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

[Xmca-l] Re: Word and Act

Haydi and Andy
Thanks for this rejoinder to the complexity of receiving Vygotsky's work in
the West.
I do wonder if it is possible to maintain the *purity* of the *whole
generation* that was engaged in exploring the *developing relation* between
the function of word and act.

I was left wondering at the meaning of the very last sentence of this 4
page PDF.

At *the end* the *functional transformation* of the relation between word
and act and the possibility of future *disintegration* [and return to
earlier forms of functioning] between the word and act.

Haydi, *in the end* THIS Vygotsky has traveled to the West and is now
transforming western notions of psychology as [genetically psycho-social
The question you raise is if in this traveling what is ESSENTIAL is lost or
I am left wondering about the notion of *horizons* of UNDERstanding.
When I read that Anna Stetsenko, [who in the beginning formed her ideas
within the horizon of THIS Vygotsky], indicates that the relation of
*subjectivity* AND *objectivity* continues to BE an *open* question I
wonder if THIS Vygotsky will inevitably remain Para-Doxical and be open to
multiple other interpretations?.

Haydi, your passion to return to Vygotsky's ACTUAL words [and this 4 page
PDF is an excellent example of this return] does stop us in our tracks and
gives us pause.  I myself am left to puzzle the various [multiple]
Vygotsky's [yes multiple versions or genres] OF Vygotsky's works AS

Reading the rejoinders between Martin, Andy, and the multitude of other
participants on this site I find in ITSELF a dialectical AND dialogical
PROCESS that highlights in FACT the developing subject matter of the
functional relations between word act, AND *image*.

I do NOT know who is *right* but I trust in THIS process that opens a space
[place] to bring us together.

IN THE END *is* the beginning. This seems to be a *truth* that puts the
emphasis on a different aspect of this 4 page PDF.


On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 3:02 AM, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net> wrote:

> Attached is a PDF of the article Haydi was talking about, "Word and Act."
> Andy
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *Andy Blunden*
> http://home.pacific.net.au/~andy/
> Haydi Zulfei wrote:
>> Dear all,
>> The biased pretension is that Vygotsky was absolutely alienated in regard
>> to the concept of 'activity' . First , because Vygotsky died at an early
>> time and did have too much upon his shoulders to resolve , not being able
>> to read more of the 'beautiful sayings of Engels' like the one in which he
>> stated that 'work created man' , he left a space for motley maneuverings
>> and inserting all kinds of ideas from the West into his own original ideas
>> and concepts which were nothing but local and native . Today , the 'rift'
>> has become so deep not to be bridged by even a divine hand . Who invested
>> so heavily on the rift ? His sacrificial industrious unfatiguable disciples
>> ?? World politics , World decaying Capitalism , the number one horrendous
>> criminal (Please have a look at Kobane , Syria , and at the whole Middle
>> East areas and elsewhere in the World) for decades and decades tried to
>> justify every act of onslaught , murder , plunder , terror , filth and dirt
>> , under the banner of fear and threat of 'communism' and 'Stalinism' . West
>> tried to make people forget the
>>  crimes of Hitlerism , Francoism , Tszarism and now while they try to
>> incessantly ring in our own ears the terrifying crashing sound of the Big
>> Bang of the Soviet Collapse , still they don't cease to adulterate the
>> scientific findings and concepts with the dirt of Stalinism ; they don't
>> have ears to hear Luria's invitation to pay tribute to the just one WHOLE
>> GENERATION of giving and inspiring people who worked for their land ; they
>> don't have ears to hear Davydov saying 'I'm a convinced Marxist' just two
>> or three months before his homeland went to ruin and conspiracy and
>> selfishness of three traitors as Presidents . They don't have ears to hear
>> 'if all science then was Stalin-made , then yours is also Bush-made' and we
>> laugh if you talk of the open society in which you live because ...  If
>> Academics prefer to be away from politics , then please away from all
>> politics !! Your administration uses 'double standards' . you please don't
>> !! Please don't
>>  create such an atmosphere in which one cannot say as his opinion that
>> 'Stalin was not the same as Hitler' --this once happened in the past with
>> attacks and insults -- or 'Bush is no less than Stalin' . Your digestion
>> for freedom and liberty should be great as Heavens !!
>> Second , Vygotsky believes in 'activity proper' ; please don't burden him
>> with your own tendencies . He didn't like Americans to confiscate his own
>> ideas ; he , first of all , credited his true disciples with his great
>> heritage ! He just out of momentary negligence uses the word 'activity'
>> with all kinds of names : speech activity , attention activity , sign
>> activity , etc. and for 'activity proper' also he uses 'behaviour' ,
>> 'operation' , 'external and internal activity' , 'action , act' , etc. as
>> he uses feeling , passion , emotion , etc without any precise distinction
>> when he begins the discussion but ultimately he comes true with every
>> aspect of his concepts . One cannot deny his 'redundancies' and 'overuses'
>> . Third , please , if possible , read volume six , conclusion , word and
>> act , and see where he is different from ANL .
>> He almost argues the way L does , except when and where he reaches the
>> 'word' by which he means 'now the word becomes the act' . But is this not
>> just a metaphor ? Could Vygotsky have believed that 'word' , 'discourse' ,
>> 'genre' , 'dialogue' , 'talk' coming out of 'activity' according to his
>> strong undeniable irrefutable belief , had given 'word' prevalence and
>> precedence  over 'material activity' , had driven this latter out of the
>> domain , had announced itself not needy and quite free of 'material
>> activity' ?? Always Primary ?? Yes , is this the case ??
>> Yes , I know all about its impact : organizing , communicating ,
>> cognizing , conceptualizing , sublimating , novel-forming , etc. etc. but
>> let's remind ourselves of his ... IN THE BEGINNING ... IN THE END ... as
>> things forgotten by his readers !! It seems that an allergy is to be found
>> here that logically and unpolitically should be wiped out ; otherwise ,
>> there would not be so much room for its being libertarian and scientific !!
>> Best
>> Haydi
>> ________________________________
>>  From: ‪mike cole‬ ‪<mcole@ucsd.edu>‬
>> To: ‪"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity"‬ ‪<xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>‬
>> Sent: Wednesday, 29 October 2014, 17:52:54
>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: In defense of Vygotsky ["Sense and meaning" really
>> means consciousness, which really means intellectualism]
>> Lubomir--
>> A couple of comments that i put in the text in red
>> On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 8:26 AM, Lubomir Savov Popov <lspopov@bgsu.edu>
>> wrote:
>>> Hi Annalisa,
>>> I was waiting a bit to see if someone else will chime in.
>>> If we refer to Soviet (now Russian) psychology:
>>> -- They prefer to talk about consciousness rather than mind.
>>> -- All psychological functions and states emerge in the process of human
>>> activity.
>>> --Consciousness is a major category in historical materialism and
>>> therefore has to be accepted as a major category by the social science
>>> disciplines. There are
>>  different interpretation of the concept of
>>> consciousness in different social science disciplines. However, they all
>>> had to refer to historical materialism. No one was bigger than historical
>>> materialism. Consciousness is also used in several ways in everyday life.
>>> But that is another story. The kinds of usage should not be mixed.
>> ​At that time American psychologists could not talk about or think as
>> professionals about a category called consciousness.
>> I wrote a review of the Payne book about Rubenshtein a loooooooooooooong
>> time ago. I will try to find and reproduce as an artifact of one
>>  encounter
>> of the two ways of thinking. ​
>>> Also:
>>> --LSV was sidelined pretty early by Rubinstein. The interest in LSV
>>> resurfaced in the 1980s, but was not too strong. ANL and his students
>>> were
>>> reigning and that time.
>> ​Here you want to be more careful. The period of ANL's ascendancy declined
>> after 1966 and it was Rubensteinians who gained power. Epitome of that
>> counter-development in the appointment of Lomov to head of Academy
>> Institute, to be followed by Brushlinskii. ​
>>> --ANL had quite of a power struggle with Rubinstein. ANL and his
>>> students/protégés ruled the psychology domain in the USSR at their life
>>> time.
>>> ​ An overstatement as above.​
>>> -- Almost all textbooks in psychology after 1970 were written by the ANL
>>> circle. After 1970 Rubinstein was not published much and maybe not at
>>> all.
>>> The last psychology textbook by Rubinstein that I have seen was from the
>>> 1960s (first edition 1940).
>>> -- Rubinstein was the
>>  first (if memory serves) to formulate the principle
>>> of the unity of consciousness and activity. However, many sources claim
>>> he
>>> heavily used works of LSV.
>> ​This is really news to me. Who claimed that and did anyone believe them?​
>>> Of course, all historical materialists hold to the principle that
>>> consciousness emerges in the process of activity; it is a product of
>>> activity and everyday life environment of the subject.
>>> ​It is so-znanie, with-knowledge, knowledge-with-an other. In my view,
>>> the residue of joint mediated actions-in-activity. All full
>>  of holes and
>>> gaps, but recountable.​
>>> Researchers from Russia can provide more precise account.
>>> ​that would be great. ​
>>> Best wishes,
>>> ​Mike (too)​