[xmca] The Non-modular Mind

[Gregory Allan Thompson <gathomps@uchicago.edu>]

Some quick thoughts on reconciling Freud and Luria (and CH
theories). There is a way to read Freud in which there is no
reason to believe that Freud viewed repression as a bad thing.
In this view, the point of psychoanalysis for Freud was not to
remove repression (Freud never told his patients to just give
in to their libido and live like animals), but rather the goal
of psychoanalysis was to find more healthy ways to channel
repression (in part by giving voice to the repressed idea, and
hence setting it free so that it no longer bubbles up into
SYMPTOMS).

In this reading of Freud, a certain sort of repression is
precisely that which frees us and makes us more than mere
animals (cf. Marx on species being; Spinoza on passion,
rationality, freedom and human bondage; but also the neglected
argument in Rousseau that the man in chains has a new type of
freedom). In other words, the argument here seems to be one of
freedom (dynamic emergence) through constraint. 

Following this reading, the superego is precisely the same
control from without that you mentioned with the Russians. It
is the internalization of culture and is that which makes
human cultural life possible.

When reading Freud I always find this a very convincing
reading, and yet this is not the popular uptake of his work -
which makes on wonder: why? Can we blame Marcuse? Or would the
"get rid of repression" reading of Marcuse also be a
mis-reading? (I could never get excited enough about Marcuse's
work to figure this out!). Do we just wish that Freud made
this argument? Are we just too repressed (in the bad way) such
that our mis-reading of Freud is one of our symptoms?

Looking back at your post Mike, I realize I may have mis-read
your reading of Freud. Possibly again a symptom?

-greg


>Message: 1
>Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2010 13:34:51 -0700
>From: mike cole <lchcmike@gmail.com>
>Subject: Re: [xmca] The Non-modular Mind
>To: Larry Purss <lpscholar2@gmail.com>
>Cc: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
>Message-ID:
>	<AANLkTil_SStSd6MqZCWKUp1G328NHmfVutnaAyUF4pd6@mail.gmail.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
>I *think* the conversation is contiguous, Larry. Tomorrow it
will be at the
>archives and we can double check, or someone who has not
posted in it can
>tell us.
>
>Guess I better find the Kirschner and Martin book! I was
discussing a
>version of the following issue with a colleague while running
errands just
>now:
>*Some accounts emphasize dynamic emergence and others
emphasize how we are
>implicated and constituted [and constrained] by historical
traditions.*
>
>In our conversation this issue came up in terms of the
question of why Luria
>was so interested in Freud and the question of the role of
cultural
>mediation in cultural-historical and freudian theories.
Musing over this
>issue some time ago, I came to the tentative conclusion that
for Freud
>culture operates as constraint/inhibition of impulses while
in general the
>Russians emphasized the tool-like nature of culture and
cultural mediation.
>But I think this one sided interpretation of the Russians in
correct, and
>perhaps wrong in the opposite way for Freud-- perhaps you can
enlighten me
>on that side.
>
>But for the Russians there are many very clear statements
that mediated
>action requires the individual to subordinate themselves to
the tool (the
>"freudian" side, *in order* to realize the instrumental
potential of action.
>There are many expressions of this idea that self control and
control of the
>environment (including others) are part of a single process.
This in turn is
>closely linked to their ideas about "will" -- we learn to
"control ourselves
>from the outside."
>
>Applied to the two emphases in your summary of K&M my current
view is that
>the two positions are only emphases, not difference in
principle, but two
>sides of the same coin. Withoutout the constraints of
tradition (culture as
>the accumulated resources for acting in the world) humans
would be helpless,
>but such resources, never being entirely adequate or even
adequately
>understood, emergence is ineluctable, unless, of course, the
social group is
>to die out.
>
>I associate these ideas also with Giddens and others who
adopt the mantra
>that constrains are both constraining in the usual sense and
enabling.
>Nicolas Bernstein, whose focus was on movement, argued
strongly for the
>reduction of degrees of freedom as essential to coordinated
action.
>
>Thanks for letting me know that the mandelstam translation
piece got
>through.
>
>mike
>On Sun, Jun 6, 2010 at 11:21 AM, Larry Purss
<lpscholar2@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Mike
>> One more quick question on using gmail.
>> I'm responding to your email and I don't know if only your
last message
>> plus my response is getting sent to CHAT or if all the
previous threads
>> starting with David's email 24 hours ago also are trailing
behind.  I'm
>> trying to be conscious of  not clogging up the listserve
archives with
>> redundant emails.?
>>
>> You asked the question about our response to having read
the Mandelshtam
>> post.  My personal reaction was to be fascinated with the
>> narrative structure and imaginative interpretative depth of
historical
>> understanding required when "translating".  As I read the
article I was
>> reminded of  the power of historical CONTEXT and Martin's
reminder that
>> every time we encounter a text something NEW EMERGES.  The
translation, from
>> a hermeneutical framework,  was adding layers of CONTEXT
[especially
>> historical traditions] to the reflective process of
translation.
>> Translation is more than a process of "uncovering" or
"discovery".  It is
>> also a collaboration between the text [and its historical
context], the
>> translator [and his/her historical context], and the reader
[and the
>> reader's historical context].
>> Reading the article I was immersed in the emergence of a deeper
>> appreciation of how we are  historically implicated.  It
was a wonderful
>> piece of writing.
>>
>> That leads to the question of how profoundly we are
CONSTITUTED by
>> TRADITIONS [as discussed in hermeneutical accounts]. 
Kirschner's and Jack
>> Martin's edited volume point out this is one of the major
debates in
>> sociocultural theory. Some accounts emphasize dynamic
emergence and others
>> emphasize how we are implicated and constituted [and
constrained] by
>> historical traditions.  In their introduction to their book
[excerpted at
>> google books] they point out the various sociocultural
accounts take
>> different positions on this emergence/tradition conversation.
>> How I view this tension makes a difference in how I
position my self in
>> school settings.  I personally take the view that the more
I can reflect on
>> how determined and constituted I am by traditions, the more
I can take a
>> perspective on these real constraints and in the process of
becoming more
>> reflective I actually become more agentive in my capacity
to be somewhat
>> more self-determined and free to imagine alternative
futures.  It is this
>> developing capacity to be reflective on how we are
constituted within
>> sociocultural traditions that creates an opening to be
other than I am
>> now.
>>
>> Larry
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Jun 6, 2010 at 9:34 AM, mike cole
<lchcmike@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Combining Mead and Vygotsky makes a lot of sense, Larry.
See the Edwards
>>> article in Cambridge Companion to LSV. (I have got the
Reddy and Stern
>>> books
>>> now-- I would love to see a discussion of the very opening
of Stern and of
>>> course we all are interested in the early
infancy/sociality issue). I also
>>> REALLY would like to see a discussion of the Zinchenko
article on Word and
>>> Meaning in the Companion. Lots of key issues raised there.
>>>
>>> David-- I wanted to call *Cultural Psychology*, "culture
in mind" but
>>> Brad's book came out about two months before CP went to
press and the
>>> marketer at Harvard called me on the phone and told me, on
the spot, to
>>> come
>>> up with a new title. So I took an old title with a
question mark at the
>>> end,
>>> put a period in its place, and the rest is the rest. I
have not really
>>> interacted with him around the substance of his ideas.
>>>
>>> I do not think I have gotten a copy of the Kirschner and
Martin edited
>>> volume, Larry. But maybe I have and it is on the periously
high stack of
>>> must reads. My problem is that i feel a strong compulsion
to re-re-read
>>> ch6
>>> of T&S right now and contibute to Andy's electronic
symposium project. And
>>> I
>>> spent last evening with Zinchenko, thinking (actually,
truth be old, Zinky
>>> had to share time with Moll Flanders -- now there is an
interesting
>>> couple!).
>>>
>>> Did anyone get that article about translating Mandelshtam?
I thought it
>>> worth discussion but maybe that because I have spent so
much time with
>>> Fernando Rey struggling to find a way to navigate
Russian-Spanish-English
>>> quotations in a way that did not bog the reader down in
all the
>>> complexities, which would detract attention from the point
he is trying to
>>> make. Still, Mandelshtam is a major inspiration for LSV
and Zinchenko, and
>>> the multi-lingual travails of translation.
>>>
>>> mike
>>> PS-- I will add the Zinchenko article to the list of "to
scans" although
>>> the
>>> entire Companion turned out to have several interesting
articles in it.
>>>
>>> On Sun, Jun 6, 2010 at 7:15 AM, Larry Purss
<lpscholar2@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> > Andy
>>> > Your little shift with the term "My only objection" is
what I've learned
>>> > ......
>>> >
>>> > is actually the core issue of evaluating the "common
good" or "common
>>> > dread"
>>> > of this powerful tool.
>>> >
>>> > I also struggle between the power of the internet as a
forum of EMERGING
>>> > DYNAMIC IMAGINARIES  [emerging traditions]  that
challenge any
>>> > presuppositions I have [what I at the moment take to be
"normal"] and
>>> the
>>> > power of a book to consolidate and anchor these emerging
ideas.  My
>>> hunch
>>> > is
>>> > that the emerging "tradition" of CONSTITUTIVE
sociocultural psychology
>>> is
>>> > partially emerging as a developmental consequence of the
internet [which
>>> I
>>> > believe has the power to radically change our notions of
"education" and
>>> > "psychology" and also has the power to develop new
psychological
>>> accounts
>>> > and new KINDS OF PERSONS]
>>> >
>>> > Michael mentioned he is trying to get a PDF of the
Sluencko and Hengl
>>> > article from the "handbook of  Sociocultural Psychology"
>>> > In the spirit in which that book was written, I want to
recommend a new
>>> > book
>>> > which I believe will draw us away from the internet to
consolidate these
>>> > emerging ideas. The book "The Sociocultural Turn in
Psychology" by
>>> SUZANNE
>>> > KIRSCHNER and JACK MARTIN" seems to bring together in
one volume most of
>>> > the
>>> > various theories in the new CONSTITUTIVE sociocultural
psychology.
>>> > If you go to goggle books and read the EXCERPT of the
book published on
>>> > line
>>> > it gives an excellent summary of the last two decades of
work in this
>>> > tradition.
>>> > The book suggests their are 4 theoretical accounts that are
>>> interconnecting
>>> > in this developing tradition.
>>> >
>>> > 1]  Discursive and social constructionism
>>> > 2]  Hermeneutic realism
>>> > 3]  Dialogical
>>> > 4] neo-Vygotskian CHAT
>>> >
>>> > Its interesting that they discussed social relational
psychoanalysis as
>>> a
>>> > tradition within this tradition but left it out of this
book because
>>> this
>>> > account is being developed outside of university settings.
>>> >
>>> > Michael Cole has a chapter in this book as a
representative of the 4th
>>> > tradition.
>>> >
>>> > A brief comment on JACK MARTIN, one of the editors of
this volume.  He
>>> has
>>> > recently co-published an article with Alex Gillespie and
both these
>>> authors
>>> > are ELABORATING a NEO-MEADIAN account of development
that I personally
>>> > believe is a coherent account of how "agency" and "self"
emerge through
>>> > levels of social participation {MEAD'S SOCIAL ACTS}.  I
have not seen
>>> > Mead's
>>> > CONSTITUTIVE SOCIAL RELATIONAL account of development
throughout the
>>> > lifespan [as articulated by Jack Martin and Alex
Gillespie} discussed on
>>> > CHAT. Having their chapter in this book will bring this
particular
>>> > developmental account into wider discussion within the
developmental
>>> > community. It is written withiin a historiogenetic as
well as
>>> ontogenetic
>>> > account.
>>> >
>>> > The book that Jack Martin and Suzanne Kirschner have
written seems to
>>> have
>>> > promise to make more coherent the various themes and
threads that are
>>> > currently developing a taprestry called "constitutive
sociocultural
>>> > psychology"
>>> >
>>> > I'm curious how others view these competing notions of
development and
>>> what
>>> > are common themes and where they need further analysis.
I was excited to
>>> > learn about this book as I see the many ideas that often
keep me up
>>> nights,
>>> > collected in one anthology.
>>> >
>>> > Have any of you already got a copy of the book?
>>> > Both the authors have previously been the president of
the "Theory and
>>> > Philosophy" section of the APA so have the recognition
of their peers.
>>> >
>>> > I'm hoping to track down this book and try to remember
how to read for
>>> > hours
>>> > at a time or is my mind now an "internet mind?"
>>> > As a personal evaluation, this format leads be to books
such as Jack
>>> > Martin's which I would be ignorant of without this tool.
>>> >
>>> > Larry
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Sun, Jun 6, 2010 at 3:19 AM, Andy Blunden
<ablunden@mira.net> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > Enjoyed the "Google is rotting your brain" article.
There is no doubt
>>> > that
>>> > > I suffer from this syndrome. The only way I can get
through a decent
>>> book
>>> > > nowadays is by taking myself right away from the
screen. And I then
>>> miss
>>> > it.
>>> > > My only objection would be that if it weren't for
everything that I've
>>> > > learnt via the internet (like with xmca) then I
wouldn't be able to,
>>> or
>>> > even
>>> > > want to, read these good books in any case.
>>> > >
>>> > > Andy
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > > mike cole wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > >> I heard the book written about below discussed on NPR
earlier this
>>> week,
>>> > >> and
>>> > >> your note induced me to dig out and send along. Seems
relevant to
>>> your
>>> > >> comments.
>>> > >> mike
>>> > >>
>>> > >>
http://www.salon.com/books/laura_miller/2010/05/09/the_shallows
>>> > >>
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > >  _______________________________________________
>>> > > 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
>>>
>>
>>
<ablunden@mira.net>
>> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > > Enjoyed the "Google is rotting your brain" article.
There is no
>> doubt
>> >> > that
>> >> > > I suffer from this syndrome. The only way I can get
through a decent
>> >> book
>> >> > > nowadays is by taking myself right away from the
screen. And I then
>> >> miss
>> >> > it.
>> >> > > My only objection would be that if it weren't for
everything that
>> I've
>> >> > > learnt via the internet (like with xmca) then I
wouldn't be able to,
>> >> or
>> >> > even
>> >> > > want to, read these good books in any case.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Andy
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > > mike cole wrote:
>> >> > >
>> >> > >> I heard the book written about below discussed on
NPR earlier this
>> >> week,
>> >> > >> and
>> >> > >> your note induced me to dig out and send along.
Seems relevant to
>> >> your
>> >> > >> comments.
>> >> > >> mike
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >>
http://www.salon.com/books/laura_miller/2010/05/09/the_shallows
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > >  _______________________________________________
>> >> > > 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
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>
>
>End of xmca Digest, Vol 61, Issue 6
>***********************************
---------------------------------------
Greg Thompson
Ph.D. Candidate
The Department of Comparative Human Development
The University of Chicago
_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca