[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[xmca] Taking the HAT out of CHAT
- To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
- Subject: [xmca] Taking the HAT out of CHAT
- From: Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net>
- Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2010 20:54:29 +1100
- Delivered-to: xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
- In-reply-to: <AANLkTi=zUf8xLPTygcsw8io5A1NGNM28adAhtuq54-AE@mail.gmail.com>
- List-archive: <http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca>
- List-help: <mailto:xmca-request@weber.ucsd.edu?subject=help>
- List-id: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca.weber.ucsd.edu>
- List-post: <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
- List-subscribe: <http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca>, <mailto:xmca-request@weber.ucsd.edu?subject=subscribe>
- List-unsubscribe: <http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca>, <mailto:xmca-request@weber.ucsd.edu?subject=unsubscribe>
- References: <AANLkTimKfMrRe6Qx52pKCn9w8GJBNp2b-hS8ZTzgEtZ+@mail.gmail.com> <326530.64578.qm@web110306.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <AANLkTi=zUf8xLPTygcsw8io5A1NGNM28adAhtuq54-AE@mail.gmail.com>
- Reply-to: ablunden@mira.net, "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
- Sender: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu
- User-agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (Windows/20090812)
*Response to Poehner and Lantolf.*
Not being an L2 teacher or any other kind of teacher, I will limit my
comments to Poehner and Lantolf’s attack on philosophy. That they can
quote Vygotsky in support of their cause is neither here nor there, as
Vygotsky’s entire lifetime is testimony to the place he gave to
philosophy in his critique of psychology, and /vice versa/, and the
great admirer of Spinoza could be quoted in the opposite spirit just as
well.
“... Practice sets the tasks and serves as the supreme judge of
theory, as its truth criterion. It dictates how to construct the
concepts and how to formulate the laws.” (Vygotsky, 2004, p. 304)
Vygotsky concludes that the highest test of a theory is practice and
that the distinction that had been made between general and applied
psychology (e.g., industrial, educational psychology) was not only
invalid but in fact, as he convincingly argued in “The Crisis,”
applied psychology /is /psychology. This was, for Vygotsky, the full
implication of Marx’s Eleventh Thesis on Feuerbach for the science
of psychology: “Marx has said that it was enough for philosophers to
have interpreted the world, now it’s time to change it” (Vygotsky,
1997b, pp. 9–10).
The claim that “practice is the truth criterion” for theory is the
position of pragmatism, not Marxism. This may seem like splitting hairs,
after all Marx does say in Thesis 2: “The question whether objective
truth can be attributed to human thinking is not a question of theory
but is a *practical* question. Man must prove the truth ... in practice.
The dispute over the reality or non-reality of thinking which is
isolated from practice is a purely scholastic question.”
But the passage of 150 years has clarified matters. “Applied psychology
/is /psychology,” and the interpretation of Thesis 11, “... it was
enough for philosophers to have interpreted the world, now it’s time to
change it” makes things clear. Thesis 11 is saying that the point of
philosophy is to change the world. In the absence of the socialist
utopia, then, philosophy is not done for. The revolution Vygotsky
wrought in /philosophy/ is testimony enough to that. The cry that the
time for philosophy is past is a call to abandon philosophy.
In this context, L2 theory may be fraught with dualisms, but it seems to
me that there is a fashion nowadays to point to dualisms everywhere
without justification, so I am not impressed with the claim of 20
dualisms which might just as well be 20 valid distinctions. My
suspicions are confirmed when the authors themselves posit a false
dichotomy: “mediation through cultural concepts” versus “mediation
through social interaction.” This is a new dualism to me; probably it is
what lies behind the neologism of “SCT” which the authors use to
supplant CHAT. But more of that later.
What on earth is a “/cultural/ concept”? What are “/non/-cultural
concepts”? And how is an action to be mediated by a (cultural) concept
/other than/ as part of a social interaction.” And what kind of
interactions are /not/ social? And what is it that is being mediated
other than the (social) use of a (cultural) artefact? Is there any other
way of using an artefact other than in the course of a /socially/
meaningful action? How is a “cultural artefact” used without “social
interaction”? How is a “social interaction” effected without the use of
“cultural artefacts” or some other type of non-cultural artefact?
So this is a false dichotomy. But what end does it serve? Well, it
justifies the use of SCT = Socio-Cultural Theory, by (1) inserting
“socio-” usually by contrast with “societal,” (2) dropping the
“Historical” dimension of development, and more importantly (3) dropping
Activity. So we have come full circle. The meaning of the use of Theses
on Feuerbach against itself is to reduce Activity to being the test or
manifestation of Theory. But the opposite is just as valid: Theory is
the manifestation of Activity, a.k.a. Practice.
Andy
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Andy Blunden*
Joint Editor MCA: http://lchc.ucsd.edu/MCA/Journal/
Home Page: http://home.mira.net/~andy/
Videos: http://vimeo.com/user3478333/videos
Book: http://www.brill.nl/default.aspx?partid=227&pid=34857
MIA: http://www.marxists.org
__________________________________________
_____
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca