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

Re: [xmca] guess who



In February, Nikolai Veresov
http://communication.ucsd.edu/MCA/Mail/xmcamail.2009_02.dir/0100.html
posted xmca on this question. See http://www.marxists.org/subject/psychology/works/veresov/consciousness.htm where he says "'Methods of reflexological and psychological investigation' represented the reflexological concept of human consciousness and Vygotsky called himself a bigger reflexologist than Pavlov."

On the notion of "social behaviorism" I tend to agree with you exactly, but http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Social_Psychology/Identity is an example of Mead being defined as "social behaviorism," even though he is _so_ different from Watson etc.

But I would be more interested in hearing responses to your original response Mabel, about interactionist theories.

Andy

Mabel Encinas wrote:

Hi, Andy.
I agree with you about the fact that Vygotsky is criticising reflexology in the excerpt I quoted (below). I disagree though that Vygotsky was seen as a reflexologist either then or later (it might be that someone has considered so). Vygotsky was definitely not a reflexology. He openly criticises the simplification that Pavlov does to psychology and the physiological reductionism of his approach, and he is very much interested in consciousness, a field that is completely out of the focus of reflexology. Then, I do not agree with your point that the quote I include has to do with behaviourists, as they do not consider consciousnes (self or any other) something that could/should be scientifically studied. Could you please tell me why do you think so? Thank you. Mabel


 > Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2009 23:22:59 +1100
 > From: ablunden@mira.net
 > To: liliamabel@hotmail.com
 > Subject: Re: [xmca] guess who
 >
 > Mabel, it is a very interesting quote, but my thesis is that
 > in that speech Vygotsky is conducting an immanent critique
 > of reflexology. I am sure that everyone present at the time,
 > as well as every interpreter since believes that he was at
 > the time a reflexologist. But evidently a reflexologist who
 > didn't believe in reflexology. Already in the excert you
 > quote we see the unmistakeable reflection of the American
 > social behaviorists!!
 >
 > By the way, since you have this volume, check out pp. 325-28
 > on the question of consciousness./
 >
 > Andy
 >
 > Mabel Encinas wrote:
 > > Hi.
 > >
> > I agree with your point, Andy, and actually I think that the concept of
 > > mediation is related (or subsumed) to the concept of practice. In my
 > > view that is what is missing in interactionist theories (and more
 > > generally in communicative theories). Practice implies the
> > transformation of the world/and the subjects, not only their meaning as
 > > such.
 > >
 > > On the other hand, I agree, Larry, with the importance of the present
> > moment and its affective load, although I do not know Stern's work and I
 > > do not work with psychoanalisis. What is intriguing to me is that
> > Vygotsky sets the 'self' perception in quite another way, Tony (and this > > is related to the subject of consciousness recently held here, in which
 > > unfortunately I could not participate). He says in Vol 3. of the
 > > Collected works (p. 77):
 > >
 > >
 > > … the mechanism of social behavior and the mechanism of
 > > consciousness are one and the same. Speech is, on the one hand, the
 > > system of the ‘reflexes of social contact’ and, on the other hand,
 > > the system of the reflexes of consciousness par excellence, i.e., an
 > > apparatus for the reflection of other systems.
 > >
 > > The key to the problem of another person’s Ego, of the knowledge of
 > > another person’s mind lies here. The mechanism of knowledge of the
 > > self (self-consciousness) and knowledge of others is the same. The
 > > usual theories about the knowledge of another person’s mind either
 > > accept that it cannot be known, or they try to build a plausible
 > > mechanism with the help of various hypotheses. In the theory of
 > > /Einfühlung/ and in the theory from analogy the essence of such a
 > > mechanism is the same: we know others insofar as we know ourselves.
 > > When I know another person's anger, I reproduce my own anger.
 > >
 > > In reality it would be more correct to put it the other way around.
 > > We are conscious of ourselves because we are conscious of others and
 > > by the same method as we are conscious of others, because we are the
 > > same vis-à-vis ourselves as others are vis-à-vis us. */I am
 > > conscious of myself only to the extent that I am another to myself
 > > /*(I added emphasis in this previous sentence, as you might not have
 > > html). i.e. to the extent that I can again perceive my own reflexes
 > > as stimuli. In principle there is no difference in mechanism
 > > whatsoever between the fact that I can repeat aloud a word spoken
 > > silently and the fact that I can repeat a word spoken by another:
 > > both are reversible reflex-stimuli.
 > >
 > > That is why the acceptance of the hypothesis proposed will lead
 > > directly to the sociologizing of all consciousness, to the
 > > acceptance that the social moment in consciousness is primary in
 > > time as well as in fact. The individual aspect is constructed as a
 > > derived and secondary aspect on the basis of the social aspect and
 > > exactly according to its model.
 > >
 > >
 > > I think this is not a trivial difference, but I guess this difference
> > and the issue of practice, are at the core of the distinction between a
 > > sociocultural approach and interactional approaches.
 > >
 > > Mabel
 > >
 > >
 > >
 > > > Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2009 17:24:34 +1100
 > > > From: ablunden@mira.net
 > > > To: xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
 > > > Subject: Re: [xmca] guess who
 > > >
 > > > Larry, I too am interested in the relation between CHAT and
 > > > the "intersubjective" people because intersubjective
 > > > theories are found in American Hegel interpretation and in
 > > > Critical Theory along with appropriations of psychoanalysis
 > > > and American Pragmatism, but the ones I've read find very
 > > > unsatisfactory. I would like to see Critical Theorists in
 > > > particular paying attention to CHAT.
 > > >
 > > > The main problem I have with the intersubjective stuff I've
 > > > read is that they lack any concept of mediation, by which I
 > > > mean the use of artefacts in thinking and communicating.
 > > > They mistakenly imagine that individual "subjects" can
 > > > communicate directly without mediation. What do you mean
 > > > when you say "mediated"
 > > >
 > > > Andy
 > > >
 > > > Larry Purss wrote:
> > > > The topic of the social construction and development of the self in
 > > Mead and the parallels with cultural historical theories of
 > > intersubjectivity is fascinating. I have just finished reading "Daniel
> > Stern's book "The Present Moment in Psychotherapy and Everyday Life" He
 > > is a member of the "Boston Change Process Study Group" which is
> > exploring the potential for change enacted in the moment to moment (2 to
 > > 10 second) intersubjective spaces created in enactements. This work is
 > > embedded in the larger focus on intersubjectivity being elaborated
> > within "relational psychoanalysis". One of the historical roots of this
 > > approach comes from Harry Stack Sullivan and "interpersonal
> > psychoanalysis" Sullivan's work was a conversation between Mead's theory
 > > of the relational self and psychoanalysis. This conversation is today
 > > transforming all branches of psychoanalytic theory and practice and
 > > there are many books and journal articles focusing on
 > > "intersubjectivity" and the quality of
 > > > "mutual" recognition to facilitate change. This perspective can be
> > applied to learning and developmental theory to emphasize Mead's project
 > > of the social self.
 > > > > I work in school systems and try to use this intersubjective
 > > relational lens to deepen my understanding of "mediated learning" as a
 > > process of "implicit relational knowing" (see Daniel Stern) as well as
 > > explicit relational knowing and practices. Intersubjectivity as
 > > experienced in the moment to moment enactments that are elaborated
 > > within the interactions of mediated learning are grounded in affective
 > > attunement as foundational to cognitive learning.
> > > > I hesitate to bring "psychoanalytic" models to this website because
 > > of the reaction to traditional Freudian models of reified psychic
> > structure and all that baggage. However I happen to be intrigued by both > > "mediated learning" and "intersubjectivity" as ways to look at the micro
 > > units of analysis.
 > > > > As an aside Daniel Stern was one of the researches, with Jerome
 > > Bruner, and others who studied "baby talk" and the development of
 > > language in moment to moment transactions. Twenty years later Daniel
 > > Stern and the Boston Change Process Study Group are still working at
 > > this micro unit of the present moment and the creation of
 > > intersubjective spaces.
 > > > > Stern (p.43 "The Present Moment") quoted William James as he
 > > described the stream of consciousness as like a bird's life made up of
 > > an alteration of flights and perchings. Stern's book elaborates the
 > > present moments are like the perchings. The flights are the spaces
 > > between moments of consciousness. These "flights" are inaccesible and
 > > ungraspable. "Consciousness is thus free to switch focus from one
> > present moment to the next, and the sense of the self as experiencer is
 > > never felt to be interrupted, even though the perchings are
 > > discontinuous. These present moments are the stuff of subjectivity
 > > during ordianary mental states" (p.43)
 > > > > Mediated learning in the ZPD can be enriched by exploring Mead's
 > > and Stern's and other scholars who are exploring intersubjectivity and
 > > the development of the self.
 > > > >
 > > > >
 > > > >
 > > > > ----- Original Message -----
 > > > > From: Tony Whitson <twhitson@UDel.Edu>
 > > > > Date: Saturday, October 31, 2009 7:12 pm
 > > > > Subject: Re: [xmca] guess who
 > > > > To: lchcmike@gmail.com, "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity"
 > > <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
 > > > > Cc: Ben DeVane <ben.devane@gmail.com>
 > > > >
 > > > >> Mead was also my first guess (and it really was a guess, since I
 > > > >> haven't
 > > > >> actually read Mead)
 > > > >>
 > > > >> But I thought the more interesting thing about the provocation
 > > > >> is that
 > > > >> even though it seemed like exactly what I would expect from
 > > > >> Mead, I could
 > > > >> not be certain, because there are a number of others we are
 > > > >> interested in
 > > > >> who could just as well have said the same. That's what I find
 > > > >> most
 > > > >> interesting in this.
 > > > >>
 > > > >> And I do think this is part of Hegel's legacy, such that even
 > > > >> Lacan could
 > > > >> have said much the same as this, although with somewhat
 > > > >> differing
 > > > >> implications.
 > > > >>
 > > > >> On Sat, 31 Oct 2009, mike cole wrote:
 > > > >>
 > > > >>> Got it first try. Mead got his PhD with Dilthey. My own guess
 > > > >> is that this
 > > > >>> goes back to at least Hegel, but others would know better.
 > > > >>>
 > > > >>> (Dishes done, snuck away)
 > > > >>> mike
 > > > >>>
 > > > >>> On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 7:51 PM, Ben DeVane
 > > > >> <ben.devane@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >>>> We just got done reading Mead in our pragmatism reading group here,
 > > > >>>> and it sounds very Meadish (Vygotsky crossed with Dewey), so
 > > > >> that's my
 > > > >>>> guess. Honest I didn't look it up on Google.
 > > > >>>>
 > > > >>>> I really enjoyed the Holland & Lachicotte, and Edwards
 > > > >> chapters on the
 > > > >>>> parallels between Mead and Vygotsky in the Cambridge
 > > > >> handbook. Highly
 > > > >>>> recommended for anyone unfamiliar with Mead's work.
 > > > >>>>
 > > > >>>> -Ben
 > > > >>>>
 > > > >>>>
 > > > >>>> On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 8:09 PM, mike cole
 > > > >> <lchcmike@gmail.com> wrote:
 > > > >>>>> In preparing for class just now i fell across this sentence.
 > > > >> Obvious who
 > > > >>>>> wrote it without looking it up on google?
 > > > >>>>>
 > > > >>>>> “*The self is something which has a development*, it is not
 > > > >> initially>> there
 > > > >>>>> at birth, but arises in the process of social experiences
 > > > >> and activity,
 > > > >>>> that
 > > > >>>>> is, develops in the given individual as a result of his
 > > > >> relations to that
> > > >>>>> process as a whole and to other individuals within that process”
 > > > >>>>>
 > > > >>>>> My own relations are saying get the hell off the computer,
 > > > >> the doorbell
 > > > >>>> is
 > > > >>>>> ringing and the goblins are on the move. So off i go.
 > > > >>>>> mike
 > > > >>>>> _______________________________________________
 > > > >>>>> xmca mailing list
 > > > >>>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
 > > > >>>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
 > > > >>>>>
 > > > >>>>
 > > > >>>>
 > > > >>>> --
 > > > >>>> ***********************
 > > > >>>> Ben DeVane
 > > > >>>> Ph.D Candidate
 > > > >>>> Games+Learning+Society Research Group
 > > > >>>> University of Wisconsin-Madison
 > > > >>>> ***********************
 > > > >>>>
 > > > >>> _______________________________________________
 > > > >>> xmca mailing list
 > > > >>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
 > > > >>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
 > > > >>>
 > > > >> Tony Whitson
 > > > >> UD School of Education
 > > > >> NEWARK DE 19716
 > > > >>
 > > > >> twhitson@udel.edu
 > > > >> _______________________________
 > > > >>
 > > > >> "those who fail to reread
 > > > >> are obliged to read the same story everywhere"
 > > > >> -- Roland Barthes, S/Z (1970)
 > > > > _______________________________________________
 > > > > xmca mailing list
 > > > > xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
 > > > > http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
 > > > >
 > > >
 > > > --
> > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
 > > > Andy Blunden http://www.erythrospress.com/
 > > > Classics in Activity Theory: Hegel, Leontyev, Meshcheryakov,
 > > > Ilyenkov $20 ea
 > > >
 > > > _______________________________________________
 > > > xmca mailing list
 > > > xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
 > > > http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
 > >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Windows Live Hotmail: Your friends can get your Facebook updates, right
 > > from Hotmail®.
> > <http://www.microsoft.com/middleeast/windows/windowslive/see-it-in-action/social-network-basics.aspx?ocid=PID23461::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-xm:SI_SB_4:092009>
 >
 > --
 > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
 > Andy Blunden http://www.erythrospress.com/
 > Classics in Activity Theory: Hegel, Leontyev, Meshcheryakov,
 > Ilyenkov $20 ea
 >

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Windows Live: Make it easier for your friends to see what you’re up to on Facebook. <http://www.microsoft.com/middleeast/windows/windowslive/see-it-in-action/social-network-basics.aspx?ocid=PID23461::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-xm:SI_SB_2:092009>

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Andy Blunden http://www.erythrospress.com/
Classics in Activity Theory: Hegel, Leontyev, Meshcheryakov, Ilyenkov $20 ea

_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca