Vygotsky often referred back to cultural artifacts - totem pole for
example - to explicate his emerging view of sign. Maybe because an
artifacts purpose is partly to help us remember, so in that sense it
always a sign.
I see it very much along the lines of function. I could use a pitch
fork to pitch the hay (tool) but then I could stick in the ground to
remember where that big hole is (sign) but anywho its a cultural
artifact either way.
N
I like to think of a stop sign. One could I suppose pull it out of the
ground and use it as a shovel, but we don't.
MnFamilyMan@aol.com wrote:
> Steve;
>
> Thank you for the support. I don't have time to get into specifics at
> this time but one of the themes I am now struggling with is cultural
> artifacts v. psychological tools. It appears at times that current
> theorists who write about these two themes appear to interchange
> them. Is this a misperception that I am having or is commonly
> accepted that these are one and the same? Did Vygotsky intend for
> psychological tools to be referred to as cultural artifacts or did he
> view psychological tools as being separated into his concepts of
> 'everyday' skills and 'scientific' [i.e. cultural] skills? Perhaps I
> am reading something wrong in what epople are writing, could someone
> please comment to help elucidate this perception?
>
> Steve, as the school year goes on I could certainly comment on the
> birding exercise if that is something you are interested in.
>
> eric
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Dec 01 2002 - 01:00:08 PST
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 The files now available herein are being maintained strictly for historical reference, research, and recordkeeping purposes.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.