[Xmca-l] Re: Passions, (Projects?) and Interests

[Huw Lloyd]

As we know, Vygotsky juggles a large number of ideas. If one wants to
arrive at a Vygotskian view of these ideas, then one needs to relate them.
In isolation they are vague and slippery. Together they are still vague
where Vygotsky remained undeveloped, hence I would say one needs to go
beyond Vygotsky's writings to see how the significant fragments that
Vygotsky presents fit together. This, for me, is a side effect, I have not
set out to explain Vygotsky.

Fundamentally, cognition is about the coordination of action. Needs,
however one frames them, are addressed through action. Successful
realisation of needs arise through relating to the world, to society, to
family, to artefacts etc. These coordinations and relations are achieved
through what we call knowledge and the fundamental, developmental, features
of this knowledge is that they become reorganised. Knowing how to find out
is epistemological knowledge. Shifts in one's personal epistemology also
entails shifts in one's ontology.

There is no single cultural "epistemological form" this is quite obvious
from the first volume of Vygotsky. From my position, epistemological forms
are developmental. Culture can support and hinder this aspect. From my
position, focusing upon culture as a universal medium is abstracting away a
great deal concerning personal meanings. In my paper I introduce a model of
epistemological forms which helps to make all the relations that the theory
touches upon more tangible, albeit simplified.

Best,
Huw

On Sat, 12 Jan 2019 at 17:43, mike cole <mcole@ucsd.edu> wrote:

> I know this may sound obtuse, Huw. But the concept of need in both LSV and
> ANL has always
> seemed very slippery to me. Presumably a long term need is to obtain
> enough food, shelter......
> but that involves social transactions that are culturally mediated.
> Reproduction is a species need in one way and
> I guess my felt need to check out how Arsenal is faring is short term. But
> its long term equivalent? Seems more than epistemic/ontological. I am not
> sure where sexual interests fit in.
>
> Can this be explained in a manner that this struggling person can
> understand?
>
> mike
>
>
>
> On Sat, Jan 12, 2019 at 8:49 AM Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Vygotsky likens them to temporary needs.
>>
>> Huw
>>
>> On Sat, 12 Jan 2019 at 00:36, mike cole <mcole@ucsd.edu> wrote:
>>
>>> Ah, so interests are the affective ingredient that accompanies the point
>>> of.view?  A subjtive object?
>>> Mike
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 3:58 PM James Ma <jamesma320@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Interests have much to do with intentionality - and there is always a
>>>> subjective angle from which the object (interests) is viewed - I don't
>>>> recall coming across Vygotsky alluding to this.
>>>> To illustrate my point, I use the term "evidentiality" (which in
>>>> linguistics refers to statements being explicitly marked to show the source
>>>> of the speaker's information, e.g. "I witnessed this"). It goes without
>>>> saying that privileged access bears on one's interest (a state of being
>>>> interested, or an act of taking an interest, in something). Thus, one
>>>> person's interest is always a "secondary evidential" from another person's
>>>> viewpoint, in which case another person has to make inference through sense
>>>> perception, mediated by contextual factors (e.g. interpersonal, ideational
>>>> and textual).
>>>>
>>>> James
>>>>
>>>> *_______________________________________________________*
>>>>
>>>> *James Ma  Independent Scholar *
>>>> *https://oxford.academia.edu/JamesMa
>>>> <https://oxford.academia.edu/JamesMa>   *
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 16:48, mike cole <mcole@ucsd.edu> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> So interests are curiosity, Huw?
>>>>> Didn’t “Psychology of Art” have something to to do with Emotions,
>>>>> David?
>>>>> 10 Volumes (!) of LSV! Wow.
>>>>> Mike
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 5:58 AM Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> For Vygotsky, interests are intentions.  Although he recognises that
>>>>>> Lewin's structural theory is inadequate with regard to discerning the
>>>>>> essence of interests, his own writings in that chapter focus upon
>>>>>> developmental patterns of interests, and he does not get around to being
>>>>>> explicit about what is behind interest -- what is really driving it. To a
>>>>>> certain extent this is answered with the social situation of development,
>>>>>> but unless one reads between the lines there is a great deal of vagueness,
>>>>>> such as with reference to psychological functions.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have a rather large theoretical paper I am completing on this to
>>>>>> compliment some empirical work. What I state is that it is epistemology
>>>>>> (and ontology) that is the interest behind interest.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>> Huw
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 12:08, Moises Esteban-Guitart <
>>>>>> moises.esteban@udg.edu> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That's an interesting question that I asked myself when I read
>>>>>>> EDUCATIONAL
>>>>>>> PSYCHOLOGY by Vygotsky "from one interest of the child’s to a new
>>>>>>> interest
>>>>>>> —that is the rule” (Vygotsky, 1926/1997a, p. 86). My conclusion was
>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>> it depends on the biographical moment (see pp. 393 to 396 document
>>>>>>> attached). By the way, in his "Educational Psychology" he wrote on
>>>>>>> sex too
>>>>>>> ("Education on the sex instinct", pp. 71-77), however I didn't
>>>>>>> explore
>>>>>>> this.
>>>>>>> m
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> > David,
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > I would imagine the reference to interest relates to the STUDENTS'
>>>>>>> > interest: meaning that whatever way it is approached it needs to be
>>>>>>> > introduced from and in relation to the students' current
>>>>>>> > knowledge/interest/developmental stage as opposed to being imposed
>>>>>>> in a
>>>>>>> > decontextualised way.
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > At least I think that's what's going on here...
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > Julie
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >> Sorry, Rob. I mean fifteen hours a year. The government has
>>>>>>> itinerant
>>>>>>> >> specialists who lecture from school to school. There is even a
>>>>>>> bus for
>>>>>>> >> visiting the provinces.
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> In contrast, Vygotsky says:
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> a) No class with ONLY sex education--since anatomical, sexual, and
>>>>>>> >> sociocultural maturation do not coincide in modern humans, sex
>>>>>>> education
>>>>>>> >> is
>>>>>>> >> not a science of a natural whole, where the object of study is
>>>>>>> given to
>>>>>>> >> us.
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> b) No classes WITHOUT sex education--since sex education is simply
>>>>>>> >> learning
>>>>>>> >> how to be with people who may be of sexual interest, all classes
>>>>>>> must
>>>>>>> >> have
>>>>>>> >> some form of sexual "enlightenment".
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> c) No sex education without INTEREST. But what, exactly, is
>>>>>>> interest?
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> David Kellogg
>>>>>>> >> Sangmyung University
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> New in *Language and Literature*, co-authored with Fang Li:
>>>>>>> >> Mountains in labour: Eliot’s ‘Atrocities’ and Woolf’s
>>>>>>> >> alternatives
>>>>>>> >> Show all authors
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> https://doi.org/10.1177/0963947018805660
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 5:40 PM robsub@ariadne.org.uk
>>>>>>> >> <robsub@ariadne.org.uk>
>>>>>>> >> wrote:
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>> Fifteen hours a week???
>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>> >>> I hope it's not all practicals - the teachers would be exhausted.
>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>> >>> In the UK nowadays the very inadequate thing we do in schools is
>>>>>>> called
>>>>>>> >>> Sex and Relationship Education. The "and Relationship" bit was
>>>>>>> tacked
>>>>>>> >>> on
>>>>>>> >>> some time in the 90s or maybe early 2000s, if I recall rightly.
>>>>>>> They
>>>>>>> >>> missed
>>>>>>> >>> a trick there - they should have put it the other way round
>>>>>>> >>> "Relationship
>>>>>>> >>> and Sex Education". A very large lump of the population go into a
>>>>>>> >>> tabloid
>>>>>>> >>> induced panic as soon as they hear the word "sex", especially
>>>>>>> when
>>>>>>> >>> related
>>>>>>> >>> to children, and then fail to hear the "and relationship" it.
>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>> >>> Rob
>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>> >>> On 11/01/2019 07:14, David Kellogg wrote:
>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>> >>> Last July in Geneva, I got into a bit of a tiff with my hosts
>>>>>>> over
>>>>>>> >>> whether
>>>>>>> >>> or not Vygotsky had a theory of emotion. The commonplace
>>>>>>> position,
>>>>>>> >>> taken
>>>>>>> >>> by
>>>>>>> >>> almost all high Vygotskyans including my francophone friends, is
>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>> >>> Vygotsky spent too much of his life developing a theory of
>>>>>>> thinking and
>>>>>>> >>> intellect, complexes and concept formation, and when he turned
>>>>>>> his
>>>>>>> >>> attention to the lower and higher emotions, that dark side of
>>>>>>> the moon,
>>>>>>> >>> it
>>>>>>> >>> was too late. He worked out a kind of prolegomena, in the form of
>>>>>>> >>> "Teaching
>>>>>>> >>> on the Emotions" (or "Study of the Emotions" or perhaps "The
>>>>>>> Doctrine
>>>>>>> >>> of
>>>>>>> >>> the Emotions"--you can read what he did in Volume 6 of the
>>>>>>> Collected
>>>>>>> >>> Works). And the rest was silence.
>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>> >>> Here in Korea we are bringing out our tenth volume of Vygotsky's
>>>>>>> works
>>>>>>> >>> (see attached cover, with blurbs from Renee Van der Veer and
>>>>>>> Irina
>>>>>>> >>> Leopoldoff-Martin). It's all about sex education, which is a very
>>>>>>> >>> important
>>>>>>> >>> topic here in Korea, because we have fifteen hours of sex
>>>>>>> education a
>>>>>>> >>> week
>>>>>>> >>> mandated by the government, but the ministry of education has
>>>>>>> more or
>>>>>>> >>> less
>>>>>>> >>> withdrawn the downloadable materials for this, not for the usual
>>>>>>> >>> reasons
>>>>>>> >>> but instead because of criticism from Human Rights Watch (it is
>>>>>>> >>> terribly
>>>>>>> >>> sexist, homophobic, and just plain ignorant).
>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>> >>> Vygosky's view is that sex education (which he calls "sexual
>>>>>>> >>> enlightenment") has to be integrated into ALL subjects (so for
>>>>>>> example
>>>>>>> >>> the
>>>>>>> >>> test of a good sex enlightenment programme would be one that
>>>>>>> ensures
>>>>>>> >>> equal
>>>>>>> >>> participation of boys and girls in math and physics), it has to
>>>>>>> start
>>>>>>> >>> as
>>>>>>> >>> soon as preschoolers enter primary school, and it has to be
>>>>>>> >>> INTERESTING.
>>>>>>> >>> In
>>>>>>> >>> other words, instead of the "sex education without sex"
>>>>>>> programme we
>>>>>>> >>> have
>>>>>>> >>> here in South Korea, we need non-sex education...but with a good
>>>>>>> deal
>>>>>>> >>> of
>>>>>>> >>> sex.
>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>> >>> All of which has got me thinking about the problem my Geneva
>>>>>>> friends
>>>>>>> >>> set
>>>>>>> >>> before me. I think that Vygotsky really DOES have a theory that
>>>>>>> unites
>>>>>>> >>> passions and interests. It's like that book by Hirschmann on how
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> >>> unity
>>>>>>> >>> of passion and interest gave rise to capitalism, but instead it
>>>>>>> is all
>>>>>>> >>> about how passions, shared projects, and interests give rise to
>>>>>>> sexual
>>>>>>> >>> love, and it is more or less right before we would expect to
>>>>>>> find it:
>>>>>>> >>> in
>>>>>>> >>> the Pedology of the Adolescent, right before the chapter on
>>>>>>> concept
>>>>>>> >>> formation, which shows how complexes (which are categories for
>>>>>>> others)
>>>>>>> >>> become concepts (categories for themselves). This is the chapter
>>>>>>> on
>>>>>>> >>> interests, which explains how passions (which are sensations in
>>>>>>> >>> themselves)
>>>>>>> >>> become interests: that is, emotions for themselves. (There is
>>>>>>> already a
>>>>>>> >>> passable translation of this in Volume Five of the CW). The only
>>>>>>> thing
>>>>>>> >>> is
>>>>>>> >>> there is a need for a transitional form--a feeling with others.
>>>>>>> Andy's
>>>>>>> >>> idea
>>>>>>> >>> of the Project?
>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>> >>> David Kellogg
>>>>>>> >>> Sangmyung University
>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>> >>> New in *Language and Literature*, co-authored with Fang Li:
>>>>>>> >>> Mountains in labour: Eliot’s ‘Atrocities’ and Woolf’s
>>>>>>> >>> alternatives
>>>>>>> >>> Show all authors
>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>> >>> https://doi.org/10.1177/0963947018805660
>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > Dra. Julie Waddington
>>>>>>> > Departament de Didàctiques Específiques
>>>>>>> > Facultat d'Educació i Psicologia
>>>>>>> > Universitat de Girona
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Moisès Esteban Guitart
>>>>>>> Dpt de psicologia
>>>>>>> Director - Institut de Recerca Educativa -
>>>>>>> Facultat d'Educació i Psicologia
>>>>>>> Universitat de Girona
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Grup de recerca "Cultura i Educació" (GRC  2017SGR19)
>>>>>>> https://culturaieducacio.cat
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Responsable a la Universitat de Girona del Postgrau
>>>>>>> Interuniversitari en
>>>>>>> Psicologia de l'educació MIPE-DIPE http://mipe.psyed.edu.es/ca
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190112/510022df/attachment-0001.html