ARGH!!
I forgot to attach the article referred to in previous message, as usual.
advanced dementia.
mike
On Sun, Feb 21, 2010 at 8:37 PM, mike cole <lchcmike@gmail.com> wrote:
> larry--
>
> The attached article is focused on adolescence--> adult transition, but I
> think it is
> relevant to making judgment about normativity that extend back in
> development to
> the beginning or earlier, whatever that might be.
> mike
>
> PS-- very difficult reconciling very different sources of
> evidence/intuition "on the fly byte by byte"!!
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 10:04 AM, Larry Purss <lpurss@shaw.ca> wrote:
>
>> Hi David and Ana
>>
>> I been thinking about the "normative" aspect of development and how
>> development is conceptualized differently within particular historical
>> moments. Also when Ana suggested that their are many dimensions to
>> development beyond abstraction and generalization I reflected on how some
>> Discourses reflect on affective development. Following is some reflections
>> from Frank Lachmann and Beatrice Beebe who have been exploring the same
>> affective developmental terrain as Daniel Stern, Fonagy, and others. They
>> look to the parent-infant relationship for understanding the dynamic
>> movement of the developmental process.
>> Lachmann and Beebe in an earlier (1989) article in Psychoanalytic
>> Psychology, 1989, 6(2), p. 137-149 "Oneness Fantasies Revisited" take the
>> position that earlier phases of development both organize and continue to be
>> transformed by later phases of development. Of special interest in this
>> article are the complex and subtle interactive experiences of MATCHING
>> (imitation) DISRUPTION, and REPAIR exchanges of active participants in an
>> activity.
>> Infant researchers have documented numerous kinds of matching interactions
>> in infancy. These have variously been termed "mirroring" "imitation"
>> "matching" "attunement" (D.Stern) Beebe and Lachmann are most interested in
>> the dynamic process of CYCLES of match, disruption, and repair in face to
>> face interactions.Tronick researched mother-infant play interactions with
>> infants at 2 to 6 months old. When these interactions were videotaped and
>> microanalyzed Tronick found 30% of mismatched states "were repaired within 1
>> second and within 2 seconds 70% of mismatched states are repaired". EACH
>> partner has a chance to alter his behavior or his/her partners behavior to
>> reestablish a matched state.
>> Lachmann and Beebe that the managing of the cycle from matching to
>> disruption to repair is the beginning of a lifelong developmental capacity
>> to FLEXIBLY span the the DIMENSION of experience from "we-ness" to a sense
>> of "self". They emphasize this is only a single dimension or source of WE
>> and SELF experiences and there are multiple developmental sources.
>> D. Stern (1983) suggests vocalizing in alternation, where each person
>> takes his or her turn is later transformed into a conversational dialogue in
>> the exchange of symbolic information. Bowlby's Attachment theory describes
>> toddlers moving back and forth between mother (attachment) and the
>> environment (emergence and alterity)
>> Tronick developed a "still-face method" where mother shows no response to
>> the infants engagement and differentiates the infant's response along a
>> continuum from most to least adaptive. Those infants who continue to signal
>> the mother (with positive or negative emotions) and repair the interactional
>> mismatch are considered most adaptive.
>> Tronick's conclusions to the research was that the mode of managing match
>> and disruption in "normal" ongoing interaction does BIAS DEVELOPMENT. The
>> CAPACITY for INTERACTIVE REPAIR increases security of attachment. The
>> capacity to FLEXIBLY move along the range of sense of self to "we"
>> experiences is a developmental achievement and a loss oe diminishment of
>> this flexibility leaves a person more vulnerable.
>> Beebe and Lachmann suggest it is the mode of managing the sequence from
>> match to disruption to repair (which can change in a 1 to 2 second interval)
>> which may BIAS the solutions to development at each transformation.
>> Mother-infant patterns of match-disruption-repair "begin a long chain of
>> developmental transformations. The various transformations of these patterns
>> will ultimately be relevant to the adult's capacity to FLEXIBLY encompass
>> the range of experience from sense of self to oneness." (p146)
>> This dimension of optimally being flexible to experience both "Self" and
>> "we" develops over a life time rather than within a specific stage (as in
>> traditional psychoanalysis) A growing child's perceptual, affective, and
>> cognitive capacities are influenced by the capacity to maintain both a firm
>> sense of self and the ability to flexibly yield one's sense of a bounded
>> self. Gradually, over time, this range of experience is abstracted and
>> represented in symbolic elaborations but the process of
>> match-disruption-repair continues throughout life and can be reinforced or
>> undermined within socio-cultural settings. These processes are generally not
>> in the FOREGROUND of awareness in ongoing experience across all stages of
>> development.
>>
>> David and Ana and others interested in the Zo-ped
>> This post is an attempt to articulate one particular dimension of the
>> multiple dimensions Ana pointed out. It points to the movement of emotions
>> and the centrality of the affective dimension within the Zo-ped at the
>> microgenetic level of analysis. As Ana stated at the end of her post
>> What do others think?
>>
>> Larry
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: David Kellogg <vaughndogblack@yahoo.com>
>> Date: Monday, February 15, 2010 9:13 pm
>> Subject: Re: [xmca] Those Pesky emotions in the ZPD
>> To: Culture ActivityeXtended Mind <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
>>
>> >
>> > Thanks, Larry, for your thought-provoking quotes, your
>> > thoughtful comments, and above all for changing the subject
>> > line. Of course, it goes without saying that emotions are not
>> > mostly adjectives; an adjective is merely a type of word. As
>> > Bakhtin reminds us, personal emotion is an inseparable part of
>> > every word meaning, but the part of speech is not.
>> >
>> > I suspect that If anything English tends towards verbs
>> > in expressing emotion, partly, I think, because of a general
>> > emphasis on individual activity in English grammar (SVO, the
>> > hero slew the dragon, instead of SOV, once upon a time, a dragon
>> > and a hero did combat). In Korean, "feeling" is mostly nominal,
>> > and "kibun" (individual emotion) is a kind of microcosm of
>> > "bunwigi", social emotion.
>> >
>> > Mr. Bae Hicheol, a valued member of our Vygotsky translation
>> > team who is, along with his fellow teachers, the target of very
>> > nasty government witch-hunt, pointed out to me this morning
>> > that the distinction between "vertical" and "horizontal" isn't
>> > simply a distinction between "hierarchy" and "democracy", or
>> > even between concrete, syntagmatic relations of the sort we find
>> > in e-motions that are produced as a result of action in a
>> > concrete situation (e.g. conversations about everyday matters)
>> > and the abstract, paradigmatic relations we find in sicence
>> > concepts.
>> >
>> > It's a distinction between quantitative, gradualistic,
>> > incremental learning (e.g. times tables, lists of likes
>> > and dislikes, simple categories of good and bad guys) and
>> > qualitative, revolutionary, paradigm-shifting development (e.g.
>> > access to algebraic relations, principles of artistic taste,
>> > concepts of justice and fairness).
>> >
>> > Yrjo Engestrom pointed out that "horizontal" movement eventually
>> > involves transgressing boundaries. But we can often move pretty
>> > far, at least in language learning, without a fundamental
>> > paradigm shift. For example, if you are at the stage of
>> > ostension, everything becomes an object you can hold (and emote
>> > over). Of course, you rapidly run out of things within arms
>> > reach, but there is a simple strategy for coping with that which
>> > does not restructure the language system; you simply crawl a
>> > little ways further. The same thing is true of indicatory
>> > reference, where everything either near or far becomes an object
>> > you can point at. It is even true of naming.
>> >
>> > It's really only when we start to talk of things that cannot be
>> > seen (the past, the future, the imaginary character, the
>> > abstract principle) that we need a signifying function at all.
>> > But as soon as we do this (even when we are talking perfectly
>> > concretely, but about things we want or things we miss) we knock
>> > our heads against a very hard paradigm ceiling which only
>> > NEGATION can really shatter.
>> >
>> > I don't think e-motion is any different, at least in principle.
>> > It's actually possible to go on feeling your own feelings and
>> > expressing a vast variety of your own feelings without any
>> > fundamental, qualitative growth. Development arises when, in the
>> > course of role play, it becomes necessary to feel feelings that
>> > you don't actually feel, or feelings that someone else is
>> > feeling. It's precisely at this point that emotion becomes the
>> > basis of esthetics, and even the basis of ethics.
>> >
>> > Here are some kids role playing "The Bremen Town Musicians" in a
>> > fifth grade English class in a public school here in Seoul. The
>> > donkey leaves his master to become a Beatle in Hamburg, and
>> > meets a hound-dog along the way.
>> >
>> > T: (pointing to the third picture) Dog! Yes, he ... they met ...
>> > they meet a
>> > Ss: Dog!
>> > T: Dog. What are they saying to the dog?
>> > Ss: Can you join us?
>> > T: Can you join us? Let's go together. Can you join us? And the
>> > dog says ...
>> > S1: See you again.
>> > S2: Sure!
>> > S3: Who are you?
>> > S4: Do you want to die?
>> >
>> >
>> > Now, you might think that S4's comment is simply being sassy,
>> > because of course "Do you want to die?" is the way that Korean
>> > yakuza threaten each other. But it comes up again when the dog
>> > and the donkey meet a mouse:
>> >
>> >
>> > T: The donkey, the cat, the dog says to the mouse ... ?
>> > S: Can you join us?
>> > T: Can you join us?
>> > S9: Sorry! Sorry! Sorry! Sorry!
>> > T: The mouse says ...
>> > S: Sorry, I can't. I'm play computer game.
>> > S: Do you want to die?
>> >
>> > Now at this point the teacher might respond. Of course, "Do you
>> > want to die?" could mean something like if you DON'T want to
>> > die, you have to go to Bremen and join my rock band. But another
>> > child has a better idea and suggests, with the teacher's help,
>> > that the mouse might have a very good reason for not joining.
>> >
>> >
>> > T: Sorry, I can't. Why? Why do you think ... he says "Sorry, I can't"?
>> > Ss: *&^%$#@!
>> > S: I don't like cat!
>> > T: Why do you think he says "Sorry, I can't."?
>> > S21: I'm tired!
>> > S: Teacher! Because I don't like *&^%$
>> > S: Tired! I'm tired!
>> > S: I don't like YOU!
>> > T: Uh? Jerry can't join them? Jerry? Jerry? The mouse can't join them?
>> > S!: Ah! Ah! (pointing to the cat in the book) Tom! Tom!
>> > T: Yes, his name must be Jerry. Why ... why can't he join them?
>> > S: Ah! ... Mouse doesn't like cat!
>> > KT: Because the mouse ...
>> > S: don't like cat.
>> > T: doesn't like the cat. He is (gesturing of being scared)
>> > scared of ...
>> > S: cat.
>> > KT: the cat. Yes, maybe ... maybe. What ... what ... what
>> > happens next?
>> >
>> > Now we have an interesting twist in the tail. Can the story
>> > accomodate it? Can Tom provide some kind of safety guarantee?
>> > Will he keep to it? Here some real development seems not only
>> > possible but inevitable.
>> >
>> > Of course, it's easier to get to ascend to this point if you see
>> > individual feelings ("I don't like you") as a descent of social
>> > emotion to the individual in the first place ("Can you join
>> > us?")!
>> >
>> > This is the day after Seolal, here in Korea--the rice harvest
>> > festival when everybody goes home (via a three day traffic jam)
>> > to bow to their elders and hope for a prosperous new year. Hope
>> > works better in large groups. Let us all pitch in and hope for
>> > bigger harvests, smaller traffic jams, and a world in
>> > which witches get to go hunting instead of being hunted like mice.
>> >
>> > David Kellogg and Friends
>> > Seoul National University of Education
>> >
>> > --- On Mon, 2/15/10, Larry Purss <lpurss@shaw.ca> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > From: Larry Purss <lpurss@shaw.ca>
>> > Subject: [xmca] Those Pesky emotions in the ZPD
>> > To: "Activity eXtended Mind, Culture," <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
>> > Date: Monday, February 15, 2010, 2:45 PM
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > David and Ana
>> > I thought I would start a new post so we don't loose focus on
>> > the dialogical functions of development in the other thread.
>> > I've attached the Chaiklin article on the ZPD to help clarify
>> > David's recommendation we not loose focus on the notion of
>> > development of higher mental functions.
>> > However the place of emotions in development also needs
>> > articulation and therefore this new thread that focuses more
>> > centrally on pesky emotions.
>> > I want to quote a passage from Gordon Well's and Guy Claxton's
>> > edited volume Learning For Life in the 21st Century on page 8 of
>> > the introduction which is inviting reflection on e-motions and
>> > identity formation.
>> >
>> > "We must ask how can the concept of individual agency be
>> > reconciled with the strong emphasis on
>> > socialization/enculturation that is taken to be a central
>> > feature of sociocultural theory, as well as of most public
>> > education.? We might also note here that traditionally
>> > education has tended to IGNORE social and emotional development,
>> > concentrating almost exclusively on intellectual development,
>> > and, more specifically, on the acquisition of bodies of
>> > formalized knowledge. From a CHAT perspective, however, all
>> > human activity is inherently social and IMBUED WITH EMOTION.
>> > Along with other more HUMANISTIC perspectives, which are also
>> > challenging the status quo, CHAT therefore invites us to inquire
>> > how educational activities can be designed to engage the active
>> > involvement of the student as a 'whole person' and to contribute
>> > positively to IDENTITY FORMATION." (page 8, emphasis added)
>> >
>> > Wells and Claxton also quote Vygotsky on this same theme.
>> >
>> > "Thought has its origins in the MOTIVATING sphere of
>> > consciousness; a sphere that includes our inclinations and
>> > needs, our interests and impulses, and our AFFECT and EMOTION
>> > ... A true and complex understanding of another's thought
>> > becomes possible ONLY when we discover its real AFFECTIVE-
>> > VOLITIONAL basis. (Vygotsky, 1987, page 282, emphasis added)
>> >
>> > As Vygotsky, Wells, Claxton, (and many others in the CHAT
>> > community, the larger sociocultural community, and the even
>> > larger humanistic community) make clear those pesky emotions
>> > have a place in our ongoing discourse on the ZPD.
>> >
>> > Ana's account of the complexity of the ZPD and the many
>> > functions and dimensions of development (not learning) of the
>> > whole person invites us to elaborate the "affective-volitional
>> > basis" as foundational to our continuing dialogue.
>> >
>> > Larry
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > -----Inline Attachment Follows-----
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > 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
>> >
>> _______________________________________________
>> xmca mailing list
>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>>
>
>
Attachment:
Johnson-Hanks.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document
_______________________________________________ xmca mailing list xmca@weber.ucsd.edu http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca