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

Re: [xmca] "Perezhivanie" and "Opyt"



Hi, Achilles! I think that the examples you give lead to the difference:
perezyvanie relates to a process and usually meant as actual experience as
in consciousness and opyt is something completed belonging to
past and/or more abstract "social experience".
Bella


On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 5:53 PM, Achilles Delari Junior <
achilles_delari@hotmail.com> wrote:

>
> Greetings, for all.
>
> Recently, I have compiled 11 important posts from XMCA about
> "perezhivanie", with unique contributions from Dorothy, Mike, Peter, Bella
> and Chaterin. However, in Vigotsky's works in Brazil I have noted that
> there's no discrimination in translate "opyt" and "perezhivanie". Both are
> translated ever like "experiência" (experience). I supose that they are not
> the same. Sometimes in "Conciousness as problem of behavior psychology"
> (1924) (Portuguese version) Vygotsky tell about and the word, in these cases
> (checking with Russian version), is not "perezhivanie" but "opyt". While
> when he speaks about consciousness as "experience of experiences" there
> stands "perezhivanie perezhivanii".
>
> Please, if you have a litle time to answer, what do you think about the,
> sometimes unperceived, diference between "perezhivanie" and "opit"?
>
> Best regards.
>
> Achilles.
> >From Brazil.
>
>
> > From: stevegabosch@me.com
> > To: xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > Subject: Re: [xmca] Vygotsky and Behaviourism
> > Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 05:05:01 -0800
> >
> > Very well said, Andy.  Immanent critique.  Immanence and transcendence
> > at the same time.  Revolutionary critique from within.  Your analogy
> > with Marx and political economy is perfect.
> >
> > - Steve
> >
> >
> >
> > On Feb 11, 2009, at 2:29 AM, Andy Blunden wrote:
> >
> > > Thanks Steve, maybe together we can figure this out. Can I venture
> > > to throw one more ingredient into the puzzle. I am assured by Karl
> > > Levitin that Vygotsky did study Hegel early on. Now how would a
> > > Hegelian deal with reflexology? He would use immanent critique. That
> > > means entering into reflexology and taking it forward both
> > > theoretically and practically, until it arrives at contradiction
> > > with itself. To my eyes this is exactly what Vygotsky is doing.
> > >
> > > But reading Hegel or Marx, people frequently mistake "immanent
> > > critique" for uncritical acceptance. So for example, there is a vast
> > > body of people who study "Marxist political economy" and so on,
> > > unconcerned with the fact that Marx was conducting an immanent
> > > critique of political economy.
> > >
> > > Someone who is conducting an immanent critique firmly believes that
> > > it is not possible to criticise a theory from some other standpoint,
> > > from outside; for example to criticise reflexology from the
> > > standpoint of reactology or to criticise behaviourism from the
> > > standpoint of social behaviourism, or whatever, is sectarian and
> > > empty. Critique of reflexology can only be conducted from *within*
> > > reflexology.
> > >
> > > So we see Vygotsky talking the language of this and that school of
> > > psychology, but as he says: "Kings are not always royalists."
> > >
> > > I really don't know. I think you are right Steve, that the
> > > "Educational Psychology" is an entirely different type of book, and
> > > perhaps we can get some clues from there.
> > >
> > > Andy
> > >
> > > Steve Gabosch wrote:
> > >> I agree with Mike from the other day, Andy, David etc. that an
> > >> historical analysis of behaviorism, reflexology, reactology etc.
> > >> would be very helpful.
> > >> On one of Andy's questions, Vygotsky has a clear and helpful
> > >> answer.  He explains, in simple textbook descriptions, reactions
> > >> and reflexes in Educational Psychology (1926/1997).  This book has
> > >> a style and form of writing I have not seen anywhere else in
> > >> Vygotsky's work, and has a very different purpose.  He is not
> > >> trying to reflect his own thinking, per se, but generalize on the
> > >> ideas of reflexology - and world psychology - in ways useful to
> > >> teachers.  It is an "experimental textbook."  The book must be read
> > >> with this in mind.
> > >> He explains "... in the present book, I have often had to present
> > >> the views of other researchers, and to translate concepts developed
> > >> by other writers into my own terminology, as in any systematic
> > >> presentation.  I have been able to express my own thoughts only in
> > >> passing, and mixed in with those of other writers.  Nevertheless, I
> > >> am of the belief that the present volume represents not just a
> > >> novel experiment in the construction of a course of educational
> > >> psychology, but also an attempt at the construction of a new type
> > >> of textbook."  pg xix
> > >> Anyway, back to Andy's question.  Chapter 2, The Concept of
> > >> Behavior and Reaction, has a description of the three components of
> > >> a reaction - the sensory component, the component associated with
> > >> transforming the stimuli into an internal process, and the motor
> > >> component, which in higher animals may be termed the central
> > >> component, the central nervous system.
> > >> It goes on to describe reactions and reflexes.  "In animals that
> > >> possess a nervous system, reactions tend to assume the form of what
> > >> is known as a *reflex*.  By a reflex we generally understand in
> > >> physiology any act of the organism that is induced by some external
> > >> stimulation of the nervous system, which is transmitted along an
> > >> afferent nerve to the brain, and from there along an efferent
> > >> nerve, automatically inducing a movement or a secreting of a
> > >> working organ .... Certain scientists have recently begun to insist
> > >> on referring to human reactions as reflexes, and have begun to call
> > >> the science of human animal reactions, *reflexology*.
> > >> "However, such a substitution of terms is unwarranted. As can be
> > >> easily seen from its description, a reflex is only a special case
> > >> of a reaction, that is, it is a reaction of the nervous system.
> > >> Thus, a reflex is a concept which is narrowly physiological in
> > >> nature, while a reaction is one which is broadly biological in
> > >> nature."  pg 15-16.
> > >> - Steve
> > >> On Feb 10, 2009, at 11:12 PM, Andy Blunden wrote:
> > >>> It would be helpful to clarify this wouldn't it, David.
> > >>> In Vygotsky's speech, when he says:
> > >>>
> > >>> "Classical reflexology ... reduces everything to a common
> > >>> denominator. And precisely because this principle is too all-
> > >>> embracing and universal it does not yield a direct scientific
> > >>> means for the study of its particular and individual forms."
> > >>>
> > >>> I took this to be a damning criticism of reflexology, but maybe
> > >>> "reaction" is different from "reflex"?
> > >>>
> > >>> On "Behaviourism," I have always taken this word in a very broad
> > >>> sense as including all those approaches which say that
> > >>> "consciousness" is not a legitimate object for science.
> > >>>
> > >>> Vygotsky says: "Consciousness is only the reflex of reflexes"
> > >>> which he says have a "social origin". And he says this in the
> > >>> context of praising Wm James. But he goes on to *criticise*
> > >>> reflexology for *excluding* mental pheneomena from its
> > >>> investigations, i.e., he criticises reflexology for what I have
> > >>> always called behaviourism (though I may be eccentric in that use
> > >>> of the word).
> > >>>
> > >>> So my reading he criciises reflexology and behaviourism, but to
> > >>> different readers he is both a reflexologist and a
> > >>> behaviourist. :) As he says: "Kings are not always royalists."
> > >>>
> > >>> As Alice would say: "mysteriouser and mysteriouser."
> > >>>
> > >>> Andy
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> David Kellogg wrote:
> > >>>> eric--
> > >>>> On p. 31 of "Making of Mind", Luria writes of arriving in Moscow
> > >>>> from Kazan in 1923:
> > >>>> "The situation in the institute when I arrived was peculiar
> > >>>> indeed. All of the laboratories had been renamed to include the
> > >>>> term 'reactions': there was a laboratory of visual reactions
> > >>>> (perception), of mnemonic reactions (memory), of emotional
> > >>>> reactions, and so forth. All this was meant to eliminate any
> > >>>> traces of subjective psychology and to replace it with a kind of
> > >>>> behaviorism."  Luria clearly thinks that "reactology" really was
> > >>>> a kind of relabelled behaviorism. So do I!
> > >>>> David Kellogg
> > >>>> Seoul National University of Education
> > >>>>     _______________________________________________
> > >>>> xmca mailing list
> > >>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> > >>>
> > >>> --
> > >>>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >>> Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy/ +61 3 9380 9435 Skype
> > >>> andy.blunden
> > >>> Hegel's Logic with a Foreword by Andy Blunden:
> > >>> http://www.marxists.org/admin/books/index.htm
> > >>>
> > >>> _______________________________________________
> > >>> xmca mailing list
> > >>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> > >> _______________________________________________
> > >> xmca mailing list
> > >> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy/ +61 3 9380 9435 Skype
> > > andy.blunden
> > > Hegel's Logic with a Foreword by Andy Blunden:
> > > http://www.marxists.org/admin/books/index.htm
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > xmca mailing list
> > > xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > > http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > xmca mailing list
> > xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Conheça o Windows Live Spaces, a rede de relacionamentos do Messenger!
>
> http://www.amigosdomessenger.com.br/_______________________________________________
> xmca mailing list
> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>



-- 
Sincerely yours Bella Kotik-Friedgut
_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca