Re: Leont'ev-Vygotsky controversy

From: Steve Gabosch (
Date: Tue Feb 17 2004 - 11:32:59 PST

Mike, I am finding this whole arena of inquiry a terrific entry into a
deeper understanding of CHAT, how CHAT has developed, and most
intriguingly, how humanity itself has developed - is developing and may
develop - the essential questions I see underlying the CHAT project. This
discussion has been tying together - and untangling - Vygotsky, Leontiev,
Luria, Davydov, Rubenshtein, Pavlov, even Cole, Engestrom and
Chaiklin. Ana brings up the linguistic side, Andy the Hegelian, Victor the
Ilyenkovian. What is human activity? What units of analysis do we have at
our disposal? Where does/do mediation, word-meaning, culture and history,
cultural artifacts, tools and symbols, labor, language, and the Subject and
Object come in? How about the social relations of production? (See Mohamed
Elhammoumi, "To Create Psychology's Own Capital.") Cultural ways of
learning? Expansive learning, work development, dialogic
intersubjectivity? Etc. etc.

1) What are the core ideas, units of analysis and methodologies that link
all of the strands of inquiry called CHAT together?
2) How have these core ideas been developing since, say, 1924?

I would love to see and help with putting together an xmca discussion
(perhaps, (sigh), a bit less ambitious than the above), with some carefully
selected readings, on the "Leont'ev-Vygotsky controversy" as it has somehow
come to be called (Eugene I think gets the credit :-)) ).

Perhaps some time after the AERA Conference (April 12-16)?

- Steve

Perhaps someone in the group will identify a set of key texts and we can
>find a way to make them available, and agree on a period of joint discussion.

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Mar 01 2004 - 01:00:08 PST