is both at one
> and
> > the same time; it is a unit of verbal thi
> > >  nking. It is obvious, then, that our method must be that of semantic
> > analysis. Our method must rely on the analysts of the meaningful aspect
> of
> > speech; it must be a method for studying verbal meaning.
> > >
> > > We can reasonably anticipate that this method will produce answers to
> > our questions concerning the relationship between thinking and speech
> > because this relationship is already contained in the unit of analysis.
> In
> > studying the function, structure, and development of this unit, we will
> > come to understand a great deal that is of direct relevance to the
> problem
> > of the relationship of thinking to speech and to the nature of verbal
> > thinking."
> > >
> > >
> > > Obviously, such an "understanding" of thinking has not the slightest
> > relation to either Spinozism or Marxism. It is a naive attempt to combine
> > eclectically the old ideas of empirical psychology with the school
> textbook
> > of formal logic.
> > > (Of course, I understand that this paragraph needs more detailed
> > theoretical analysis. And I will not slow down this analysis in the very
> > near future. In the meantime, I only note that Vygotsky's assertion that
> > "generalization is a verbal act of thought" is a maximally aphoristic
> > expression of his idealistic position. For us, as for the materialists,
> the
> > generalization is a practical act and its instrument is the instrument of
> > labor. And the initial and universal instrument of generalization is not
> a
> > sign, but an instrument of labor. So the ax is a means of generalizing
> the
> > properties of wood. The ax is, in the same time, a means of analyzing all
> > the same wood. All this is obvious, looking through the optics of
> > Spinoza-Ilyenkov, that is, simply a Marxist definition of ideality.)
> > Theoretical conclusions made by Vygotsky from the results of Luria's trip
> > to Uzbekistan logically follow from the above. The Uzbek illiterate
> > peasant, not from school textbooks, but from his own labo
> > >  r experience knowing how the earth, aryk, water, hoe and melon are
> > connected, and therefore refusing to produce meaningless formal logical
> > operations with words denoting these things, is declared a primitive
> > thinking by "complexes". Simultaneously, any school crap who knows how to
> > pronounce definitions from his textbook and familiar with the melon only
> > when it is bought, washed and cut by his mommy, is declared the bearer of
> > scientific consciousness.
> > >
> > > Only in this way can we, as psychologists and teachers, come to the
> > value of instruments of labor, not only for the distribution of material
> > wealth, but also for the distribution of the spiritual wealth, for the
> > distribution of the ability to think, for the distribution of culture.
> Only
> > in this way can we approach the Marxist definition of culture as the
> > totality of the means of its object-oriented activity accumulated by
> > humankind the means of its labor. Only on the path of such based on idea
> of
> > object-oriented activity understanding of man we will be able to get out
> of
> > the deadlock of the semiotic, with its symbolic arbitrariness.
> > > Vygotsky's merit is that he was the first who seriously set the task of
> > creating a Marxist psychology and his merit can be considered that the
> > first real step in this direction was made by his friend and student AN
> > Leontiev.Our task is to continue their mission.
> > > Sasha
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >       От: Alfredo Jornet Gil <a.j.gil@iped.uio.no>
> > >  Кому: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>;
> > Mike Cole <lchcmike@gmail.com>; ivan-dgf <ivan-dgf@migmail.ru>; Martin
> > John Packer <mpacker@uniandes.edu.co>; ‪Haydi ‪Zulfei‬‬ <
> > haydizulfei@rocketmail.com>; Alexander Surmava <
> > alexander.surmava@yahoo.com>
> > >  Отправлено: среда, 25 октября 2017 15:03
> > >  Тема: Re: [Xmca-l] Re: Отв: Re: Отв: Re: Object oriented activity and
> > communication
> > >
> > > #yiv0081188988 #yiv0081188988 -- P {margin-top:0px;margin-bottom:
> 0px;}#yiv0081188988
> > Dear Sasha, all,
> > >
> > > apologies for late response, as we've had some health issues at home
> > that fortunately are now dissipating but which have limited participation
> > anywhere else than home life.
> > >
> > > The real need of democratic pedagogy. That sounds like a concrete
> aspect
> > to begin moving on to what we had hoped at the beginning of this
> > conversation: how is this all gonna be of practical (real) relevance to
> us
> > and not only armchair discussion. So, in what sense is this 'real,' and
> is
> > this a 'need'? (I am not addressing Sasha alone, I am addressing any and
> > everyone)
> > >
> > > Alfredo
> > >
> > > From: Alexander Surmava <alexander.surmava@yahoo.com>
> > > Sent: 21 October 2017 13:36
> > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; Mike Cole; Alfredo Jornet Gil;
> > ivan-dgf; Martin John Packer; ‪Haydi ‪Zulfei‬‬
> > > Subject: Отв: [Xmca-l] Re: Отв: Re: Отв: Re: Object oriented activity
> > and communication Dear Martin,I think that if we're going to discuss the
> > method of Marx, then it is better to do it discussing his most mature
> work.
> > That is evidently "Das Kapital" and Ilyenkov's monograph "Dialectics of
> the
> > abstract and concrete in theoretical thinking". I am aware that there is
> a
> > point of view that the position of Marx as a humanist was adequately
> > presented in Gründrisse, whereas the humanistic core of Marx's theory was
> > allegedly lost in “Das Kapital”. Accordingly, Marxism is better to study
> > with the help of Gründrisse, and not with the help of “Das Kapital”.
> Along
> > with Ilyenkov I do not share this view.I'm afraid that the discussion of
> > this topic would take us too far from our psychological themes. I think
> > that we should not get stuck in discussing the order of "steps", but
> > immediately put our foot on the first "step" so that after that try to
> rise
> > from it to the seco
> > >  nd, and so on ... Taking into account my not young age, it seems to me
> > that at least for me, it's time to move on from the discussion of the
> > method to the discussion of the subject, from the preparation to
> thinking,
> > to the thinking as such. Especially because the Method can not be studied
> > before and regardless of the study of the very subject. Perhaps this
> seems
> > paradoxical, but it is a paradox only for those who are not familiar with
> > the dialectic of Spinoza and Marx. Meanwhile, instead of discussing the
> > question - what is activity, or what is the psyche - we continue to carry
> > water in a sieve, discussing the singular or plural of the term activity.
> > Without a doubt, this topic is very useful for translators from Russian
> (or
> > German) language to English, but theoretically it is not very
> informative.
> > And besides, we are convinced that Andy Blunden completely exhausted this
> > topic a few years ago. Much more interesting would be to discuss the
> > question: what is the justificati
> > >  on to declare Vygotsky the founder of activity theory. Where, in any
> > > of his works, Vygotsky introduces the concept of activity, not just
> uses
> > the term «activity» in the theoretical contexts in which it is used
> > habitually by idealistic psychology. “The activity (or activities) of
> > consciousness”, “the activity (or activities) of mental functions”,
> “speech
> > activity (or activities)”, the concrete activities of the personality”-
> all
> > this has nothing to do with object-oriented activity, with Spinoza and
> > Marx. It seems to me that our main mistake is that we are discussing the
> > subtleties of understanding the categories of activity by Vygotsky and
> > Leontyev, whereas we need something different. It is necessary to try to
> > formulate OUR OWN UNDERSTANDING of the activity, proceeding from THE REAL
> > NEED OF THE PRACTICE OF DEMOCRATIC PEDAGOGY.It is impossible to
> understand
> > activity based on Vygotsky's ideas, because there was no such theoretical
> > category in his theoretical system of views. AN Leontiev introduces a
> > category of object-oriented a
> > >  ctivity into psychology, but his theory is of little use for solving
> > practical problems too, for saying “A”, Leontyev never said “B”. Having
> > proposed the principle of activity as the universal basis of the
> > psychological theory, its germ cell AN Leontiev did not go further
> failing
> > to concretize this correctly chosen abstract category.Once again, from
> > thehobby group of lovers of Vygotsky, with his "Сultural-Рistorical
> > Psychology" and AN Leontyev with his "Psychological Theory of Activity"
> we
> > all have to become community of researchers developing fundamentally new
> > approaches to education, based on dialectical, revolutionary method of
> > Marx.For the realization of this dream, it is necessary to begin not so
> > much - to learn to listen to each other... :-)Sincerely,Sasha
> > >
> > > От: Martin John Packer <mpacker@uniandes.edu.co>
> > > Кому: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
> > > Отправлено: пятница, 20 октября 2017 3:08
> > > Тема: [Xmca-l] Re: Отв: Re: Отв: Re: Object oriented activity and
> > communication
> > >
> > > Right, Marx was himself well aware of this difference. My point is that
> > we have begin to talk about “the start” of Marx’s analysis, and about its
> > “stages,” but these should not be equated with the order of the treatment
> > in Capital.
> > >
> > > Martin
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Oct 19, 2017, at 5:40 PM, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net<mailto:
> ablu
> > nden@mira.net>> wrote:
> > >
> > > https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/p3.htm
> > >
> > >   Of course the method of presentation must differ in form
> > >   from that of inquiry. The latter has to appropriate the
> > >   material in detail, to analyse its different forms of
> > >   development, to trace out their inner connexion. Only
> > >   after this work is done, can the actual movement be
> > >   adequately described. If this is done successfully, if
> > >   the life of the subject-matter is ideally reflected as
> > >   in a mirror, then it may appear as if we had before us a
> > >   mere a priori construction.
> > >
> > > Andy
> > >
> > > ------------------------------------------------------------
> > > Andy Blunden
> > > http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm
> > > On 20/10/2017 3:23 AM, Martin John Packer wrote:
> > > Seems to me that if we’re going to talk about the details of Marx’s
> > analysis we need to look not at Capital but at the Grundrisse. The two
> have
> > virtually opposite organizations; it’s clear that the order of
> presentation
> > in Capital was not the order of analysis.
> > >
> > > Martin
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>