Hello Holli, You can find a discussion of them in my edited volume by Cambridge (1999). Best, ag On Fri, October 17, 2014 11:41 pm, Tonyan, Holli A wrote: > Can you explain more about "action" versus "activity"? These two terms > get used a lot in nuanced ways and I get confused. If there is a place > where this is already delineated, could you please point me in that > direction? > > Also, I am not familiar with defect-compensation. > > Sent from my iPad > >> On Oct 17, 2014, at 9:35 PM, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net> wrote: >> >> <html> >> Martin, I think the issue is that we have certain concepts which are >> intrinsically both subjective and objective (action, activity, meaning, >> experience for example) but we also have other concepts which are >> intrinsically either objective or subjective (behaviour, weight, >> thinking, consciousness, mood for example). Of course, because subject >> and object are mutually constituted, any of these domain-specific >> concepts also entails relations to the other domain. Otherwise we have >> nonsense. If I say "The Stock Market crashed in 1929" I am not talking >> about a state of mind, though obviously states of mind were entailed in >> this event. Likewise "I'm in a bad mood today" is not a statement about >> events in my life, even though these may be the cause. >> >> What Vygotsky has done which allows him to develop a nondualistic >> psychology is that he took as his *most fundamental* concept "action". >> His other key concepts, his units of analysis for the various >> investigations, are also concepts which are intrinsically >> subjective/objective. E.g., word meaning, defect-compensation, >> perezhivanie. This is it: choose as your unit of analysis a concept >> which is a unity of objective and subjective. >> >> ANL would agree with his, but in his critique he is trying to muddy the >> water by claiming that Vygosky takes as his fundamental concept, >> "consciousness". >> >> Andy >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> *Andy Blunden* >> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__home.pacific.net.au_-7Eandy_&d=AAICAw&c=Oo8bPJf7k7r_cPTz1JF7vEiFxvFRfQtp-j14fFwh71U&r=nc0IzcQ7AJuG1zNoaB3azX4jLwOThkgntuk4nvTAto4&m=gKMMa479BWWTMz0UJqBIkjS5I75PRZR54MHJbhn8NCY&s=lsnDPs27Ct58Y8MBNnCw3hdGxQkaKKMS-MEISlsP3JM&e= >> >> Martin John Packer wrote: >>> Who says that emotional experience is "subjective," Huw? LSV writes >>> throughout The Problem of the Environment that perezhivanie is the >>> child's relationship to social reality. In my book that makes it >>> personal, not subjective. The word "subjective" doesn't occur once in >>> the text. It is certainly a common assumption in today's dualistic >>> psychology that experience is subjective, a mental state.That would >>> indeed be idealist. But since LSV is avoiding dualism... >>> >>> Martin >> > > Artin Goncu, Ph.D Co-editor, Mind, Culture, and Activity:An International Journal Professor Emeritus, University of Illinois at Chicago College of Education M/C 147 1040 W. Harrison St. Chicago, IL 60607
The LCHC website last updated in 2022. The files now available herein are being maintained strictly for historical reference, research, and recordkeeping purposes. The content of the site has not been altered or updated since archiving. Content on this site may not meet current digital accessibility standards. If you require an alternative, accessible format of any information found on this site, please contact Bruce Jones, bjones@ucsd.edu to request an accommodation.