Re: Does anyone know...? Lewin-Vygotsky-Zeigarnik

Alfred Lang (lang who-is-at psy.unibe.ch)
Mon, 9 Sep 1996 08:57:19 +0100

Sorry, this message of Friday was not forwarded by our university computer
because it missed the date field which was not filled by my Mac because I
had to reset PRAM and forgot to reset the Map control field - I send it
again:

Ana, Jay, et al.

It is to exclude that Zeigarnik knew of Lewin (and of Vygotsky as a
psychologist) before she went to Berlin in 1924. In the interview she
describes that her studies' course was quite accidental. She was interest
in psychological things more in the form of literature, but was
disappointed of the philologists of the time, and then came accross and was
fascinated by the lectures of Wertheimer and Lewin and perhaps even more of
his group and his personality. On the other hand, Vygotsky certainly knew
in the later twenties of the Berlin Gestalt group from his extended
readings, e.g. in connection with the "crisis" of psychology.

I know of few mentions of Vygotsky in Lewins works and only casually in
passing something specific; but so he deals with several of his probably
major sources of influence, with the exception of Cassirer, so with Simmel
or with Mach).

In the 1941 "Field theory of learning" (in the resume at the end) he
mentions Vygo slightly critically (and a bit cryptically) among others who
tend to use too simple classifications in matters organizing forces within
the cognitive structure.

Also in 1941 in "Regression, retrogressin and development" with Barker and
Dembo he mentions Vygo's Thinking and Speaking together with Geld &
Goldstein in reference to abstract and concrete thought

In the 1946 overall summary of his theorizing "Behavior and and development
as a function of the total situation" (also reprinted in the 1951
Cartwright volume "Field Theory") he refers to Vygo's Thinking and Speaking
in connection with substitute activities (Ersatzwert und Erkennen).

I need to look up some of the earlier writings; but Vygotsky is certainly
not as fully present in Lewins writings as you would expect from so much
common interests.

By the way, Zeigarnik appears ot have written on Lewin in the Great Sowjet
Pedagogical Encyclopedia, e.g. in the 1965 edition in vol. 2, pp. 597-98,
and in what seems to be a monograph: Teoria licnosti Kurta Lewina. Moscow
1981, University-Publishers, both of which I do not know, cannot read. The
references are from Alexander Metraux in the introduction to his 2 volume
edition of L.'s philosophy of science writings, Bern/Stuttgart,
Huber/Klett-Cotta, 1981 + 1983.

Vygotsky's criticism of Lewins "a-historic" position is based on a widely
colportated misunderstanding. Lewin might actually well be perhaps the most
consequentially historical of all psychologists, as he explains in his 1943
"Defining the field at a given time". I cannot see this as a revision of
Lewins position, rather as an explication of what is at the base of Lewins
psychological thinking from the late 1910s which is bases on the notion of
genetic series. I shall explain this a bit in another message to Jay's
suggestion as soon as I find the time which might be only after the Geneva
conference.

As to "semiotic tools" and the symbolic function I feel that Lewin never
explicitly used semiotic terminology and his notion of a sign process is
very implicit if at all. He appears to even avoid terms like "symbol".
Perhaps, this is one of his major and very consequential neglects in that
the field theory obviously uses an equivalent notion and the fundamental
notion of genetic series indeed requires a "medium" including but going
beyond physical causality. Lewin is basically a (Neo-)Kantian with usual
20th century pseudo materialistic touch (as is with Vygotsky) of the common
"natural" science paradigm. This is hard to understand in view of the
early influence of Cassirer and the fact that Lewin wrote a highly admiring
commemorative article on Cassirer that has been published in 1949 by
Schilpp (The philosophy of Ernst Cassirer). Lewin appears to have not
followed Cassirer's developments after the 1910 "Substanzbegriff und
Funktionsbegriff" when Cassirer, while also keeping that Kantian
background, took a (dualistic) semiotic path in his Philosophy of Symbolic
Form.

Alfred

Alfred Lang ---------------------------- Internet: lang who-is-at psy.unibe.ch
Psychology, Univ. of Bern, Unitobler, Muesmattstr. 45, CH-3000 Bern 9
Office:----------------------Tel (+41 +31) 631 40 11 Fax 631 82 12
Home (preferably): Hostalen 106, CH-3037 Herrenschwanden
Switzerland --------------------------Tel+Fax (+41 +31) 302 53 42