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

[mike cole]

Lovely essay, David.

Can't we generalize this:
   "*Yes, privileged access is not a metaphyiscal, philosophical problem;
it's a*
*real, concrete problem for stage actors.​"*

Can't we conclude that privileged access is a real, concrete, problem for
human
​​
*​*
*​*beings in their everyday lives?

mike*​*

On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 2:04 PM, David Kellogg <dkellogg60@gmail.com> wrote:

> Yes, privileged access is not a metaphyiscal, philosophical problem; it's a
> real, concrete problem for stage actors. It's why Vygotsky takes
> Stanislavsky's scripts as a kind of model for the human mind in Chapter
> Seven of Thinking and Speech. How the actor gives the audience access to
> the plane of thinkings and sayings was never problematic. In Shakespeare's
> time, there were long "set speeches" to the audience, but the "true
> feelings" of the character for the character she or he was about to murder
> or marry had to be conveyed soto voce, in asides. Shakespeare changed all
> that, and he did it with stagecraft, by dividing the stage into planes
> representing the mind of the speaker--the foreplane, where Hamlet advances
> to the front of the stage and speaks feelings to the audience, the midplane
> for quoting thoughts and words, and the rearplane for actions.
>
> This model is essentially the model of the mind we see in Chapter Seven.
> Alas,  only David Tennant, of contemporary Shakespeareans, really
> understands this: only his Hamlet speaks "To be or not to be" with UPWARD
> intonation, as if it were a real question, and manipulates the stresses
> correctly, so that "whether tis nobler in the mind to suffer the slings and
> arrows of outrageous fortune" in the end turns out to be "not to be" while
> "to take up arms against a sea of troubles and by opposing end them" turns
> out to be "to be".
> Benedict Cumberbatch, by contrast, turns this torrent of emotion back into
> a fifteenth century set speech and delivers it like a soldier presenting a
> battle briefing to superior officers with a PPT.
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=twwntlAlnV0
>
> The Chinese actor is more Brechtian than Stanslavskian (or rather, Brecht
> was more Chinese than European); the Chinese actor always has the character
> at arms length, even the character which the actor is conveying (the
> dialectical leap is between actor and character, not between doing,
> feeling, thinking and saying). Notice the first part of the video when the
> various actors are explaining their feelings to audience. They don't have a
> particular place where they stand to do this, or even a particular
> intonation for it: it is more often conveyed by their gestures and their
> eye contact, and by their use of the third person in Chinese, which shows
> they are addressing the audience rather than their interlocutor.The Chinese
> actor always stresses the linked quality of feeling and thinking, thinking
> and doing, while the Western actor tries to convey the dialectical leap.
>
> David Kellogg
>
> On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 9:59 PM, James Ma <jamesma320@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > 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
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>