Vygotsky's Crisis in Psychology

From: MnFamilyMan@aol.com
Date: Sat Mar 31 2001 - 12:48:38 PST


To all interested people,

The impetus for Vygotsky’s crisis stems from arealization that practitioners
of psychological theory had come againstroadblocks because of incongruous and
haphazard approaches the different fieldsof psychological study present at
point of service delivery.  Vygotsky identifies Husserl’s phenomenology,Freud
and Adler’s psychoanalysis, Stern’s personality theory, the
behavioristapproach of Pavlov, Kaffka’s Gestalt theory, Feurbach’s
materialism and theemerging school of Marxist psychology as the main fields
of study which heimplores must combine their theoretical understanding of
human nature under theumbrella of Piaget’s methodological approach. In this
instance I am inserting Piaget because Vygotsky does not mentionPiaget as
much in his 1927 paper but by the time he writes Thought andLanguage, 1934,
he has fully embrace Piaget’s methodology.  The theoretical framework
Vygotsky utilizesfor furthering his belief that psychology was and is) not a
unified disciplines development in nature.   Vygotskyclaims phylogenetically
psychology had not yet developed its conceptualframework.  To correlate this
toVygotsky’s general theory of development I would claim that the separation
ofthe different fields of study would be parallel to his idea of ‘thinking
incomplexes’, which he uses to explain an individual’s ontogenesis.  In
keeping with Vygotsky’s call for creatinga general psychology it would then
make sense that phylogenesis and ontogenesisare intertwined in their
development. The mere fact that social sciences have philosophy as their
matriarchaldiscipline places them in parallel with any theory, which attempts
to explaingeneral human development.  Epistemologyplays a hug part in the
methodology of a unified social science.  Vygotsky and his colleagues
identify theassociative complex, the collections complex, the chain complex,
and thediffuse complex as the different ways in which information is gathered
(Thoughtand Language).  In order for the personor discipline to transition to
a functioning entity these complexes mustcombine or unify into a general
operational concept.  Once a person or discipline has formed this general
conceptualframework they can begin to effectively predict future outcomes. 
If this conceptual framework does poorly atpredicting future outcomes it
falls under the category of pseudoconcept.  My claim is that presently the
socialsciences are in the pseudoconcept stage of development.  The different
fields of study listed earlierare still in operation today as their own
perceived discipline, not yetcombined to one unified force, still unable to
consistently predictoutcomes.  Much factual knowledge hasbeen gathered but
methodologically there is much inefficiency because ofmassive replications of
ideas that are merely called something else.  My comparison of activity
theory topragmatism would serve as an example of this. I declare that unless
the social sciences develop a general conceptualframework for practitioners
to use consistently across cultures and geneticdisposition service delivery
will continue to be inadequate.  Because the study of development is
criticalto understanding human nature I firmly believe that this general
conceptual frameworkwill stem from combining the structural development
theories of Mikhail Basov,Jean Piaget and Lev Vygotsky.  Theimportance of
using these three would be Basov’s Behavioral emphasis, Piaget’smethodology
and focus on ego driven responses and Vygotsky’s understanding ofhow society
influences individual behavior. Not only do these three provide diverse
backgrounds they also provide aconceptual framework that takes into account
both the quantitative andqualitative differences that occur when individual’s
and systems undergotransitions.  Humans are not fossilizedin their behaviors;
they are forever transforming and changing.  In fact it is thought to be
troublesome of aperson becomes chained to their habits. Therefore, a general
conceptual framework that is developmental innature accounts for the fluid
process, which is reality.

First draft, I'd appreciate any feed back. If no time, I am certainly in
that boat and understand the feeling. This posting is an attempt for myself
to understand not only current systems but also an attempt at understanding
why I have had such a blessed difficult time fitting into current systems, or
any systems ever for that matter.

Still actively providing services,
Eric Ramberg



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Apr 01 2001 - 01:01:28 PST