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

[Xmca-l] Re: perezhivanie



Hi Marc,Excuse me for the embedded discourse !

      From: Marc Clarà <marc.clara@gmail.com>
 To: Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net>; "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu> 
 Sent: Tuesday, 10 January 2017, 5:49:20
 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: perezhivanie
   
Hi, Andy,
In my opinion, it is important, and especially in this topic, to be precise
about the phenomena or the aspects of the phenomena which are under
scrutiny; otherwise, scientific discussion and cumulative construction may
become quite difficult. In this case, it might happen, I think, that
different people interarticulate a formally coherent discourse talking of
perezhivanie, and they think they are talking about the same object of
study and about analogous observations, but in reality talking about
different objects of study, or different aspects, or about observations
which can be complementary (instead of in opposition, for example). The
problem, in my view, is not that there are different focuses, aspects, etc.
under research in relation to a phenomenon or different related phenomena;
the problem may arise if observations about different aspects, for example,
are counterpoised and discussed as if they were about the same aspect of
the phenomenon.

**If I'm not mistaken in my badly-dreamt of conjectures , you've opined through a big paragraph in a way of leveling accusations against some sort of 'different people' who because of their unknowability of good ways to attainment of the truth , misrepresent "a formally coherent discourse talking of perezhivanie"--of a unified ! assembly of the extraordinary profiles with the highest values of research endeavours .**


That's why I think it may be useful to make some distinctions, to gain some
precision in the scientific work on perezhivanie. The first distinction,
experiencing-as-contemplation and experiencing-as-struggle, is made by
Vasilyuk (although with a different name for experiencing-as-struggle, as
explained in the paper). He initially distinguishes these as two types of
activity, although later suggests that experiencing-as-contemplation could
be an initial moment for a subsequent experiencing-as-struggle (but not all
experiencing-as-contemplation would necessarily imply
experiencing-as-struggle). In experiencing-as-struggle, Vasilyuk also
identifies the importance of the cultural meanings that mediate this
activity -which he calls schematism,- and especially how these meanings are
transformed in experiencing-as-struggle. In my interpretation, when
Vygotsky talks of perezhivanie in The Problem of the Environment, he
focuses mainly in this type of meaning. This is what in my comment I
suggested to call m-perezhivanie.



**Yes , It's about a lifetime I've not been convinced that sign as abstract fixed code to necessarily accord with one definite determinate invariant meaning or even polysemical as in a dictionary antecedently traceable to once some use in the past could be magic to all achivements and you're everybody to be praised to have been able to innovate the term 'struggle' to depict all the measures taken and all the procedures to be carried out post-receptical to the schematism or orienting stage . We've at some point in the past discussed the phenomenological stage of contemplation , then not the delayed receptive and last theoretical moments of a concrete universal concept especially with respect to Late Davydov's ideas and theorems .**  

**My points if I want to be precise : 1. What is the difference between Vygotsky's 'practical joint activity' and that of Leontiev's ? in the text2. Does 'experiencing' PRECISELY convey 'activity' ; please add the many different terms you have used in the article in the absence of the ties fastening them together. Of course , you've admitted the limits . 3. What is our focus of speciality in either case ? activity , meaning . I will not continue .**

**Have we ever thought that when we use a sign , in fact and actually we intend 'a sign OF. That is with signs even with meanings we are not yet within the WORLD , assemblage of social relations , the social situation of development , communicational interactions , transactions . We're not to reinterpret the world , we are to change it with our work , expenditure of energy , stamina and nowadays with the type of work we've termed 'labour' . I repeat : we're not just to reinterpret. In the article , we read meaning ... created , that is newly created with respect to all and whole factors extra/intra and as you like as MOMENTS for the emergence and ascension of a miraculous meaning which is used effectively on the spot and in the peculiar context innovated creatively. The one minute later , even if we repeat and try to copy , things will be odd to accept fully .  The impasse is social , the impossibility is social . I talked of impossibles and impasses as social maladies , as psychoses and deteriorations and the impoverishment and the communal ruptures and disintegration . We're facing macrosocials and if microsocials , microsocials that might lead to fall and perishing and devastation . We face Carlas not the one Carla . It's not the one class , it's the universe class . Where are we ? And what do scientific researches do ? with what outcome ? And what are the rungs to the tops of the ladder ? Vasiluk is right with the alteration , you as well . **   

I agree with you, Andy, and I think this is also related to part of
Alfredo's points, that there is no experiencing-as-struggle without a
mediating m-perezhivanie which is transformed in the activity, so that,
even analytically, this distinction could seem useless, because studying
experiencing-as-struggle is the same as studying the transformation of
m-perezhivanija, and viceversa. Still, I think that the distinction may be
useful because I work with the hypothesis that this type of holistic
meaning is key not only as a mediator in experiencing-as-struggle, but in
many other types of activity (as I mentioned also in previous messages and
also in the paper). Thus, what we learn about this type of mediating
meaning in experiencing-as-struggle may inform also about other types of
activities and viceversa. Also, and in the same vein, in my view this
distinction helps to connect Vygotsky and Vasilyuk works on perezhivanie.
Thus, note that, in The Problem of the Environment, Vygotsky does not
consider what in my interpretation is m-perezhivanie as mediating in
activities of experiencing-as-struggle, but instead he considers it,
basically, as mediating in activities of experiencing-as-contemplation.
I don't know if the terms I suggested are adequate or not, and I don't
consider myself with authority enough to recommend one term over others,
but I think that, regardless the terms used, we need to be precise about
the phenomenon or aspects of the phenomenon we are addressing.
Best regards,
Marc.
a student

2017-01-10 1:05 GMT+01:00 Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net>:

> Marc, throughout the Special Issue we spelt /perezhivanie/ the same say
> and put it in italics, indicating a Russian word transliterated into
> English, and systematically had authors delete "experiencing" and "lived
> experience" from their articles and even quotations, as part of an effort
> to create a common meaning for the word. Summing up your position, in the
> Response, you said:
>
>        In my reading (and I apologize in advance for any
>        misinterpretations), the different papers in this
>        special issue have basically noted four different
>        phenomena that are sometimes referred to as
>        /perezhivanie/. They might be considered four
>        different meanings of the word. To distinguish
>        between these meanings of /perezhivanie/, I will
>        give them four different tentative names:
>        experiencing-as-contemplation;
>        experiencing-as-struggle; fantasy-based
>        experiencing-as-struggle; and m-/perezhivanie/.
>
> What is your recommendation for future writers? Should they choose one of
> these four terms? Or use /perezhivanie/ and qualify, or rely on context to
> specify meaning?
>
> Andy
> --
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> Andy Blunden
> http://home.mira.net/~andy
> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making
>