It is interesting how debates resurface from the past or at least have a
similarity. Aspects of this present thread are discussed through the
"Activity" archives.
But first, in *Making of Mind* it is mentioned the prototype of the lie
detector (Luria) was made possible by the purges. I beieve Leontiev headed
this work in which subjects were taken and given this lie detector test to
determine the truth of their statements.
Or in the preface of Cognitive Development.... Luria states,
"the masses (Uzbekistan)had lived for centuries in economic stagnation and
illiteracy, their development hindered among other things by the religion of
Islam".
In the conclusion Luria states,
"To repeat, the research in the same localities forty years later, during
which time the peoples of central Asia have, in effect, made a lead of
centuries, would be superfluous. An investigator who desired to replicate
our work would obtain data that differ little from those he might obtain by
studying the structure of structures of cognitive processes among
inhabitants in any other part of the Soviet Union".
Yet the tensions were also present in the 1991 archives in a different
light.
Phil Agre mentioned in March of 91 that,
"But it seems to me, and this may simply be ignorance and I would love to be
shown wrong, that
much of Marx's analysis of the historically specific forms of cognition has
no particular place in activity theory."
Later in the same message he stated,
"All the same, it seems to me that the political priority right now is not
to attempt to cleanse activity theory of its political consciousness but
rather to take this opportunity to reorganize it within the full, complex,
dialectically aware political consciousness and practice that it was never
allowed to attain within the stifling environment of the Soviet Union, for
which Stalinism was a virtual habitus."
Engestrom responded,
"I agree with the general thrust of Phil Agre's proposal: activity theory
needs to firmly grounded in history and in the struggles of societal change.
Leont'ev seems to have been aware of this. His 'Problems of the Development
of the Mind' talks at length about consciousness in class society (p.
244-269). However, when he comes to socialism, the text becomes thin,
basically
an ideologically dictated praise. This would support Phil's point of why
activity theory could not develop fully in Soviet Union."
"Phil also asks how it was possible that activity theory emerged and
developed in such conditions in the first place. Maybe even Soviet Union had
its internal contradictions that gave rise to creativity. It's fashionable
to forget this and condemn everything the Soviets ever did."
My point being there is something more to history than cultural
insensitivity. Maybe its not history so much as having a political
consciousness. We now call those who advocate a free, public education as
proponents of "forced" schooling. We probally need history more now than
ever before but silly me I keep forgetting that history is dead.
Let us not forget what Luria was challenging, a psychology that looked for
laws of mental activity inside the organism.
Nate
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Feb 01 2000 - 01:03:20 PST