Ana-- I'll put aside the discussion of whether LSV believed in evolutionary
progression or not. I think he did and we can return to this question or
someone else can take it up. But I am focused on the meaning(s) of
context being used in such discussion. So, I want to focus on questions
that arise from your statement that:
the key to understanding Vygotsky is to understand that social
communication precedes higher mental functions in human beings. Social
activities and processes are not just a background (context) within which a
person, and individual develops -- social processes and activities are
internalized (Vygotsky's term) and make the person's self. And (!), this
is not social reductionism, because the process of internalization is the
process of active recreation of a social world as an inner microcosm.
In addition, I think that play -- activities and orientations in play --
are key to understanding how this internalizing/recreating works.
1. Vis a vis LSV's thinking, I think I agree that the individual is
differentiated from the social group, that social activities are not
just a background (is "background" a synomym for "context" here?).
2. Its crucial in avoiding the (sometimes alleged) idea that society
creates the individual and turn the matter to the active individual
internalizing social ....ugh....context (?) situation (?) pattern of
interaction (?) and CREATING the psychological plane/inner microcosm.
Do you believe, and do you believe that LSV believed, these processes
to be universal? And in particular, do you believe that his account of
the role of play in development is universal? That is the issue that
Artin and Susan raise.
Now a question. The term, culture, does not enter your account. Yet
isn't culture central to the mechanism of development from a cultural
historical perspective?
And if the answer is yes, is cultural variation of any importance?
And a second question. Tool mediated action in context is the unit of
analysis proposed by Jim Wertsch, Volodya Zinchenko and others. Is there
any tool you know of, the effectiveness of which is independing of the
activity it is mediating?
If not, could LSV propose a cultural historical theory and NOT be a
contextualist?
And now much of this is from LSV and not from either one of his Russian
students or non-Russian interpreters?
More later. Time to teach a class with Kris Guitterez at UCLA and finish
up our joint class for the year. The quarter system sure drags things
out.
mike
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Jul 08 2003 - 11:29:44 PDT