Re: [xmca] Subject: Verb, Object

Paul,
my understanding is that in the CHAT tradition, "culture" has a specific
meaning, being the sum of artefacts produced and consumed by a group of
people, inclusive of the understanding that an artefact is what it is only
in connection with its use in a certain range of activities with a certain
meaning.

Nevertheless, the use of the word to indicate the *society* (as a
continuing self-reproducing collectivity of communities) which produces and
consumes the given collection of artefacts is so deeply embedded, I think
that we have to accept that as a legitimate usage of the word. Mike is the
person who has defined "cultural psychology" so maybe Mike will tell us
what he means?

Andy
At 04:35 PM 1/01/2008 -0800, you wrote:
>great, but would someone please tell me exactly what "culture" means.
>
> Paul
>
>Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net> wrote:
> Sure.
>Andy
>At 10:43 PM 1/01/2008 +0000, you wrote:
> >Andy
> >... why not "cultural psychology"?
> >
> >Luísa Aires
> >
> > > Good question Mike. I never thought about that, and it is certainly in
> > > ignorance of how these terms are used in academia generally.
> > >
> > > I suppose by 'social psychology' I mean a current of psychology which
> > > utilises a concept of 'extended mind' as its foundational principle.
> It is
> > > always the case that other currents contribute insights which are not so
> > > easily accessible from one's own (so to speak) - even if you don't accept
> > > the principles of Psychoanalysis, there are still things to learn
> from it;
> > > and the same goes for all currents and schools of psychology. But by
> > > 'social psychology' I mean a real psychology, that is practical and
> useful
> > > in dealing with psychological problems and copes with the reality of
> > > individual difference and so on. A 'social psychology' which sees
> > > individuals as purely and simply instances of their social position does
> > > not warrant the name in my opinion. And 'social psychology' in the sense
> > > that Max Horkheimer (I think) used it, which deal only with the phenomena
> > > of crowds and so on, is also 'not worthy' of the name.
> > >
> > > So I am looking for a tool which can give me a way of understanding how
> > > the
> > > Zeitgeist is formed, how it is changed, practically how to intervene in
> > > it.
> > > I do not expect a 'social psychology' to go further and provide me with a
> > > social or political theory as such, but it need to be able to bridge the
> > > gap, so to speak. Let's face it! If we can change the Zeitgeist which
> gets
> > > people like George W Bush and John Howard elected in democratic
> countries,
> > > into one in which genuinely good people get elected, then the rest will
> > > look after itself and I can enjoy my retirement.
> > >
> > > Why not a meta-psychology? Apart form my idiosyncratic dislike of
> "meta" I
> > > don't want a metapsychology, I want a psychology which has a
> > > metapsychology
> > > which is sound and able to cope with the sociality of consciousness.
> > >
> > > Why not a "science of human nature"? "Human nature" is such a problematic
> > > term, it carries such a lot of unwanted 19th century baggage. And I am
> > > interested in consciousness, not "nature" in general.
> > >
> > > Sure, social psychology is a sub-discipline within psychology. There are
> > > things which belong to psychology which are not centre-stage for me.
> Sure,
> > > brain injury or other defects are a serious topic, as is child
> > > development,
> > > etc., etc.. I guess I am talking about a psychology whose central thread
> > > is
> > > a social psychology rather than a neurobiology, for example.
> > >
> > > I need a social psychology which recognises that social movements are not
> > > just large numbers of people with the same feeling, but subjects, and
> > > individuals are neither passive victims of social processes nor
> absolutely
> > > free agents. But a *real*, practical, living school of psychology, with
> > > people using it in designing curricula, healing depressed people, running
> > > half-way houses, training teachers, organising self-help groups, etc.,
> > > etc.
> > > and doing real, experimental science with it, critiquing and
> improving its
> > > concepts down the years.
> > >
> > > Does that make sense?
> > >
> > > Andy
> > >
> > > At 05:14 PM 30/12/2007 -0800, you wrote:
> > >>Andy-- This is the second time you have declared your goal to be
> > >> answering
> > >>questions within the framework of social psychology. Why do you use this
> > >>term? Why not a
> > >>meta-psychology? Why not a "science of human nature"?
> > >>
> > >>I ask because I am used to social psychology being viewed as a
> > >>sub-discipline within psychology.
> > >>The only dept of social psych I know of that takes on your questions
> > >>seriously is at the LSE. One branch of cultural psychology in the US
> > >> comes
> > >>out of experimental social
> > >>psychology here, but I do not think you have that in mind.
> > >>
> > >>This query is not to distract from the main line of discussion, but
> > >> rather
> > >>to locate what you are striving for better.
> > >>
> > >>mike
> > >>On Dec 30, 2007 4:34 PM, Andy Blunden wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > I think David and Peg's messages were out of sync., yes?
> > >> >
> > >> > This all raises that most difficult of questions for a social
> > >> psychology
> > >> > that wants to deal with the tasks I am asking it to deal with, how do
> > >> you
> > >> > deal with the knock-on effect of an action, which is predictable from
> > >> > on-high, but unknown to the actors themselves? We rely on the basic
> > >> > insight
> > >> > that what goes on in the head first went on between people - whether
> > >> in
> > >> > the
> > >> > form given to it by Fichte, Hegel, Marx, CS Peirce or Vygotsky. What
> > >> is
> > >> > Hegel's Logic about? About the underlying "logic of events", how this
> > >> or
> > >> > that policy or statement or whatever ultimately leads to this or that
> > >> > problem which was at first invisible. Life experience will tell you
> > >> this,
> > >> > but if you don't have life experience, it will happen according to the
> > >> > logic of events anyways and you should learn. Basically, I think we
> > >> can
> > >> > only make sense of this if we get right away from the idea of the
> > >> > "individual-as-subject" but remember that no subject exists other than
> > >> in
> > >> > and through individual human beings.
> > >> >
> > >> > With the ANL example of the child and the father, I have always had
> > >> > trouble
> > >> > with "examples" and methods which presuppose a leader or a father or a
> > >> > facilitator, a person who knows what the experimental subject or
> > >> student
> > >> > or
> > >> > self-help group really needs to do, and organises things accordingly.
> > >> Of
> > >> > course, I understand that all you teachers and teacher-trainers, child
> > >> > psychologists, etc., work and have a responsibility to work in
> > >> precisely
> > >> > that circumstance. But I do not think this is the paradigmatic
> > >> > relationship. The father can only do his bit in "leading" the child
> > >> into
> > >> > an
> > >> > activity where its "best interests" will be served if the father can
> > >> act
> > >> > as
> > >> > a kind of transmitter of life experience, and kind of short-cut the
> > >> > process
> > >> > for the child. So it is not the father's technique which is the
> > >> paradigm,
> > >> > but the bitter life experience which the child may or may not have as
> > >> a
> > >> > result of choosing to do this or that.
> > >> >
> > >> > Andy
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > At 07:54 AM 30/12/2007 -0800, you wrote:
> > >> > >Dear Andy and Peg:
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Here's some stuff from my notes; I happen to know that Andy can't
> > >> get
> > >> > > ahold of a copy of ANL's Problems of the Development of the Mind. I
> > >> hope
> > >> > > I don't get those funny marks that always show up when I paste in...
> > >> > >
> > >> > > p. 402 ANL points out how 'only understandable' motives for
> > >> homework
> > >> > > such as wanting to get a good mark can be replaced by 'really
> > >> effective'
> > >> > > motives such as doing it so you can go out to play. However, after
> > >> some
> > >> > > weeks of really effective motives, it is also possible that the
> > >> child
> > >> > > will find that the only understandable motives become really
> > >> effective,
> > >> > > e.g. the child will leave off doing homework because it¡¯s untidy
> > >> and
> > >> > the
> > >> > > child is now afraid of getting a bad mark.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > p. 403: ANL writes: 'It is a matter of an action¡¯s result being
> > >> more
> > >> > > significant in certain conditions than the motive that actually
> > >> induces
> > >> > > it. The child begins doing its homework conscientiously because it
> > >> wants
> > >> > > to go out quickly and play. In the end this leads to much more not
> > >> > simply
> > >> > > that it will get the chance to go and play but also that it will get
> > >> a
> > >> > > good mark. A new "objectivation" of its needs come about which means
> > >> > they
> > >> > > are understood at a higher level.'
> > >> > >
> > >> > > 'The transition to a new leading activity differs from the process
> > >> > > described simply in the really effective motives becoming in the
> > >> case of
> > >> > > a change of leading activity, those understandable motives that
> > >> exist in
> > >> > > the sphere of relations characterizing the place the child can
> > >> occupy
> > >> > > only in the next higher stage of development rather than in the
> > >> sphere
> > >> > of
> > >> > > relations in which it still actually is. The preparation of these
> > >> > > transitions therefore takes a long time because it is necessary for
> > >> the
> > >> > > child to become quite fully aware of a sphere of relations that are
> > >> new
> > >> > > for it.¡±
> > >> > >
> > >> > > ANL compares a child¡¯s performance in a school play with the
> > >> child¡¯s
> > >> > > learning of study as an independent activity. The child begins the
> > >> > school
> > >> > > play as an assignment, and later continues for the approbation the
> > >> child
> > >> > > receives during a successful performance. As with learning to study
> > >> for
> > >> > a
> > >> > > good mark instead of just studying for the opportunity to go out and
> > >> > > play, a ¡°merely understandable¡± motive has now become ¡°really
> > >> > > effective¡± and a new activity is established.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > But only in the case of independent study (according to ANL) is
> > >> the
> > >> > new
> > >> > > activity developmentally significant (¡°objectively¡±) because the
> > >> child
> > >> > > is not going to become a professional dramatist (if the child were,
> > >> then
> > >> > > the performance in the play would be study). Thus only in the latter
> > >> > case
> > >> > > can we say there is a new leading activity.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Here's what I make of this:
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > > a) ANL really does NOT interrogate the subject as to the object
> > >> > > orientation of the activity: the object (study, the completed play)
> > >> is
> > >> > > indeed given in advance. As far as ANL is concerned, ONLY Chaiklin's
> > >> > > "objective" ZPD exists, and there is NO subjective ZPD. But Andy's
> > >> idea
> > >> > > of "immanent critique" is NOT an objective critique; it has to do
> > >> with
> > >> > > following up (just like Sarah's) the subject's way of seeing things
> > >> and
> > >> > > seeing where it leads.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > b) In the development discussion (San Diego-Helsinki) Dr. Olga
> > >> Vasquez
> > >> > > raised the question of whether "leading activity" is the same as
> > >> > > "neoformation", and Dr. Pentti Harakarainnen really did not answer
> > >> it
> > >> > and
> > >> > > instead talked about Dr. Engestrom's even more general concept of
> > >> > > activity. But here we can see that "leading activity" and
> > >> "neoformation"
> > >> > > are quite different: LSV used "neoformation" to talk about
> > >> transitional
> > >> > > structures during crisis periods that COMPLETELY disappear (for
> > >> example,
> > >> > > the child's autonomous speech at one and the child's "negativism" at
> > >> > > three) as well as neoformations which become the leading activity
> > >> during
> > >> > > normal growth. Only the latter is a "leading activity" for ANL.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > c) There is still a STRONG behaviorist streak in ANL's reasoning:
> > >> the
> > >> > > difference between the "really effective" and "merely understood"
> > >> > > reasoning can very easily be described, in ALL of ANL's examples, as
> > >> a
> > >> > > simple lengthening of the time distance between the behavior and the
> > >> > > positive reinforcement. Bruner, in a quote that I have long since
> > >> lost,
> > >> > > suggests that development can be described this way, but I don't
> > >> think
> > >> > > LSV ever would have done so: for LSV the key thing about humans is
> > >> that
> > >> > > they are dogs that can ring their own bells.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > David Kellogg
> > >> > > Seoul National University of Education
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > >---------------------------------
> > >> > >Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo!
> > >> > Search.
> > >> > >_______________________________________________
> > >> > >xmca mailing list
> > >> > >xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >> > >http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> > >> >
> > >> > Andy Blunden :
> > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/tel (H) +61 3
> > >> 9380 9435,
> > >> > mobile 0409 358 651
> > >> >
> > >> > _______________________________________________
> > >> > xmca mailing list
> > >> > xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >> > http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> > >> >
> > >>_______________________________________________
> > >>xmca mailing list
> > >>xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >>http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> > >
> > > Andy Blunden : http://home.mira.net/~andy/ tel (H) +61 3 9380 9435,
> > > mobile 0409 358 651
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > xmca mailing list
> > > xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > > http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >xmca mailing list
> >xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> >http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>
>Andy Blunden : http://home.mira.net/~andy/ tel (H) +61 3 9380 9435,
>mobile 0409 358 651
>
>_______________________________________________
>xmca mailing list
>xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>
>
>
>---------------------------------
>Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
>_______________________________________________
>xmca mailing list
>xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca

  Andy Blunden : http://home.mira.net/~andy/ tel (H) +61 3 9380 9435,
mobile 0409 358 651

_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
Received on Tue Jan 1 17:16 PST 2008