RE: [xmca] "higher psychic function"

["David H Kirshner" <dkirsh@lsu.edu>]

> Why not take infant/adult as the relevant distinction. We know much
more about it, and it keeps human activity as the topic.

Because I was responding to the fear that, as you put it, in the use of
"'higher mental functions' ... some kind of elitism or anthropcentrism
is being smuggled in." I think this is a legitimate fear (though perhaps
less often in connection with Vygotskyan theorists than with others who
use this same terminology).

> If we try to say something about human beings by saying this is what
animals do not do, a secondhand report that a trained chimp did this in
1953 negates the whole point.

Except that the animal researchers have established quite clearly, I
believe, that the linguistic systems of chimps do not incorporate
grammatical structure. In other words, the chimp linguistic capability
does not include the possibility of creating new meanings (collectively,
or individually) through the productive generativity of language.
Presumably this is also what limits chimps from being able to organize
socially around linguistic (and other cultural) artifacts.

David


-----Original Message-----
From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu]
On Behalf Of Andy Blunden
Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 5:57 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: Re: [xmca] "higher psychic function"

I have found over the years that using a human/animal distinction tends
to confuse a question rather than clarifying it. Why not take
infant/adult as the relevant distinction. We know much more about it,
and it keeps human activity as the topic. If we try to say something
about human beings by saying this is what animals do not do, a
secondhand report that a trained chimp did this in 1953 negates the
whole point. Best to just stick to human beings and let aninal
psychologists deal with animals, in my opinion. And we ought to be able
to distinguish between the moral equality of all human beings (even
infants) and the idea of the functional identity of all human beings,
which makes growing up into an illusion.

Andy

David H Kirshner wrote:
> Arguably, all animals engage in symbolic thought in the sense that 
> symbolic elements help organize their perceptual fields and subsequent

> motor responses to the world.
> One way in which "higher mental functions" can be interpreted that 
> seems to me to be elitist (and dualist) is to presume that for we 
> humans symbolic elements can directly govern our behavior, not by 
> virtue of perceptual organization, but through control systems linking

> symbols (as
> signifieds) to motor systems. Rather, what is special about humans is 
> that symbolic functions are exaggerated, with signifiers having the 
> possibility of becoming separated from signifieds in a way that 
> enables new practices of symbolic play to emerge within and between
people.
> Eventually, these practices mature into language (Langue et Parole), 
> and eventually into discursive practices in which "I" becomes an 
> element of the symbolic world. It is within this symbolic sphere that 
> we can simulate symbolic control of self. We do well to be wary of 
> elitist interpretations of "higher mental functions" that reify this 
> simulative practice as the actual basis of our behavior. Like all of 
> our cousins in the animal world, we swim in a perceptual soup to which

> our motor systems are linked through complex correlational (not 
> logical) relations.
>
> David
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu]
> On Behalf Of Andy Blunden
> Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 4:52 AM
> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> Subject: Re: [xmca] "higher psychic function"
>
> I'd like to know from Collette what the actual problem is. If someone 
> cannot cope with the concept of higher mental functions because they 
> don't know what it means, but suspect that some kind of elitism or 
> anthropcentrism is being smuggled in here, I don't think it can be 
> solved by the choice of a word for it. It is simply a question of 
> explaining this concept of Vygotsky's. If someone is not prepared to 
> listen, then changing the name is not going to help. The concept will 
> still remain a mystery.
>
> Collette?
> Andy
>
> Rod Parker-Rees wrote:
>   
>> I wonder whether there is any way of sidestepping the value system
>>     
> which is attached to HMF by the use of the word 'higher'. This seems 
> to me to bring along Piagetian connotations of progress towards the 
> rarefied air of the snow covered summits of formal operational 
> thinking, away from the 'swampy lowlands' of more parallel, thick 
> processes. 'Thin mental functions' would be no good - but what about 
> 'lean mental functions'?
>   
>> All the best,
>>
>> Rod
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu 
>> [mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu]
>>     
>
>   
>> On Behalf Of Huw Lloyd
>> Sent: 13 February 2012 19:47
>> To: Vera John-Steiner; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
>> Subject: Re: [xmca] "higher psychic function"
>>
>> On 13 February 2012 18:17, Vera John-Steiner <vygotsky@unm.edu>
wrote:
>>
>>   
>>     
>>> Hi,
>>> I think "mediatory" is a very awkwars term and it requires quite a 
>>> bit of knowledge about CHAT. Integrated (see David's note ) 
>>> psychological functions may work better, or possibly integrated 
>>> psychological processes. V's point was that "higher" psychological 
>>> functions required the unification of diverse streams of learning, 
>>> culture and development.
>>>
>>>     
>>>       
>> Though integrated begs the question of how in particular, and doesn't
>>     
> relate clearly to qualitative change.
>   
>> HMF is simple to say and has a certain mystique.  :)
>>
>> Huw
>>
>>
>>   
>>     
>>> Vera
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Huw Lloyd" 
>>> <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>
>>> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
>>> Sent: Monday, February 13, 2012 9:53 AM
>>>
>>> Subject: Re: [xmca] "higher psychic function"
>>>
>>>
>>> On 13 February 2012 16:21, Colette Murphy <c.a.murphy@qub.ac.uk>
>>>       
> wrote:
>   
>>>  Hugh
>>>     
>>>       
>>>> Thanks a lot for your reasoning. May I just explain that I was 
>>>> worried that 'higher psychic function' might sound too abstract and

>>>> psychological for many science educators (including myself). Thus, 
>>>> whilst your suggestion makes perfect sense, I fear that it may also

>>>> suffer from being too abstract / psychological for my current 
>>>> purpose. Can you make it more concrete perhaps?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>       
>>>>         
>>> Well it is more concrete, in the Marxian sense.
>>>
>>> Really, I would say this hinges on your reference to "scientists".
>>>       
> If
>   
>>> they are scientists they should know, or not be shy of knowing, what

>>> a homology (structural comparison) is.  That a term like mediation 
>>> addresses the phenomena as a scientific system, whereas 'higher' is 
>>> indeed abstract and removed (but familiar from the perspective of 
>>> other psychological theories).
>>>
>>> If a term is introduced that is not familiar, then they're atleast 
>>> made aware that the subject may deal with unfamiliar things, rather 
>>> than assimilating them (in the Piagetian sense) to their current
>>>       
> understanding.
>   
>>> So "Higher" may suffice, for some, from an outside perspective but 
>>> it
>>>       
>
>   
>>> points in inappropriate ways.  "Mediatory" is more precise but 
>>> points
>>>       
>
>   
>>> to the unknown, which is also truthful to their understanding.
>>>
>>> Huw
>>>
>>>
>>>  Thanks a million
>>>     
>>>       
>>>> Colette
>>>>
>>>> Dr Colette Murphy
>>>> Senior Lecturer
>>>> School of Education
>>>> 69 University St
>>>> Queen's University
>>>> Belfast BT7 1HL
>>>>
>>>> tel: 02890975953
>>>>
>>>> "Why is it, in spite of the fact that teaching by pouring in, 
>>>> learning by passive absorption, are universally condemned, that 
>>>> they
>>>>         
>
>   
>>>> are still so entrenched in practice?"
>>>>
>>>>         John Dewey Democracy in Education 1916, Page 46 
>>>> ______________________________**__________
>>>> From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu] On 
>>>> Behalf Of Huw Lloyd [huw.softdesigns@gmail.com]
>>>> Sent: 13 February 2012 16:08
>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
>>>> Subject: Re: [xmca] "higher psychic function"
>>>>
>>>> On 13 February 2012 15:57, Bella Kotik-Friedgut 
>>>> <bella.kotik@gmail.com
>>>>       
>>>>         
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>         
>>>>> Colette asked for  a concept  "that it be best 
>>>>> read/understood/accepted
>>>>>         
>>>>>           
>>>> by
>>>>       
>>>>         
>>>>> educationalists (more specifically, science education researchers)

>>>>> in such a case  it seems that  "Extension of psychological 
>>>>> mediatory function" does not fit the context Bella Kotik-.
>>>>>
>>>>>         
>>>>>           
>>>> Because.... ?
>>>>
>>>> Huw
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>       
>>>>         
>>>>> On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 5:00 PM, Huw Lloyd 
>>>>> <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com
>>>>>         
>>>>>           
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>           
>>>>>> On 13 February 2012 12:09, Bella Kotik-Friedgut <
>>>>>>           
>>>>>>             
>>>> bella.kotik@gmail.com
>>>>       
>>>>         
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>             
>>>>>>>  Dear Colette my off-list note returned rejected by your server,
>>>>>>>               
> so:
>   
>>>>>>>  I use "higher mental functions" or sometimes "higher 
>>>>>>> psychological functions", but the first is preferable.
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Sincerely yours Bella Kotik-Friedgut
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 1:47 PM, Colette Murphy <
>>>>>>>             
>>>>>>>               
>>>> c.a.murphy@qub.ac.uk
>>>>       
>>>>         
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>               
>>>>>>>> Dear All
>>>>>>>> I'd be very interested to hear your views on how to
>>>>>>>>               
>>>>>>>>                 
>>>>> edit/reword/rewrite
>>>>>         
>>>>>           
>>>>>>>> the phrase "higher psychic function" in relation to Vygotsky's 
>>>>>>>> CH
>>>>>>>>               
>>>>>>>>                 
>>>>>> theory
>>>>>>           
>>>>>>             
>>>>>>> so
>>>>>>>             
>>>>>>>               
>>>>>>>> that it be best read/understood/accepted by educationalists 
>>>>>>>> (more specifically, science education researchers)?
>>>>>>>>               
>>>>>>>>                 
>>>>>> Perhaps it would be better to use a term that pointed to the > >
>>>>>>           
>>>>>>             
>>>> phenomena,
>>>>       
>>>>         
>>>>>> such as "Extension of psychological mediatory function".
"Higher"
>>>>>>           
>>>>>>             
>>>>> relates
>>>>>         
>>>>>           
>>>>>> the phenomena to other psychological theories but points away 
>>>>>> from
>>>>>>             
>
>   
>>>>>> the phenomena -- one is left considering why one function is 
>>>>>> higher than another whilst embedding the ideas in an
>>>>>> (unnecessary) analogical
>>>>>>           
>>>>>>             
>>>>> framework
>>>>>         
>>>>>           
>>>>>> of "height = abstraction" or "higher as in high church" in which 
>>>>>> case
>>>>>>           
>>>>>>             
>>>> one
>>>>       
>>>>         
>>>>>> is even further removed from a precise formulation using a > >
>>>>>>           
>>>>>>             
>>>> metaphorical
>>>>       
>>>>         
>>>>>> frame.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>           
>>>>>>             
>>>>>>> I'm happy to engage off-list
>>>>>>>             
>>>>>>>               
>>>>>>>> if this query is better treated that way.
>>>>>>>>               
>>>>>>>>                 
>>>>>> This is clearly on-topic in many ways.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Kind regards,
>>>>>> Huw
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>           
>>>>>>             
>>>>>>>> Thanks a million
>>>>>>>> Colette
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Dr Colette Murphy
>>>>>>>> Senior Lecturer
>>>>>>>> School of Education
>>>>>>>> 69 University St
>>>>>>>> Queen's University
>>>>>>>> Belfast BT7 1HL
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> tel: 02890975953
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Why is it, in spite of the fact that teaching by pouring in,
>>>>>>>>               
>>>>>>>>                 
>>>>> learning
>>>>>         
>>>>>           
>>>>>> by
>>>>>>           
>>>>>>             
>>>>>>>> passive absorption, are universally condemned, that they are 
>>>>>>>> still
>>>>>>>>               
>>>>>>>>                 
>>>> so
>>>>       
>>>>         
>>>>>>>> entrenched in practice?"
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>          John Dewey Democracy in Education 1916, Page 46 
>>>>>>>> ______________________________**__________
>>>>>>>> ______________________________**____________
>>>>>>>> _____
>>>>>>>> xmca mailing list
>>>>>>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>>>>>>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/**listinfo/xmca<http://dss.ucsd.e
>>>>>>>> du/mailman/listinfo/xmca>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>               
>>>>>>>>                 
>>>>>>> ______________________________**____________
>>>>>>> _____
>>>>>>> xmca mailing list
>>>>>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>>>>>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/**listinfo/xmca<http://dss.ucsd.edu
>>>>>>> /mailman/listinfo/xmca>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>             
>>>>>>>               
>>>>>> ______________________________**____________
>>>>>> _____
>>>>>> xmca mailing list
>>>>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>>>>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/**listinfo/xmca<http://dss.ucsd.edu/m
>>>>>> ailman/listinfo/xmca>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>           
>>>>>>             
>>>>> --
>>>>> Sincerely yours Bella Kotik-Friedgut 
>>>>> ______________________________**____________
>>>>> _____
>>>>> xmca mailing list
>>>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>>>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/**listinfo/xmca<http://dss.ucsd.edu/ma
>>>>> i
>>>>> lman/listinfo/xmca>
>>>>>
>>>>>         
>>>>>           
>>>> ______________________________**____________
>>>> _____
>>>> xmca mailing list
>>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/**listinfo/xmca<http://dss.ucsd.edu/mai
>>>> l m an/listinfo/xmca> ______________________________**____________
>>>> _____
>>>> xmca mailing list
>>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/**listinfo/xmca<http://dss.ucsd.edu/mai
>>>> l
>>>> m
>>>> an/listinfo/xmca>
>>>>
>>>>  ______________________________**____________
>>>>       
>>>>         
>>> _____
>>> xmca mailing list
>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/**listinfo/xmca<http://dss.ucsd.edu/mail
>>> m
>>> a
>>> n/listinfo/xmca>
>>>
>>> ______________________________**____________
>>> _____
>>> xmca mailing list
>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/**listinfo/xmca<http://dss.ucsd.edu/mail
>>> m
>>> a
>>> n/listinfo/xmca>
>>>
>>>     
>>>       
>> __________________________________________
>> _____
>> 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*
> Joint Editor MCA: http://www.tandfonline.com/toc/hmca20/18/1
> Home Page: http://home.mira.net/~andy/
> Book: http://www.brill.nl/default.aspx?partid=227&pid=34857
>
> __________________________________________
> _____
> 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*
Joint Editor MCA: http://www.tandfonline.com/toc/hmca20/18/1
Home Page: http://home.mira.net/~andy/
Book: http://www.brill.nl/default.aspx?partid=227&pid=34857

__________________________________________
_____
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