[Xmca-l] Re: Passions, (Projects?) and Interests

Sat Jan 12 16:26:00 PST 2019

You have motivated to read the chapter, David. Thanks.
Andy.  I think what you are talking about is called, by some  (Rubenshtein?
Brushlinsky?, a subjective object.
mike

On Sat, Jan 12, 2019 at 3:45 PM Andy Blunden <andyb@marxists.org> wrote:

> As I see it, the problems Leontyev has with "need" derive from his taking
> the object of activity to be "simply objective." By this I mean that not
> only is the object external, and in that sense objective (and can only be
> fulfilled by processes which exist in the wider social and material world,
> and not just a psychic process), but it is not problematic - it is
> determined by the community as a whole (in turn taken as an unproblematic
> whole) and if an individual is pursuing some other conception of the object
> then they are mistaken. There is nothing mediate between the individual and
> the community as a whole (i.e., the state - the individual does not belong
> to an interest group, for example). The individual's need is determined by
> psychic reflection on the object of activity (and in that sense both
> subjective and objective) but it gets slippery only when you enquire about
> the object of activity, which ought to provide for the material needs of
> the individual in order to sustain the society, but of course it is not so
> simple!
>
> Andy
> ------------------------------
> Andy Blunden
> http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm
> On 13/01/2019 4:40 am, mike cole wrote:
>
> I know this may sound obtuse, Huw. But the concept of need in both LSV and
> ANL has always
> seemed very slippery to me. Presumably a long term need is to obtain
> enough food, shelter......
> but that involves social transactions that are culturally mediated.
> Reproduction is a species need in one way and
> I guess my felt need to check out how Arsenal is faring is short term. But
> its long term equivalent? Seems more than epistemic/ontological. I am not
> sure where sexual interests fit in.
>
> Can this be explained in a manner that this struggling person can
> understand?
>
> mike
>
>
>
> On Sat, Jan 12, 2019 at 8:49 AM Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Vygotsky likens them to temporary needs.
>>
>> Huw
>>
>> On Sat, 12 Jan 2019 at 00:36, mike cole <mcole@ucsd.edu> wrote:
>>
>>> Ah, so interests are the affective ingredient that accompanies the point
>>> of.view?  A subjtive object?
>>> Mike
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 3:58 PM James Ma <jamesma320@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Interests have much to do with intentionality - and there is always a
>>>> subjective angle from which the object (interests) is viewed - I don't
>>>> recall coming across Vygotsky alluding to this.
>>>> To illustrate my point, I use the term "evidentiality" (which in
>>>> linguistics refers to statements being explicitly marked to show the source
>>>> of the speaker's information, e.g. "I witnessed this"). It goes without
>>>> saying that privileged access bears on one's interest (a state of being
>>>> interested, or an act of taking an interest, in something). Thus, one
>>>> person's interest is always a "secondary evidential" from another person's
>>>> viewpoint, in which case another person has to make inference through sense
>>>> perception, mediated by contextual factors (e.g. interpersonal, ideational
>>>> and textual).
>>>>
>>>> James
>>>>
>>>> *_______________________________________________________*
>>>>
>>>> *James Ma  Independent Scholar *
>>>> *https://oxford.academia.edu/JamesMa
>>>> <https://oxford.academia.edu/JamesMa>    *
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 16:48, mike cole <mcole@ucsd.edu> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> So interests are curiosity, Huw?
>>>>> Didn’t “Psychology of Art” have something to to do with Emotions,
>>>>> David?
>>>>> 10 Volumes (!) of LSV! Wow.
>>>>> Mike
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 5:58 AM Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> For Vygotsky, interests are intentions.  Although he recognises that
>>>>>> Lewin's structural theory is inadequate with regard to discerning the
>>>>>> essence of interests, his own writings in that chapter focus upon
>>>>>> developmental patterns of interests, and he does not get around to being
>>>>>> explicit about what is behind interest -- what is really driving it. To a
>>>>>> certain extent this is answered with the social situation of development,
>>>>>> but unless one reads between the lines there is a great deal of vagueness,
>>>>>> such as with reference to psychological functions.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have a rather large theoretical paper I am completing on this to
>>>>>> compliment some empirical work. What I state is that it is epistemology
>>>>>> (and ontology) that is the interest behind interest.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>> Huw
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 12:08, Moises Esteban-Guitart <
>>>>>> moises.esteban@udg.edu> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That's an interesting question that I asked myself when I read
>>>>>>> EDUCATIONAL
>>>>>>> PSYCHOLOGY by Vygotsky "from one interest of the child’s to a new
>>>>>>> interest
>>>>>>> —that is the rule” (Vygotsky, 1926/1997a, p. 86). My conclusion was
>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>> it depends on the biographical moment (see pp. 393 to 396 document
>>>>>>> attached). By the way, in his "Educational Psychology" he wrote on
>>>>>>> sex too
>>>>>>> ("Education on the sex instinct", pp. 71-77), however I didn't
>>>>>>> explore
>>>>>>> this.
>>>>>>> m
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> > David,
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > I would imagine the reference to interest relates to the STUDENTS'
>>>>>>> > interest: meaning that whatever way it is approached it needs to be
>>>>>>> > introduced from and in relation to the students' current
>>>>>>> > knowledge/interest/developmental stage as opposed to being imposed
>>>>>>> in a
>>>>>>> > decontextualised way.
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > At least I think that's what's going on here...
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > Julie
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >> Sorry, Rob. I mean fifteen hours a year. The government has
>>>>>>> itinerant
>>>>>>> >> specialists who lecture from school to school. There is even a
>>>>>>> bus for
>>>>>>> >> visiting the provinces.
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> In contrast, Vygotsky says:
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> a) No class with ONLY sex education--since anatomical, sexual, and
>>>>>>> >> sociocultural maturation do not coincide in modern humans, sex
>>>>>>> education
>>>>>>> >> is
>>>>>>> >> not a science of a natural whole, where the object of study is
>>>>>>> given to
>>>>>>> >> us.
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> b) No classes WITHOUT sex education--since sex education is simply
>>>>>>> >> learning
>>>>>>> >> how to be with people who may be of sexual interest, all classes
>>>>>>> must
>>>>>>> >> have
>>>>>>> >> some form of sexual "enlightenment".
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> c) No sex education without INTEREST. But what, exactly, is
>>>>>>> interest?
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> David Kellogg
>>>>>>> >> Sangmyung University
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> New in *Language and Literature*, co-authored with Fang Li:
>>>>>>> >> Mountains in labour: Eliot’s ‘Atrocities’ and Woolf’s
>>>>>>> >> alternatives
>>>>>>> >> Show all authors
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> https://doi.org/10.1177/0963947018805660
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 5:40 PM robsub@ariadne.org.uk
>>>>>>> >> <robsub@ariadne.org.uk>
>>>>>>> >> wrote:
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>> Fifteen hours a week???
>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>> >>> I hope it's not all practicals - the teachers would be exhausted.
>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>> >>> In the UK nowadays the very inadequate thing we do in schools is
>>>>>>> called
>>>>>>> >>> Sex and Relationship Education. The "and Relationship" bit was
>>>>>>> tacked
>>>>>>> >>> on
>>>>>>> >>> some time in the 90s or maybe early 2000s, if I recall rightly.
>>>>>>> They
>>>>>>> >>> missed
>>>>>>> >>> a trick there - they should have put it the other way round
>>>>>>> >>> "Relationship
>>>>>>> >>> and Sex Education". A very large lump of the population go into a
>>>>>>> >>> tabloid
>>>>>>> >>> induced panic as soon as they hear the word "sex", especially
>>>>>>> when
>>>>>>> >>> related
>>>>>>> >>> to children, and then fail to hear the "and relationship" it.
>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>> >>> Rob
>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>> >>> On 11/01/2019 07:14, David Kellogg wrote:
>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>> >>> Last July in Geneva, I got into a bit of a tiff with my hosts
>>>>>>> over
>>>>>>> >>> whether
>>>>>>> >>> or not Vygotsky had a theory of emotion. The commonplace
>>>>>>> position,
>>>>>>> >>> taken
>>>>>>> >>> by
>>>>>>> >>> almost all high Vygotskyans including my francophone friends, is
>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>> >>> Vygotsky spent too much of his life developing a theory of
>>>>>>> thinking and
>>>>>>> >>> intellect, complexes and concept formation, and when he turned
>>>>>>> his
>>>>>>> >>> attention to the lower and higher emotions, that dark side of
>>>>>>> the moon,
>>>>>>> >>> it
>>>>>>> >>> was too late. He worked out a kind of prolegomena, in the form of
>>>>>>> >>> "Teaching
>>>>>>> >>> on the Emotions" (or "Study of the Emotions" or perhaps "The
>>>>>>> Doctrine
>>>>>>> >>> of
>>>>>>> >>> the Emotions"--you can read what he did in Volume 6 of the
>>>>>>> Collected
>>>>>>> >>> Works). And the rest was silence.
>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>> >>> Here in Korea we are bringing out our tenth volume of Vygotsky's
>>>>>>> works
>>>>>>> >>> (see attached cover, with blurbs from Renee Van der Veer and
>>>>>>> Irina
>>>>>>> >>> Leopoldoff-Martin). It's all about sex education, which is a very
>>>>>>> >>> important
>>>>>>> >>> topic here in Korea, because we have fifteen hours of sex
>>>>>>> education a
>>>>>>> >>> week
>>>>>>> >>> mandated by the government, but the ministry of education has
>>>>>>> more or
>>>>>>> >>> less
>>>>>>> >>> withdrawn the downloadable materials for this, not for the usual
>>>>>>> >>> reasons
>>>>>>> >>> but instead because of criticism from Human Rights Watch (it is
>>>>>>> >>> terribly
>>>>>>> >>> sexist, homophobic, and just plain ignorant).
>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>> >>> Vygosky's view is that sex education (which he calls "sexual
>>>>>>> >>> enlightenment") has to be integrated into ALL subjects (so for
>>>>>>> example
>>>>>>> >>> the
>>>>>>> >>> test of a good sex enlightenment programme would be one that
>>>>>>> ensures
>>>>>>> >>> equal
>>>>>>> >>> participation of boys and girls in math and physics), it has to
>>>>>>> start
>>>>>>> >>> as
>>>>>>> >>> soon as preschoolers enter primary school, and it has to be
>>>>>>> >>> INTERESTING.
>>>>>>> >>> In
>>>>>>> >>> other words, instead of the "sex education without sex"
>>>>>>> programme we
>>>>>>> >>> have
>>>>>>> >>> here in South Korea, we need non-sex education...but with a good
>>>>>>> deal
>>>>>>> >>> of
>>>>>>> >>> sex.
>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>> >>> All of which has got me thinking about the problem my Geneva
>>>>>>> friends
>>>>>>> >>> set
>>>>>>> >>> before me. I think that Vygotsky really DOES have a theory that
>>>>>>> unites
>>>>>>> >>> passions and interests. It's like that book by Hirschmann on how
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> >>> unity
>>>>>>> >>> of passion and interest gave rise to capitalism, but instead it
>>>>>>> is all
>>>>>>> >>> about how passions, shared projects, and interests give rise to
>>>>>>> sexual
>>>>>>> >>> love, and it is more or less right before we would expect to
>>>>>>> find it:
>>>>>>> >>> in
>>>>>>> >>> the Pedology of the Adolescent, right before the chapter on
>>>>>>> concept
>>>>>>> >>> formation, which shows how complexes (which are categories for
>>>>>>> others)
>>>>>>> >>> become concepts (categories for themselves). This is the chapter
>>>>>>> on
>>>>>>> >>> interests, which explains how passions (which are sensations in
>>>>>>> >>> themselves)
>>>>>>> >>> become interests: that is, emotions for themselves. (There is
>>>>>>> already a
>>>>>>> >>> passable translation of this in Volume Five of the CW). The only
>>>>>>> thing
>>>>>>> >>> is
>>>>>>> >>> there is a need for a transitional form--a feeling with others.
>>>>>>> Andy's
>>>>>>> >>> idea
>>>>>>> >>> of the Project?
>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>> >>> David Kellogg
>>>>>>> >>> Sangmyung University
>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>> >>> New in *Language and Literature*, co-authored with Fang Li:
>>>>>>> >>> Mountains in labour: Eliot’s ‘Atrocities’ and Woolf’s
>>>>>>> >>> alternatives
>>>>>>> >>> Show all authors
>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>> >>> https://doi.org/10.1177/0963947018805660
>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > Dra. Julie Waddington
>>>>>>> > Departament de Didàctiques Específiques
>>>>>>> > Facultat d'Educació i Psicologia
>>>>>>> > Universitat de Girona
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Moisès Esteban Guitart
>>>>>>> Dpt de psicologia
>>>>>>> Director - Institut de Recerca Educativa -
>>>>>>> Facultat d'Educació i Psicologia
>>>>>>> Universitat de Girona
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Grup de recerca "Cultura i Educació" (GRC  2017SGR19)
>>>>>>> https://culturaieducacio.cat
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Responsable a la Universitat de Girona del Postgrau
>>>>>>> Interuniversitari en
>>>>>>> Psicologia de l'educació MIPE-DIPE http://mipe.psyed.edu.es/ca
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190112/719b1299/attachment.html 