Re: Unidentified subject!

Peter Smagorinsky (psmagorinsky who-is-at ou.edu)
Tue, 24 Sep 96 11:17:55 -0500

Jim's response to Genevieve's comment reminded me of something I read
yesterday in Clifford Geertz's After the Fact: "The stories one tells
naturally take on a beginning, middle, and end, a form coincident less with
the inner direction of things than with one's parenthetic experience of
them. To remove the parenthesis is to misrepresent at once how you got what
you think might be knowledge and why you think it might be" (p. 11). We
tend to bracket events and processes for our analytic purposes--to Geertz
our narrative tradition provides the framework for this tendency, which he
says we should resist.

At 08:08 AM 9/24/96 -0500, you wrote:
>I quite agree with Genevieve. One of Vygotsky's basic assumptions was
>that the distinction between individual and social (intramental and
>intermental) processes is less obvious than we often take it to be in
>discussions of psychology. For him, the point was that the _same_ mental
>functions appear on the intermental and intramental planes. Furthermore,
>the fact that mediational means, or cultural tools inherently shape
>processes on both planes means that the connection between individual and
>social processes is even closer. From this perspective, the important
>point is to view neural, mediational, social, economic, and other such
>processes as _moments_ in human action rather than stand-alone entities.
>
>Jim Wertsch
>
>
>> >
>> >Isn't it the case that sociocultural interpretations of mental phenomena do
>> >not systematically distingusih between "psychological" (as in-the-head
>> >private phenomena)and social (economic relations, power, etc)frameworks?
>> >
>> >
>> says
>> >
>> >***********************************
>> >Chris Francovich
>> >***********************************
>> >
>>
>>
>> I wouldn't exactly put it that way. I think it's more that sociocultural
>> interpretations trace the complex relations between what goes on in the
>> firing neurons and what goes on between people, places, the weather, etc.
>> And they insist that these relations are important, that mind grows in
>> society, in activity, while at the same time, the many processes dedicated
>> to that growth ensure the continued existence of society and activity.
>> To understand, perhaps even influence learning, requires a focus on those
>> relations/relationships, on the dynamic, on the process, the movement,
>> the (often multiple) dialectic of mind, culture, activity.
>>
>> Still have at least one week to catch up on...
>>
>> oh well...
>>
>> genevieve
>>
>>
>>
>
>
NOTE MY NEW EMAIL ADDRESS!!!
Peter Smagorinsky
University of Oklahoma
College of Education
Department of Instructional Leadership and Academic Curriculum
820 Van Vleet Oval
Norman, OK 73019-0260
office phone: (405)325-3533
fax: (405)325-4061
psmagorinsky who-is-at ou.edu
E-mail for Research in the Teaching of English: ou-rte who-is-at ou.edu