[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: Re: [xmca] Help? - Microgenesis, Microgenetic, Microgeny?



I understood your question as this: Why does Vygotsky dismiss bike riding (typing, playing golf, estimating the lengths of line segments and the size of angles) as developmentally inert and then turn around and embrace the transition from crawling to walking as the "first moment" in the developmental crisis at one?


My answer was that the means of development itself develops. from material activity to verbal activity to thinking. Similarly, the child invests in activity first, and only later in speech and then much later in  thinking. When Vygotsky says that the stone that was rejected by the builders shall become the cornerstone, or perhaps the keystone of the Gothic arch, what he means is that, functionally speaking, the last shall be first. But that means, of course, that the first shall be last. The FLN in Algeria began by investing heavily in natural gas and steel; only later did they try to promote tourism and consumer goods (by the time I went to live there in 1982 the massive steel plant at Al Haddjar was in decline, but Kabylie was actually producing extremely palatable Sangre de Toro!).


I don't think the clear distinction Vygotsky makes between learning and development is original to Vygotsky; I think, if anything, he owes the way he formulates it to Koffka's 1924 book, "The Growth of the Mind". But I do think Vygotsky made the distinction omni-relevant (so for example he would utterly reject the title "Growth of the Mind" as conflating learning with development). That's why, even within the developmental process, we can distinguish between lines of development which are central (i.e. which are harbingers of the next zone of development) and those which are peripheral (which are linked to zones of development past).


We can even apply the distinction within the central line of development. Consider speech after age one, which is an indubitable central line of development. I would say that at the beginning of the period of early childhood (say, age one) vocabulary acquisition has a leading role. But by the end, the number of words the child is learning is not nearly as important as syntax. That's why vocabulary learning looks linear, but syntactic acquisition is anything but.


David Kellogg

Hankuk University of Foreign Studies


--------- 원본 메일 ---------
보낸사람: mike cole <lchcmike@gmail.com>
받는사람 :
참조 : kellogg <kellogg59@hanmail.net>
날짜: 2012년 9월 27일 목요일, 01시 14분 11초 +0900
제목: Re: [xmca] Help? - Microgenesis, Microgenetic, Microgeny?
Thanks for sticking with this, David.

What is the significance of you introducing CENTRAL line of development into the discussion of microgenesis? Only central lines develop? Non central lines only involve learning? 
airport innundated and heading home

On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 5:44 PM, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net> wrote:
Ha,a ha! David you are always an educative and entertaining read, but anyone reading this would really be surprised that it is I and not you who want to be a Hegelian here. :) Despite my fascination with Hegel and his Philosophy of History, I do not actually believe that history can be logically deduced.
But let's move on, heh? It seems we both came up with effectively the same answer to Mike's conundrum, frecalling the work you and I did under Mike's guidance a few years ago! Isn't life a puzzle!


kellogg wrote:

PS: Andy--try Googling Hoffding. You'll see that the passage on p. 81 is actually more indebted to Hoffding than to Vygotsky's reading of the Philosophical Notebooks. But of course you are right; he did read the Philosophical Notebooks, and therefore it's quite unthinkable that he didn't read the Logic.


xmca mailing list

xmca mailing list