[Xmca-l] Re: vygotsky's theory and symbolic interactionism

Tue Apr 1 09:53:44 PDT 2014

Michael,

Your example bears witness to the three stances, ready-to-hand, unready-to-hand, and present-at-hand, of Dasein highlighted by heidegger

Dr. Paul C. Mocombe
President
The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc.
www.mocombeian.com 
www.readingroomcurriculum.com 
www.paulcmocombe.info 

<div>-------- Original message --------</div><div>From: "Glassman, Michael" <glassman.13@osu.edu> </div><div>Date:04/01/2014  12:31 PM  (GMT-05:00) </div><div>To: lchcmike@gmail.com,"eXtended Mind, Culture,	Activity" <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu> </div><div>Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: vygotsky's theory and symbolic interactionism </div><div>
</div>Mike,

I wonder about the issue of tools.  If something is use unconsciously, without overt awareness of its implications, is it really a tool.  I think of labels as being used certainly in the development of small groups as overt tools of power and control, but also in larger societies in ways that individuals are not even aware of.  It is sort of like, when riding a bicycle we understand the tires as tools driving us forward.  But what about the grooves in the back path that we naturally fall into, that take us in a particular direction without us even realizing that this is happening to us.  Can we say we are manipulated by those grooves?  Are they really tools?  We don't even realize the grooves are there until someone yells out "where are you going" and we realize the grooves have been controlling our behavioral trajectory.

I don't know.  I feel like this bears some relationship to Sylvia Scribners' three epochs of human history (am I remembering this right?) or perhaps Paul's ideas on sub-atomic particles which is fascinating but I am having a hard time processing.

Michael
________________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] on behalf of mike cole [lchcmike@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2014 11:27 AM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: vygotsky's theory and symbolic interactionism

Michael/Paul--- Wouldn't Vygotsky say, invoking the notion of dual
stimulation, that if you mediate your action through a label (a cultural
artifact par excellance) you not only act differently toward the other but
are yourself changed (in fact, more or less literally, your position with
respect to the other is changed) as you subordinate yourself to this "tool"
and control yourself "from the outside" ??

Greg has been writing about positioning and labelling.

Vis a vis symbolic interactionism.  Kenneth Burke seems to me a productive
person to think with. See below.

mike

mike

On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 7:24 AM, Dr. Paul C. Mocombe <pmocombe@mocombeian.com
> wrote:

> Hi michael...yes I have checked into labeling theory...it is in doing so
> that I cam across the similarities between vygotsky and mead
>
>
> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe
> President
> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc.
> www.mocombeian.com
> www.readingroomcurriculum.com
> www.paulcmocombe.info
>
> <div>-------- Original message --------</div><div>From: "Glassman,
> Michael" <glassman.13@osu.edu> </div><div>Date:04/01/2014  9:08 AM
>  (GMT-05:00) </div><div>To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <
> xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu> </div><div>Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: vygotsky's
> theory and symbolic interactionism </div><div>
> </div>Paul,
>
> I think your view of symbolic interactionism (as related to Mead) as being
> a tool of power and domination is more reflective of Mead's theory than you
> might think.  Have you looked at labeling theory?  Also a trajectory taken
> by Mead's students which seems pretty close to what you want to day.  I'm
> not sure what role Vygotsky would play in this.
>
> Michael
> ________________________________________
> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu]
> on behalf of Dr. Paul C. Mocombe [pmocombe@mocombeian.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2014 5:58 AM
> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; Mike Cole
> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: vygotsky's theory and symbolic interactionism
>
> At the heart of vygotsky's and mead's work is hegels master/slave
> dialectic as they apply it to the constitution of identity, I.e.
> Consciousness...As though there is no consciousness/identity prior to
> socialization via language and symbolic interaction.  This is similar to
> the identitarian logic of frankfurt school logician theodor adorno.  I have
> a problem with that as I view language and symbolic interaction as always
> an element of power and domination.  In essence my research question is,
> "is there a sui generis consciousness that exist prior to
> socialization/domination by symbols and language.  Haitian metaphysics says
> yes...it exists at the subatomic particle level and is just as real as the
> i and me of language and symbolic interaction.  Zora Neale hurston in her
> ethnographic field work in haiti was attempting to theorize about this in
> her literature...it is the essence of who we are.  I may have to go into
> the realm of physics to make sense of this metaphysical logic.
>
>
> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe
> President
> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc.
> www.mocombeian.com
> www.readingroomcurriculum.com
> www.paulcmocombe.info
>
> <div>-------- Original message --------</div><div>From: Greg Thompson <
> greg.a.thompson@gmail.com> </div><div>Date:03/31/2014  11:53 PM
> (GMT-05:00) </div><div>To: Mike Cole <lchcmike@gmail.com>,"eXtended Mind,
> Culture, Activity" <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu> </div><div>Subject: [Xmca-l]
> Re: vygotsky's theory and symbolic interactionism </div><div>
> </div>Paul,
> And another piece you might be interested in:
> Winter, J. A. and Goldfield, E. C. (1991), Caregiver-Child Interaction in
> the Development of Self: The Contributions of Vygotsky, Bruner, and Kaye to
> Mead's Theory. Symbolic Interaction, 14: 433-447.
> doi: 10.1525/si.1991.14.4.433
>
> I suspect a Hegelian/Marxian root is shared between Vygotsky and Mead. Mead
> said at one point that his social psychology was an attempt to do what
> Hegel did, with the hopes that it would be "less incorrigible." I have the
> exact quote somewhere if you're interested.
>
> The Vygotsky-Hegel connections have been much debated here on XMCA, but it
> seems that there is good reason to think that Vygotsky would have been
> influenced by Hegel, whether directly or indirectly (quick duck - I think
> they'll be some words flying soon in defense of one side or the other of
> this argument...).
>
> I'm interested in this intersection as well, more in terms of links and
> complementarities with Goffman and Vygotsky, but I'm happy to chat about
> the Mead/Vygotsky link.
>
> -greg
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 5:53 PM, mike cole <lchcmike@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Anne Edwards has an article on this topic in *The Cambridge Companion to
> > Vygotsky".
> >
> > I have inquired of Anne, and would of anyone interested, to understand
> > where the concept of culture appears in the Meadian framework.
> >
> > mike
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 1:09 PM, Dr. Paul C. Mocombe <
> > pmocombe@mocombeian.com> wrote:
> >
> > > I am working on a paper comparing and contrasting george herbert mead's
> > > symbolic interactionism with
> > > vygotsky's theory....any suggestions anyone?
> > >
> > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe
> > > President
> > > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc.
> > > www.mocombeian.com
> > > www.readingroomcurriculum.com
> > > www.paulcmocombe.info
> > >
> > > Race and Class Distinctions within Black Communities
> > > www.routledge.com/9780415714372
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D.
> Assistant Professor
> Department of Anthropology
> 883 Spencer W. Kimball Tower
> Brigham Young University
> Provo, UT 84602
> http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson
>
>
>
>
>