[Xmca-l] Re: LSV versus ANL

Tue Oct 21 18:03:27 PDT 2014

On 22 October 2014 01:36, Martin John Packer <mpacker@uniandes.edu.co>
wrote:

> Where's the entry for Plump Materialism?!!!
>
> :)
>
>
Just beyond your finger tips.  :)

Huw

> Martin
>
> On Oct 21, 2014, at 7:31 PM, Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Right. But not beyond the realm of the practical.  I could write activity
> > <http://wiki.lchc.ucsd.edu/CHAT/Activity> when I meant it that way.  But
> > mail servers and clients would have to keep the links tidy.
> >
> > Huw
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On 22 October 2014 01:05, mike cole <mcole@ucsd.edu> wrote:
> >
> >> Right Huw. So an infrastructure exists. Building on it and linking it to
> >> ongoing discussions might be a challenge.
> >> mike
> >>
> >> On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 4:32 PM, Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On 22 October 2014 00:11, mike cole <mcole@ucsd.edu> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> No need for a taxonomy, Huw. We have long batted around the idea of a
> >>> "key
> >>>> word" list.
> >>>> I think the current xmca facilities may make such an undertaking
> >>>> achievable.... if there are achievers around ready to achieve it!  :-)
> >>>> mike
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> For sure.  And it has been done in at least one variant.  This is
> mostly
> >>> Andy's take on things:
> >>>
> >>> http://wiki.lchc.ucsd.edu/CHAT
> >>>
> >>> Best,
> >>> Huw
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 3:40 PM, Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com
> >
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> On 21 October 2014 22:28, Annalisa Aguilar <annalisa@unm.edu> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Hello Mike,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Thank you for the heads up. I suppose when the search field is out
> >> of
> >>>>>> sight it's out of site.  :)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> _An idea_: How about a newcomer's page indicating list posting
> >>>>>> preferences? Every list is its own culture and list cultures are
> >>> tricky
> >>>>> to
> >>>>>> gauge sometimes for an outsider. I could write a lot about this as
> >>> I've
> >>>>>> thought about it a lot, but perhaps I shouldn't do that here or
> >> now,
> >>>>> anyway.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> _Another idea_: Are there "Famous Conversations" that seem to
> >> embody
> >>>> the
> >>>>>> most meaning of exchange within the community? Ones that are
> >>> memorable?
> >>>>>> Perhaps even a "Hall of Fame"? That would be grand to read and to
> >>>> learn.
> >>>>> I
> >>>>>> would be willing to help collect that material together alongside
> >> an
> >>>> list
> >>>>>> elder, if that is a worthwhile offer.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> _Third idea_: there could be trigger search links for keywords,
> >> such
> >>> as
> >>>>>> "unit of analysis," for example. These could be inserted on the
> >>>>> vocabulary
> >>>>>> page, which unfortunately I cannot find from the XCMA homepage even
> >>>>> though
> >>>>>> I know the page exists somewhere.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> _A last, but fluffy idea_: is it possible to post emoji's here? Or
> >> is
> >>>>> that
> >>>>>> too trendy and unsophisticated? Is anyone groaning just about
> >> now...?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Personally, I would say it wasn't "fluffy" enough, Annalisa.  Mental
> >>>>> imagery seems to be the preferred currency.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
> https://www.google.com/search?btnG=1&pws=0&q=site:lchc.ucsd.edu%2Fmca%2Fmail+%22mental+image%22
> >>>>>
> >>>>> If you keep a list of terms, questions etc, then there are a number
> >> of
> >>>> ways
> >>>>> these could get used.  However, the challenge with a taxonomy here is
> >>>> that
> >>>>> you won't get unanimity on the big and little pictures, so it helps
> >> to
> >>>>> bring your theories with you and to challenge them along the way.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Welcome. :)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Huw
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I hope these are useful offerings!
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Regards,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Annalisa
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> ________________________________________
> >>>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <
> >>> xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> on behalf of mike cole <mcole@ucsd.edu>
> >>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2014 12:37 PM
> >>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> >>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: LSV versus ANL
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Hi Annalisa, Juan  Et al
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> At the home page of Lchc, Lchc at ucsd dot edu, there is a local
> >>> Google
> >>>>>> search of the site. I just googled Marx unit of analysis and there
> >>>> appear
> >>>>>> to be a lot of useful entries. Often that is a good place to start
> >>> with
> >>>>>> most of our topics.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> For reasons I do not understand, people seem to have a hard time
> >>>>>> remembering that the archives are so easy to access! Maybe we need
> >> a
> >>>>> banner
> >>>>>> or something as a reminder?  Suggestions for greater user
> >>> friendliness
> >>>>>> welcome always.
> >>>>>> Mike
> >>>>>> On Tuesday, October 21, 2014, Annalisa Aguilar <annalisa@unm.edu>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Hello!
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Thanks for directing my attention to your paper. I've downloaded
> >> it
> >>>>>>> accordingly.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I apologize to the list if as a newcomer I am contributing to any
> >>>>>> tiresome
> >>>>>>> redundancy; I am not clear whether there is a way to search the
> >>> list
> >>>>>>> archives or not.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Best,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Annalisa
> >>>>>>> ________________________________________
> >>>>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <javascript:;> <
> >>>>>>> xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <javascript:;>> on behalf of
> >>> Martin
> >>>>> John
> >>>>>>> Packer <mpacker@uniandes.edu.co <javascript:;>>
> >>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2014 9:57 AM
> >>>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> >>>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: LSV versus ANL
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Hi Juan, Annalisa,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> The relationship between LSV and Marx is certainly something that
> >>> we
> >>>>> have
> >>>>>>> discussed here on xmca.  My own contribution includes a paper
> >>>>> published a
> >>>>>>> few years ago, which I would be happy to send to you:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Packer, M. J. (2008). Is Vygotsky relevant? Vygotsky’s Marxist
> >>>>>> psychology.
> >>>>>>> Mind, Culture, and Activity, 15(1), 8-31.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Martin
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Oct 21, 2014, at 10:27 AM, Annalisa Aguilar <annalisa@unm.edu
> >>>>>>> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Hello Juan,
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I agree with you that one must understand Marxism to understand
> >>>>>> Vygotsky
> >>>>>>> clearly. Darwin's theory too. My grasp upon these topics is
> >> tenuous
> >>>>> and I
> >>>>>>> would benefit to know more.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> In my past, it has been difficult to enjoy dispassionate
> >>>>> conversations
> >>>>>>> about Marxism in my circles without the distractions of how much
> >> I
> >>>>> don't
> >>>>>>> know about Marxism, or how much Marx didn't know about
> >> capitalism;
> >>>>>> neither
> >>>>>>> position is helpful. Perhaps Marxism is a hot potato still.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Certainly there are claims that even the Soviets did not
> >>> understood
> >>>>>>> Marxism properly and that that may be why Vygotsky had such a
> >> hard
> >>>>> time.
> >>>>>> If
> >>>>>>> Marxism has been so difficult a topic, why should it be different
> >>> for
> >>>>> us
> >>>>>>> who have come late to the table? We do have the power of
> >> hindsight,
> >>>> but
> >>>>>> has
> >>>>>>> this helped?
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> For any thinker's work, it is highly relevant to understand the
> >>>>>>> contemporary milieu in which that person worked. That is why I
> >> look
> >>>> to
> >>>>>>> historical context to unlock Vygotsky's work, not just his texts.
> >>>>>> However,
> >>>>>>> I find a political specter rises from the grave when discussing
> >>>> Marxism
> >>>>>> and
> >>>>>>> kills all prospects before understanding can begin. It is
> >>>> perplexing. I
> >>>>>>> wonder if it is why Vygotsky will remain elusive to us
> >>> post-moderns.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I wish I could read the Castorina & Baquero paper, but I cannot
> >>>> read
> >>>>>>> Spanish very well. Would it be asking too much of you to list the
> >>>>>> relevant
> >>>>>>> points made in that paper? I would very much be interested!
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Regards,
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Annalisa
> >>>>>>>> ________________________________________
> >>>>>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <javascript:;> <
> >>>>>>> xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <javascript:;>> on behalf of
> >> Juan
> >>>>>> Duarte <
> >>>>>>> juanma.duarte@gmail.com <javascript:;>>
> >>>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2014 5:39 AM
> >>>>>>>> To: ablunden@mira.net <javascript:;>; eXtended Mind, Culture,
> >>>>> Activity
> >>>>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: LSV versus ANL
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I´m sorry for couldn´t answer -neither red all the messages-
> >>>>>> previously.
> >>>>>>>> But what i was reffering was precisely the fact that the "unit
> >> of
> >>>>>>> analysis"
> >>>>>>>> in Vigotsky is not understandable without taking Marx and
> >> Engels
> >>>>>> method,
> >>>>>>> as
> >>>>>>>> Vygotsky himself writes, for example, in his manuscript The
> >>>>> historical
> >>>>>>>> meaning of the chrisis in psychology.
> >>>>>>>> There´s is the need of psychology´s own Das Kapital. And the
> >>> units
> >>>> of
> >>>>>>>> analisis in LV are built in a dialectical way. So, it´s -for
> >> me,
> >>> at
> >>>>>>> least-
> >>>>>>>> surprising to read so much about the marxist psychologist, and
> >>>>>> preciselly
> >>>>>>>> about method, and very few comments about the fact he was
> >>> marxist.
> >>>> To
> >>>>>>>> understand the concept of "unit of analysis" is to know, for
> >>>> example,
> >>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>> method of Das Kapital, where Marx takes the value as a cell,
> >> unit
> >>>> of
> >>>>>>>> diverse and opposits, change value and use value, wich cannot
> >> be
> >>>>>>> separated
> >>>>>>>> without loosing the whole. So is the use of Meaning (unit of
> >>> though
> >>>>> and
> >>>>>>>> language), for example.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Well, that´s my point. And know that there are many that thake
> >>> this
> >>>>>> point
> >>>>>>>> of view. Andy, for example.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Thanks a lot for the fruitful interchange.
> >>>>>>>> I send you, if anyone is interested, an article about the
> >> marxism
> >>>> in
> >>>>> LV
> >>>>>>> (in
> >>>>>>>> spanish). Here, in Argentina, Jose Castorina and Ricardo
> >> Baquero
> >>>> have
> >>>>>>>> worked through this line, in a very interesting work.
> >>>>>>>> Juan Duarte (Argentina).
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> 2014-10-20 21:08 GMT-03:00 Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net
> >>>>>>> <javascript:;>>:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Returning to Leontyev's critique of Vygotsky, ANL claimed that
> >>>>>>>>> perezhivanie, as a manifestation of the whole personality,
> >>> cannot
> >>>> be
> >>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>> determinant of personality, because that would be a logical
> >>>> circle.
> >>>>>> But
> >>>>>>> it
> >>>>>>>>> seems to me that ANL failed to understand how Vygotsky’s
> >>> analysis
> >>>> by
> >>>>>>> units
> >>>>>>>>> allows him to avoid the reductionism into which ANL then
> >>> ventures.
> >>>>> If
> >>>>>> a
> >>>>>>>>> complex process is to be explained by something _else_, then
> >> its
> >>>>>>> analysis
> >>>>>>>>> is _reduced_  to the analysis of that something else. Analysis
> >>> by
> >>>>>> units
> >>>>>>>>> allows Vygotsky to avoid reductionism because the analysis
> >>> begins
> >>>>>> from a
> >>>>>>>>> concept of the whole complex process represented in a unit,
> >> not
> >>>> the
> >>>>>>> whole,
> >>>>>>>>> but a small fragment of the whole, such that the whole can be
> >>> seen
> >>>>> as
> >>>>>>> being
> >>>>>>>>> made up of very many such fragments only. Absent Vygotsky's
> >>> method
> >>>>> of
> >>>>>>>>> analysis by units, and Leontyev's Activity Theory is in danger
> >>> of
> >>>>>>>>> collapsing to a reductionism that actually explains nothing.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Andy
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>
> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>>>>> *Andy Blunden*
> >>>>>>>>> http://home.pacific.net.au/~andy/
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> --
> >>>>>> It is the dilemma of psychology to deal with a natural science with
> >>> an
> >>>>>> object that creates history. Ernst Boesch.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> It is the dilemma of psychology to deal with a natural science with an
> >>>> object that creates history. Ernst Boesch.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> It is the dilemma of psychology to deal with a natural science with an
> >> object that creates history. Ernst Boesch.
> >>
>
>
>