Though I haven't read it for a few years now, the following book addresses
this topic in considerable detail:
Valsiner, J. (1998). The guided mind. Cambridge, Ma.: Harvard University Press.
One website says the following:
How is something as broad and complex as a personality organized? What
makes up a satisfactory theory of personality? In this ambitious book, Jaan
Valsiner argues for a theoretical integration of two long-standing
approaches: the individualistic tradition of personalistic psychology,
typified by the work of William Stern and Gordon Allport, and the semiotic
tradition of cultural-historical psychology, typified by the work of L. S.
Vygotsky. The two are brought together in Valsiner's theory, which
highlights the sign-constructing and sign-using nature of all distinctively
human psychological processes.
Arguing that the individualistic and the cultural traditions differ largely
in emphasis, Valsiner unites them by focusing on the intricate relations
between personality and its social context, and their interplay in
personality development. The semiotic devices internalized from the social
environment shape an individual's development, and the flow of thinking,
feeling, and acting. Valsiner uses this theoretical approach to illuminate
two remarkable, and remarkably different, phenomena: letters from the
mother of Allport's college roommate, a key empirical case in Allport's
theory, and the ritual movements of a Hindu temple dancer. Valsiner shows
how both exemplify basic human tendencies for the cultural construction of
life courses.
The Guided Mind shows the fundamental unities in the vastly diverse
phenomenon of human personality.
How is something as broad and complex as a personality organized? What
makes up a satisfactory theory of personality? In this ambitious book, Jaan
Valsiner argues for a theoretical integration of two long-standing
approaches: the individualistic tradition of personalistic psychology,
typified by the work of William Stern and Gordon Allport, and the semiotic
tradition of cultural-historical psychology, typified by the work of L. S.
Vygotsky. The two are brought together in Valsiner's theory, which
highlights the sign-constructing and sign-using nature of all distinctively
human psychological processes.
Arguing that the individualistic and the cultural traditions differ largely
in emphasis, Valsiner unites them by focusing on the intricate relations
between personality and its social context, and their interplay in
personality development. The semiotic devices internalized from the social
environment shape an individual's development, and the flow of thinking,
feeling, and acting. Valsiner uses this theoretical approach to illuminate
two remarkable, and remarkably different, phenomena: letters from the
mother of Allport's college roommate, a key empirical case in Allport's
theory, and the ritual movements of a Hindu temple dancer. Valsiner shows
how both exemplify basic human tendencies for the cultural construction of
life courses.
The Guided Mind shows the fundamental unities in the vastly diverse
phenomenon of human personality.
At 06:53 PM 2/13/2005 +0700, you wrote:
>Mike and Ini and the silent voices of All,
>
>Coincidentally I was reading Davydov's essay on his 8 unsolved problems of
>activity theory (from a book you didn't edit, Mike ;-) Two questions he
>poses on the problem of collective and individual activity are:
>
>1. What are the particular characteristics of the individual subject, and
>in what what ways does it differ from personality?
>2. What can be defined as the personal level of realizing individual activity?
>
>Going out on a limb here, I thought that Bhatia and Ram's application of
>ventriloquation goes some way to answer these questions. Davydov asks, "In
>what sense does the collective subject exist outside the individuals who
>form a group?" I would tentatively answer: In the sense of the three
>voices of the mind, evoking Jay Lemke's ecosocial systems approach to
>sociocultural contexts. This paper has been for me a very real reminder of
>the usefulness of maintaining a solid theoretical basis.x
>
>Just a tad of a thought, and I wish some others would add a tad!
>
>Phil
>
>Davydov's essay: Davydov, V.V. (1999) The content and unsolved problems of
>activity theory, in Engestrom, Y, Miettinen, R and Punamaki, R-L
>"Perspectives on Activity Theory" Cambridge University Press
>
>On 13/02/2005, at 8:02 AM, Mike Cole wrote:
>
>>I have been reading Mihail Yaroshevsky's book on Vygotsky (Progress).
>>He has a very
>>interesting of "Psychology in terms of drama" which I had previously
>>overlooked. There he focuses on an article by Vygotsky that appeared
>>in the Russian version of Collected Works
>>that is not in the English version. - That table of contents came in
>>handy right away!
>>
>>Here LSV has a long discussion of the relation of his ideas to those
>>of Politzer, who is
>>refenced in the English language edition, but not as fully. This
>>appears to be the source of
>>ideas about personality as a "special organization, the primary
>>concept of higher psychology."
>>
>>"The specificity of this category lies in that, being different from
>>two other universal concepts, organism and society, it canonly be
>>understood in terms of these concepts. The individual
>>is "a SOCIAL UNIT." This unit does not exist outside a system of links
>>with other individuals. Vygotsky often quoted Marx's dictum: "Peter
>>only establishes his own identity as a man by first comparing himself
>>with Paul."
>>
>>And later: "The individual is the highest form of sociality." (pp
>>218-291 in Yaroshevski)
>>
>>Aside from identifying a unit of analysis for the study of the entire
>>individual/person-ality, this
>>discussion helps me understand for the first time why Luria, in his
>>x-cultural studies, had a chapter where he asked questions about
>>knowledge of the self in relation to culture.And, it
>>clearly links to the current almost-discussion of the dialogical
>>creation of the self.
>>
>>But, is there no version of this in English? If so, I will ask the
>>editor of J of Russian and
>>East European psych to get it translated. Seems well worth while knowing
>>better.
>>
>>Translation anyone?
>>mike
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Mar 01 2005 - 01:00:04 PST