[Xmca-l] Re: Oliver Sacks/Romantic Science

mike cole mcole@ucsd.edu
Mon Aug 31 20:59:48 PDT 2015 

Thanks Andy.

Parts of the earlier sections of the book are at marxists.org for any who
would seek the link between the view developed here and Luria's earlier
career, including his connections with Eisenshtein.
mike

On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 8:56 PM, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net> wrote:

> "Romantic Science" by Luria, attached in HTML.
> Andy
> ------------------------------
> *Andy Blunden*
> http://home.pacific.net.au/~andy/
> On 1/09/2015 1:32 PM, mike cole wrote:
>
> ​It might be helpful to this discussion if someone would post the chapter
> on Romantic Science from Luria's autobiography which MUST be somewhere
> public in pdf. It appears that I do not have one.
>
> After reading what the person said, then discussion of the ideas seems
> appropriate. Ditto Sacks, who has written a couple of extended essay's on
> his view of Romantic Science.
>
> It is true that the Russian psychologists, erudite as they were, were not
> sociologists. Nor were they anthropologists. The nature of their enterprise
> encompassed those fields and more.
>
> Doing Romantic Science and immersing oneself in the individual case in no
> way excludes inclusion of sociology, anthropology, in their work. Nor does
> Luria argue so.
>
> mike
> ​
>
> On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 7:29 PM, David Kellogg <dkellogg60@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I think the problem with this view of romantic science is that it
>> completely precludes building a psychology on a sociology. In that sense
>> (and in others), Vygotsky wasn't a romantic scientist at all. Vygotsky
>> certainly did not believe in "total immersion in the individual case";
>> such
>> an immersion is a refusal to rise to the level of theory. I'm not sure
>> Luria was romantic that way either: "the Man with a Shattered Mind" and
>> "The Memory of Mnemonist" are really exceptions. Remember the main
>> criticism of Luria's book "The Nature of Human Conflicts" was always that
>> it was too quantitative.
>>
>> There are, of course, some areas of psychology that are well studied as
>> case histories. Recently, I've been looking into suicidology, and in
>> particular the work of Edwin Shneidman, who pioneered the linguistic
>> analysis of suicide notes (and who appears to have been influenced, as
>> early as the 1970s, by Kasanin and by Vygotsky's work on schizophrinia).
>> Now you would think that if ever there was a field that would benefit from
>> total immersion in the individual case, this is one. But Shneidman says
>> that suicide notes are mostly full of trite, banal phrases, and as a
>> consequence very easy to code--and treat quantiatively (one of his first
>> studies was simply to sort a pile of real and imitation suicide notes and
>> carefully note the criteria he had when he made correct judgements). And
>> of
>> course the whole point of Durkheim's work on suicide is that the
>> individual
>> case can be utterly disregarded, since the great variations are
>> sociological and the psychological variables all seem trivial, transient,
>> or mutually cancelling when we look at suicide at a large scale (as we
>> must
>> these days). Shneidman says he has never read a suicide note he would want
>> to have written.
>>
>> David Kellogg
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 9:21 AM, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net> wrote:
>>
>> > As little as I understand it, Larry, Oliver Sacks' style of Romantic
>> > Science was his complete immersion in the individual case before him,
>> and
>> > development of a science of complete persons. The paradigm of this type
>> of
>> > science was Luria. A limit case of "Qualitative Science" I suppose. The
>> > opposite is the study of just one aspect of each case, e.g. facial
>> > recognition, and the attempt to formulate a "covering law" for just this
>> > aspect.
>> > Andy
>> > ------------------------------------------------------------
>> > *Andy Blunden*
>> > http://home.pacific.net.au/~andy/
>> > On 1/09/2015 8:40 AM, HENRY SHONERD wrote:
>> >
>> >> Mike,
>> >> I recall in an obituary in the NYTimes that naysayers were cited in
>> >> reviewing Oliver Sacks’ life work. I am wondering if some of that push
>> back
>> >> was related to his practice of romantic science, which, if I understand
>> >> from things Andy has written, involves immersion in the phenomena of
>> >> interest in search of a unit of analysis. Goethe, for example, immersed
>> >> himself in the phenomena of living things. His writing prefigures the
>> cell
>> >> as a unit of analysis, but the technology of microscopes could not
>> confirm
>> >> such a unit until later on. Your contrasting Bruner and Sacks makes me
>> >> wonder if the subject, not just the object, is at issue. Different
>> styles
>> >> of research bring different construals. This may be the bane of
>> >> objectivist, empiricist science but does it really make Sacks less of a
>> >> researcher and just a lowly clinician?
>> >> Henry
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>> On Aug 30, 2015, at 7:02 PM, mike cole <mcole@ucsd.edu> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> Hi Laura-- I knew Oliver primarily through our connections with Luria
>> and
>> >>> the fact that we
>> >>> independently came to embrace the idea of a romantic science. He was a
>> >>> shy
>> >>> and diffident person. You can get that feeling, and the difference
>> >>> between
>> >>> him and Jerry Bruner in this regard in the interview with them that
>> >>> someone
>> >>> pirated on
>> >>> to youtube.
>> >>>
>> >>> Jerry is very old but last heard from by me, engaging intellectually
>> all
>> >>> the while.
>> >>>
>> >>> mike
>> >>>
>> >>> On Sun, Aug 30, 2015 at 5:18 PM, Laura Martin <martinl@azscience.org>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> Thanks, Mike. A number of years ago I had the privilege of spending an
>> >>>> evening with Sacks when Lena Luria was visiting Jerry Bruner and
>> Carol
>> >>>> Feldman in NY.  I stood in for Sylvia who couldn't make the dinner -
>> it
>> >>>> was
>> >>>> an extraordinary evening in many ways.  Do you ever hear from
>> Bruner? I
>> >>>> wonder if he's still active.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Laura
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Sent from my iPad
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On Aug 30, 2015, at 3:29 PM, mike cole <mcole@ucsd.edu> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Dear Colleagues ---
>> >>>>
>> >>>> I am forwarding, with personal sadness, the news that Oliver Sacks
>> has
>> >>>> succumbed to cancer.
>> >>>> Its not a surprise, but a sad passing indeed.
>> >>>> mike
>> >>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Date: Sun, Aug 30, 2015 at 3:07 PM
>> >>>> Subject: NYTimes.com: Oliver Sacks Dies at 82; Neurologist and Author
>> >>>> Explored the Brain’s Quirks
>> >>>> To: lchcmike@gmail.com
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>   Sent by sashacole510@gmail.com: Oliver Sacks Dies at 82;
>> Neurologist
>> >>>> and Author Explored the Brain’s Quirks
>> >>>> <
>> >>>>
>> http://p.nytimes.com/email/re?location=InCMR7g4BCKC2wiZPkcVUieQKbejxL4a&user_id=bd31502e6eb851a9261827fdfbbcdf6d&email_type=eta&task_id=1440972441657668&regi_id=0
>> >
>> >>>> By
>> >>>> GREGORY COWLES
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Dr. Sacks explored some of the brain’s strangest pathways in
>> >>>> best-selling
>> >>>> case histories like “The Man Who Mistook His Wife for a Hat,”
>> achieving
>> >>>> a
>> >>>> level of renown rare among scientists.
>> >>>> Or, copy and paste this URL into your browser:
>> http://nyti.ms/1LL040D
>> >>>> <
>> >>>>
>> http://p.nytimes.com/email/re?location=InCMR7g4BCKC2wiZPkcVUieQKbejxL4a&user_id=bd31502e6eb851a9261827fdfbbcdf6d&email_type=eta&task_id=1440972441657668&regi_id=0
>> >
>> >>>> To
>> >>>> get unlimited access to all New York Times articles, subscribe today.
>> >>>> See
>> >>>> Subscription Options.
>> >>>> <
>> >>>>
>> http://p.nytimes.com/email/re?location=4z5Q7LhI+KVBjmEgFdYACDuqzkg7rwCIjbQiYyNWYJIW5drsCg04xD2q1X6bqVB/vYPHy+JP5GfoOOml3K0i6GaUY7fZ7jcK869mPAvEGfk=&user_id=bd31502e6eb851a9261827fdfbbcdf6d&email_type=eta&task_id=1440972441657668&regi_id=0
>> >
>> >>>> To
>> >>>> ensure delivery to your inbox, please add nytdirect@nytimes.com to
>> your
>> >>>> address book. Advertisement
>> >>>>
>> >>>> <
>> >>>>
>> http://www.nytimes.com/adx/bin/adx_click.html?type=goto&opzn&page=secure.nytimes.com/mem/emailthis.html&pos=Frame6A&sn2=6da5bd5a/78e3a264&sn1=1071d68d/49278277&camp=FoxSearchlight_AT2015-1977432-August-C&ad=MistressAmerica_336x90-NOW&goto=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Efandango%2Ecom%2Fmistressamerica%5F182432%2Fmovieoverview
>> >>>> >
>> >>>> Copyright 2015
>> >>>> <
>> >>>>
>> http://p.nytimes.com/email/re?location=4z5Q7LhI+KVBjmEgFdYACMlEhIhWVuPIxganfKahJGpDcKtdpfztygRnz23j1z6nDpx4eAAqQbYRMMl5L56EeQ==&user_id=bd31502e6eb851a9261827fdfbbcdf6d&email_type=eta&task_id=1440972441657668&regi_id=0
>> >>>> >
>> >>>> | The New York Times Company
>> >>>> <
>> >>>>
>> http://p.nytimes.com/email/re?location=4z5Q7LhI+KUv6vqdu/zT/DtUzLlQEcSh&user_id=bd31502e6eb851a9261827fdfbbcdf6d&email_type=eta&task_id=1440972441657668&regi_id=0
>> >>>> >
>> >>>> | NYTimes.com 620 Eighth Avenue New York, NY 10018
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> --
>> >>>>
>> >>>> It is the dilemma of psychology to deal as a natural science with an
>> >>>> object that creates history. Ernst Boesch
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>> --
>> >>>
>> >>> It is the dilemma of psychology to deal as a natural science with an
>> >>> object that creates history. Ernst Boesch
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>>
>
>
>
> --
>
> It is the dilemma of psychology to deal as a natural science with an
> object that creates history. Ernst Boesch
>
>
>
>


-- 

It is the dilemma of psychology to deal as a natural science with an
object that creates history. Ernst Boesch

More information about the xmca-l mailing list