Vera, can you say more about the distinction you're making?
Judy
At 07:46 PM 11/6/00 -0700, you wrote:
>Dear Anna,
>thanks for bringing the functional systems concept into the discussion. It
>is one
>of the reasons that I wanted to include Luria in our exchanges. I found
>your comment helpful, but am unsure whether we have fully integrated
>functional systems and activity systems.
>Vera
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Stetsenko, Anna <AStetsenko@gc.cuny.edu>
>To: 'xmca@weber.ucsd.edu' <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
>Date: Monday, November 06, 2000 3:15 PM
>Subject: disembodied AT?
>
>
>>I have noticed that a lot of activity in this discussion happens to go over
>>the weekend... Which tells me that perhaps not all of you have 5-year-olds
>>around you who have not seen you during the week and hence want to catch up
>>on that by engaging you in their activities which, in its turn, also happen
>>to change your chemical balance completely (in a positive way, mostly) thus
>>leaving you with much less time and propensity to contribute to the
>>discussion.
>>
>>And then, by Monday, one is faced with this overwhelming diversity of views
>>and issues to react to.
>>
>>Regarding AT as disembodied: actually, what is not reflected in L's book
>but
>>is certainly reflected in his other works is the concept of the functional
>>systems. This concept is the legacy of diverse sources varying from Anokhin
>>and Sechenov to now popular Nikolaj N. Bernstein - another Russian
>>'revolutionary scientist' (quote from a recent article about him) who is
>>making his way into Western psychology some 50 years after his works were
>>written - and, importantly, Luria. The idea behind the concept of
>>functional systems is that any activity is realized through the complex
>>systems involving the brain and the whole body - systems formed within the
>>life time and geared towards specific goals and tasks (and hence
>>activities). So, the brain and the body are not ignored but they are viewed
>>as included into broader activities and thus as not having an ultimate and
>>unique power over human beings separated from the contexts of real life
>>activities. The brain is viewed as an organ of activity and not as a source
>>of it (Diane, does this makes sense to you?). Like in the example with a
>>5-year-old child who literally can make an impact on your brain (as well as
>>many other things can - such as a change in the whether conditions, for
>>example) - but not directly, rather through engaging you in different types
>>of activities. To begin the analyses of any meaningful life event from the
>>level of a brain chemistry isolated from broader real life contexts would
>be
>>an enormous simplification. Broader activity dynamics is exactly what
>>ultimately counts...
>>
>>Hence, it does come as a surprise to many mainstream scientists but not to
>>those from the CHAT-perspective that, as recently has been shown, brain
>>cells can grow during the life time and, in fact, can respond to how the
>>specific life activities are structured (findings that are now presented as
>>breaking news). We certainly do not know how the chemical balances and
>>disbalances come about in all the details - but there are two different
>>possible paths to pursue the answers (CHAT and mainstream) with the locus
>of
>>causality being so different in these two psychological perspectives.
>>
>>Anna Stetsenko
>>
>>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Dec 01 2000 - 01:01:00 PST