Arguably, all animals engage in symbolic thought in the sense that
symbolic elements help organize their perceptual fields and subsequent
motor responses to the world.
One way in which "higher mental functions" can be interpreted that seems
to me to be elitist (and dualist) is to presume that for we humans
symbolic elements can directly govern our behavior, not by virtue of
perceptual organization, but through control systems linking symbols (as
signifieds) to motor systems. Rather, what is special about humans is
that symbolic functions are exaggerated, with signifiers having the
possibility of becoming separated from signifieds in a way that enables
new practices of symbolic play to emerge within and between people.
Eventually, these practices mature into language (Langue et Parole), and
eventually into discursive practices in which "I" becomes an element of
the symbolic world. It is within this symbolic sphere that we can
simulate symbolic control of self. We do well to be wary of elitist
interpretations of "higher mental functions" that reify this simulative
practice as the actual basis of our behavior. Like all of our cousins in
the animal world, we swim in a perceptual soup to which our motor
systems are linked through complex correlational (not logical)
relations.
David
-----Original Message-----
From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu]
On Behalf Of Andy Blunden
Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 4:52 AM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: Re: [xmca] "higher psychic function"
I'd like to know from Collette what the actual problem is. If someone
cannot cope with the concept of higher mental functions because they
don't know what it means, but suspect that some kind of elitism or
anthropcentrism is being smuggled in here, I don't think it can be
solved by the choice of a word for it. It is simply a question of
explaining this concept of Vygotsky's. If someone is not prepared to
listen, then changing the name is not going to help. The concept will
still remain a mystery.
Collette?
Andy
Rod Parker-Rees wrote:
I wonder whether there is any way of sidestepping the value system
which is attached to HMF by the use of the word 'higher'. This seems to
me to bring along Piagetian connotations of progress towards the
rarefied air of the snow covered summits of formal operational thinking,
away from the 'swampy lowlands' of more parallel, thick processes. 'Thin
mental functions' would be no good - but what about 'lean mental
functions'?
All the best,
Rod
-----Original Message-----
From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu]
On Behalf Of Huw Lloyd
Sent: 13 February 2012 19:47
To: Vera John-Steiner; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: Re: [xmca] "higher psychic function"
On 13 February 2012 18:17, Vera John-Steiner <vygotsky@unm.edu> wrote:
Hi,
I think "mediatory" is a very awkwars term and it requires quite a
bit of knowledge about CHAT. Integrated (see David's note )
psychological functions may work better, or possibly integrated
psychological processes. V's point was that "higher" psychological
functions required the unification of diverse streams of learning,
culture and development.
Though integrated begs the question of how in particular, and doesn't
relate clearly to qualitative change.
HMF is simple to say and has a certain mystique. :)
Huw
Vera
----- Original Message ----- From: "Huw Lloyd"
<huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
Sent: Monday, February 13, 2012 9:53 AM
Subject: Re: [xmca] "higher psychic function"
On 13 February 2012 16:21, Colette Murphy <c.a.murphy@qub.ac.uk>
wrote:
Hugh
Thanks a lot for your reasoning. May I just explain that I was
worried that 'higher psychic function' might sound too abstract and
psychological for many science educators (including myself). Thus,
whilst your suggestion makes perfect sense, I fear that it may also
suffer from being too abstract / psychological for my current
purpose. Can you make it more concrete perhaps?
Well it is more concrete, in the Marxian sense.
Really, I would say this hinges on your reference to "scientists".
If
they are scientists they should know, or not be shy of knowing, what
a homology (structural comparison) is. That a term like mediation
addresses the phenomena as a scientific system, whereas 'higher' is
indeed abstract and removed (but familiar from the perspective of
other psychological theories).
If a term is introduced that is not familiar, then they're atleast
made aware that the subject may deal with unfamiliar things, rather
than assimilating them (in the Piagetian sense) to their current
understanding.
So "Higher" may suffice, for some, from an outside perspective but it
points in inappropriate ways. "Mediatory" is more precise but points
to the unknown, which is also truthful to their understanding.
Huw
Thanks a million
Colette
Dr Colette Murphy
Senior Lecturer
School of Education
69 University St
Queen's University
Belfast BT7 1HL
tel: 02890975953
"Why is it, in spite of the fact that teaching by pouring in,
learning by passive absorption, are universally condemned, that they
are still so entrenched in practice?"
John Dewey Democracy in Education 1916, Page 46
______________________________**__________
From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu] On
Behalf Of Huw Lloyd [huw.softdesigns@gmail.com]
Sent: 13 February 2012 16:08
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: Re: [xmca] "higher psychic function"
On 13 February 2012 15:57, Bella Kotik-Friedgut
<bella.kotik@gmail.com
wrote:
Colette asked for a concept "that it be best
read/understood/accepted
by
educationalists (more specifically, science education researchers)
in such a case it seems that "Extension of psychological
mediatory function" does not fit the context Bella Kotik-.
Because.... ?
Huw
On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 5:00 PM, Huw Lloyd
<huw.softdesigns@gmail.com
wrote:
On 13 February 2012 12:09, Bella Kotik-Friedgut <
bella.kotik@gmail.com
wrote:
Dear Colette my off-list note returned rejected by your server,
so:
I use "higher mental functions" or sometimes "higher
psychological functions", but the first is preferable.
--
Sincerely yours Bella Kotik-Friedgut
On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 1:47 PM, Colette Murphy <
c.a.murphy@qub.ac.uk
wrote:
Dear All
I'd be very interested to hear your views on how to
edit/reword/rewrite
the phrase "higher psychic function" in relation to Vygotsky's
CH
theory
so
that it be best read/understood/accepted by educationalists
(more specifically, science education researchers)?
Perhaps it would be better to use a term that pointed to the > >
phenomena,
such as "Extension of psychological mediatory function". "Higher"
relates
the phenomena to other psychological theories but points away from
the phenomena -- one is left considering why one function is
higher than another whilst embedding the ideas in an
(unnecessary) analogical
framework
of "height = abstraction" or "higher as in high church" in which
case
one
is even further removed from a precise formulation using a > >
metaphorical
frame.
I'm happy to engage off-list
if this query is better treated that way.
This is clearly on-topic in many ways.
Kind regards,
Huw
Thanks a million
Colette
Dr Colette Murphy
Senior Lecturer
School of Education
69 University St
Queen's University
Belfast BT7 1HL
tel: 02890975953
"Why is it, in spite of the fact that teaching by pouring in,
learning
by
passive absorption, are universally condemned, that they are
still
so
entrenched in practice?"
John Dewey Democracy in Education 1916, Page 46
______________________________**__________
______________________________**____________
_____
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/**listinfo/xmca<http://dss.ucsd.e
du/mailman/listinfo/xmca>
______________________________**____________
_____
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/**listinfo/xmca<http://dss.ucsd.edu
/mailman/listinfo/xmca>
______________________________**____________
_____
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/**listinfo/xmca<http://dss.ucsd.edu/m
ailman/listinfo/xmca>
--
Sincerely yours Bella Kotik-Friedgut
______________________________**____________
_____
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/**listinfo/xmca<http://dss.ucsd.edu/mai
lman/listinfo/xmca>
______________________________**____________
_____
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/**listinfo/xmca<http://dss.ucsd.edu/mail
m an/listinfo/xmca> ______________________________**____________
_____
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/**listinfo/xmca<http://dss.ucsd.edu/mail
m
an/listinfo/xmca>
______________________________**____________
_____
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/**listinfo/xmca<http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailm
a
n/listinfo/xmca>
______________________________**____________
_____
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/**listinfo/xmca<http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailm
a
n/listinfo/xmca>
__________________________________________
_____
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
__________________________________________
_____
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Andy Blunden*
Joint Editor MCA: http://www.tandfonline.com/toc/hmca20/18/1
Home Page: http://home.mira.net/~andy/
Book: http://www.brill.nl/default.aspx?partid=227&pid=34857
__________________________________________
_____
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
__________________________________________
_____
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca