Re: [xmca] guess who

In February, Nikolai Veresov
http://communication.ucsd.edu/MCA/Mail/xmcamail.2009_02.dir/0100.html
posted xmca on this question. See
http://www.marxists.org/subject/psychology/works/veresov/consciousness.htm
where he says "'Methods of reflexological and psychological
investigation' represented the reflexological concept of
human consciousness and Vygotsky called himself a bigger
reflexologist than Pavlov."

On the notion of "social behaviorism" I tend to agree with
you exactly, but
http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Social_Psychology/Identity is
an example of Mead being defined as "social behaviorism,"
even though he is _so_ different from Watson etc.

But I would be more interested in hearing responses to your
original response Mabel, about interactionist theories.

Andy

Mabel Encinas wrote:
>
> Hi, Andy.
> I agree with you about the fact that Vygotsky is criticising reflexology
> in the excerpt I quoted (below). I disagree though that Vygotsky was
> seen as a reflexologist either then or later (it might be that someone
> has considered so). Vygotsky was definitely not a reflexology. He openly
> criticises the simplification that Pavlov does to psychology and the
> physiological reductionism of his approach, and he is very much
> interested in consciousness, a field that is completely out of the focus
> of reflexology. Then, I do not agree with your point that the quote I
> include has to do with behaviourists, as they do not consider
> consciousnes (self or any other) something that could/should be
> scientifically studied. Could you please tell me why do you think so?
>
> Thank you.
>
> Mabel
>
>
>
>
> > Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2009 23:22:59 +1100
> > From: ablunden@mira.net
> > To: liliamabel@hotmail.com
> > Subject: Re: [xmca] guess who
> >
> > Mabel, it is a very interesting quote, but my thesis is that
> > in that speech Vygotsky is conducting an immanent critique
> > of reflexology. I am sure that everyone present at the time,
> > as well as every interpreter since believes that he was at
> > the time a reflexologist. But evidently a reflexologist who
> > didn't believe in reflexology. Already in the excert you
> > quote we see the unmistakeable reflection of the American
> > social behaviorists!!
> >
> > By the way, since you have this volume, check out pp. 325-28
> > on the question of consciousness./
> >
> > Andy
> >
> > Mabel Encinas wrote:
> > > Hi.
> > >
> > > I agree with your point, Andy, and actually I think that the
> concept of
> > > mediation is related (or subsumed) to the concept of practice. In my
> > > view that is what is missing in interactionist theories (and more
> > > generally in communicative theories). Practice implies the
> > > transformation of the world/and the subjects, not only their
> meaning as
> > > such.
> > >
> > > On the other hand, I agree, Larry, with the importance of the present
> > > moment and its affective load, although I do not know Stern's work
> and I
> > > do not work with psychoanalisis. What is intriguing to me is that
> > > Vygotsky sets the 'self' perception in quite another way, Tony (and
> this
> > > is related to the subject of consciousness recently held here, in
> which
> > > unfortunately I could not participate). He says in Vol 3. of the
> > > Collected works (p. 77):
> > >
> > >
> > > … the mechanism of social behavior and the mechanism of
> > > consciousness are one and the same. Speech is, on the one hand, the
> > > system of the ‘reflexes of social contact’ and, on the other hand,
> > > the system of the reflexes of consciousness par excellence, i.e., an
> > > apparatus for the reflection of other systems.
> > >
> > > The key to the problem of another person’s Ego, of the knowledge of
> > > another person’s mind lies here. The mechanism of knowledge of the
> > > self (self-consciousness) and knowledge of others is the same. The
> > > usual theories about the knowledge of another person’s mind either
> > > accept that it cannot be known, or they try to build a plausible
> > > mechanism with the help of various hypotheses. In the theory of
> > > /Einfühlung/ and in the theory from analogy the essence of such a
> > > mechanism is the same: we know others insofar as we know ourselves.
> > > When I know another person's anger, I reproduce my own anger.
> > >
> > > In reality it would be more correct to put it the other way around.
> > > We are conscious of ourselves because we are conscious of others and
> > > by the same method as we are conscious of others, because we are the
> > > same vis-à-vis ourselves as others are vis-à-vis us. */I am
> > > conscious of myself only to the extent that I am another to myself
> > > /*(I added emphasis in this previous sentence, as you might not have
> > > html). i.e. to the extent that I can again perceive my own reflexes
> > > as stimuli. In principle there is no difference in mechanism
> > > whatsoever between the fact that I can repeat aloud a word spoken
> > > silently and the fact that I can repeat a word spoken by another:
> > > both are reversible reflex-stimuli.
> > >
> > > That is why the acceptance of the hypothesis proposed will lead
> > > directly to the sociologizing of all consciousness, to the
> > > acceptance that the social moment in consciousness is primary in
> > > time as well as in fact. The individual aspect is constructed as a
> > > derived and secondary aspect on the basis of the social aspect and
> > > exactly according to its model.
> > >
> > >
> > > I think this is not a trivial difference, but I guess this difference
> > > and the issue of practice, are at the core of the distinction
> between a
> > > sociocultural approach and interactional approaches.
> > >
> > > Mabel
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2009 17:24:34 +1100
> > > > From: ablunden@mira.net
> > > > To: xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > > > Subject: Re: [xmca] guess who
> > > >
> > > > Larry, I too am interested in the relation between CHAT and
> > > > the "intersubjective" people because intersubjective
> > > > theories are found in American Hegel interpretation and in
> > > > Critical Theory along with appropriations of psychoanalysis
> > > > and American Pragmatism, but the ones I've read find very
> > > > unsatisfactory. I would like to see Critical Theorists in
> > > > particular paying attention to CHAT.
> > > >
> > > > The main problem I have with the intersubjective stuff I've
> > > > read is that they lack any concept of mediation, by which I
> > > > mean the use of artefacts in thinking and communicating.
> > > > They mistakenly imagine that individual "subjects" can
> > > > communicate directly without mediation. What do you mean
> > > > when you say "mediated"
> > > >
> > > > Andy
> > > >
> > > > Larry Purss wrote:
> > > > > The topic of the social construction and development of the
> self in
> > > Mead and the parallels with cultural historical theories of
> > > intersubjectivity is fascinating. I have just finished reading "Daniel
> > > Stern's book "The Present Moment in Psychotherapy and Everyday
> Life" He
> > > is a member of the "Boston Change Process Study Group" which is
> > > exploring the potential for change enacted in the moment to moment
> (2 to
> > > 10 second) intersubjective spaces created in enactements. This work is
> > > embedded in the larger focus on intersubjectivity being elaborated
> > > within "relational psychoanalysis". One of the historical roots of
> this
> > > approach comes from Harry Stack Sullivan and "interpersonal
> > > psychoanalysis" Sullivan's work was a conversation between Mead's
> theory
> > > of the relational self and psychoanalysis. This conversation is today
> > > transforming all branches of psychoanalytic theory and practice and
> > > there are many books and journal articles focusing on
> > > "intersubjectivity" and the quality of
> > > > "mutual" recognition to facilitate change. This perspective can be
> > > applied to learning and developmental theory to emphasize Mead's
> project
> > > of the social self.
> > > > > I work in school systems and try to use this intersubjective
> > > relational lens to deepen my understanding of "mediated learning" as a
> > > process of "implicit relational knowing" (see Daniel Stern) as well as
> > > explicit relational knowing and practices. Intersubjectivity as
> > > experienced in the moment to moment enactments that are elaborated
> > > within the interactions of mediated learning are grounded in affective
> > > attunement as foundational to cognitive learning.
> > > > > I hesitate to bring "psychoanalytic" models to this website
> because
> > > of the reaction to traditional Freudian models of reified psychic
> > > structure and all that baggage. However I happen to be intrigued by
> both
> > > "mediated learning" and "intersubjectivity" as ways to look at the
> micro
> > > units of analysis.
> > > > > As an aside Daniel Stern was one of the researches, with Jerome
> > > Bruner, and others who studied "baby talk" and the development of
> > > language in moment to moment transactions. Twenty years later Daniel
> > > Stern and the Boston Change Process Study Group are still working at
> > > this micro unit of the present moment and the creation of
> > > intersubjective spaces.
> > > > > Stern (p.43 "The Present Moment") quoted William James as he
> > > described the stream of consciousness as like a bird's life made up of
> > > an alteration of flights and perchings. Stern's book elaborates the
> > > present moments are like the perchings. The flights are the spaces
> > > between moments of consciousness. These "flights" are inaccesible and
> > > ungraspable. "Consciousness is thus free to switch focus from one
> > > present moment to the next, and the sense of the self as
> experiencer is
> > > never felt to be interrupted, even though the perchings are
> > > discontinuous. These present moments are the stuff of subjectivity
> > > during ordianary mental states" (p.43)
> > > > > Mediated learning in the ZPD can be enriched by exploring Mead's
> > > and Stern's and other scholars who are exploring intersubjectivity and
> > > the development of the self.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > From: Tony Whitson <twhitson@UDel.Edu>
> > > > > Date: Saturday, October 31, 2009 7:12 pm
> > > > > Subject: Re: [xmca] guess who
> > > > > To: lchcmike@gmail.com, "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity"
> > > <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> > > > > Cc: Ben DeVane <ben.devane@gmail.com>
> > > > >
> > > > >> Mead was also my first guess (and it really was a guess, since I
> > > > >> haven't
> > > > >> actually read Mead)
> > > > >>
> > > > >> But I thought the more interesting thing about the provocation
> > > > >> is that
> > > > >> even though it seemed like exactly what I would expect from
> > > > >> Mead, I could
> > > > >> not be certain, because there are a number of others we are
> > > > >> interested in
> > > > >> who could just as well have said the same. That's what I find
> > > > >> most
> > > > >> interesting in this.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> And I do think this is part of Hegel's legacy, such that even
> > > > >> Lacan could
> > > > >> have said much the same as this, although with somewhat
> > > > >> differing
> > > > >> implications.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> On Sat, 31 Oct 2009, mike cole wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >>> Got it first try. Mead got his PhD with Dilthey. My own guess
> > > > >> is that this
> > > > >>> goes back to at least Hegel, but others would know better.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> (Dishes done, snuck away)
> > > > >>> mike
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 7:51 PM, Ben DeVane
> > > > >> <ben.devane@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >>>> We just got done reading Mead in our pragmatism reading
> group here,
> > > > >>>> and it sounds very Meadish (Vygotsky crossed with Dewey), so
> > > > >> that's my
> > > > >>>> guess. Honest I didn't look it up on Google.
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> I really enjoyed the Holland & Lachicotte, and Edwards
> > > > >> chapters on the
> > > > >>>> parallels between Mead and Vygotsky in the Cambridge
> > > > >> handbook. Highly
> > > > >>>> recommended for anyone unfamiliar with Mead's work.
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> -Ben
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 8:09 PM, mike cole
> > > > >> <lchcmike@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >>>>> In preparing for class just now i fell across this sentence.
> > > > >> Obvious who
> > > > >>>>> wrote it without looking it up on google?
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> “*The self is something which has a development*, it is not
> > > > >> initially>> there
> > > > >>>>> at birth, but arises in the process of social experiences
> > > > >> and activity,
> > > > >>>> that
> > > > >>>>> is, develops in the given individual as a result of his
> > > > >> relations to that
> > > > >>>>> process as a whole and to other individuals within that
> process”
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> My own relations are saying get the hell off the computer,
> > > > >> the doorbell
> > > > >>>> is
> > > > >>>>> ringing and the goblins are on the move. So off i go.
> > > > >>>>> mike
> > > > >>>>> _______________________________________________
> > > > >>>>> xmca mailing list
> > > > >>>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > > > >>>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> --
> > > > >>>> ***********************
> > > > >>>> Ben DeVane
> > > > >>>> Ph.D Candidate
> > > > >>>> Games+Learning+Society Research Group
> > > > >>>> University of Wisconsin-Madison
> > > > >>>> ***********************
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>> _______________________________________________
> > > > >>> xmca mailing list
> > > > >>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > > > >>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> > > > >>>
> > > > >> Tony Whitson
> > > > >> UD School of Education
> > > > >> NEWARK DE 19716
> > > > >>
> > > > >> twhitson@udel.edu
> > > > >> _______________________________
> > > > >>
> > > > >> "those who fail to reread
> > > > >> are obliged to read the same story everywhere"
> > > > >> -- Roland Barthes, S/Z (1970)
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > xmca mailing list
> > > > > xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > > > > http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > >
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > Andy Blunden http://www.erythrospress.com/
> > > > Classics in Activity Theory: Hegel, Leontyev, Meshcheryakov,
> > > > Ilyenkov $20 ea
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > xmca mailing list
> > > > xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > > > http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> > >
> > >
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > Windows Live Hotmail: Your friends can get your Facebook updates,
> right
> > > from Hotmail®.
> > >
> <http://www.microsoft.com/middleeast/windows/windowslive/see-it-in-action/social-network-basics.aspx?ocid=PID23461::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-xm:SI_SB_4:092009>
> >
> > --
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Andy Blunden http://www.erythrospress.com/
> > Classics in Activity Theory: Hegel, Leontyev, Meshcheryakov,
> > Ilyenkov $20 ea
> >
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Windows Live: Make it easier for your friends to see what you’re up to
> on Facebook.
> <http://www.microsoft.com/middleeast/windows/windowslive/see-it-in-action/social-network-basics.aspx?ocid=PID23461::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-xm:SI_SB_2:092009>

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Andy Blunden http://www.erythrospress.com/
Classics in Activity Theory: Hegel, Leontyev, Meshcheryakov, 
Ilyenkov $20 ea
_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca