[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [xmca] Vygotsky on Leading Activity



Yes, it struck me this way too, and I'd be interested in David Ki's take on the *first three sections of "Historical Crisis"* as a matter of fact. I see that Vygotsky by no means sees this "leading" activity in a heroic role. He describes it in similar terms to those that David Ki/Kuhn describes paradigms seeking for conquest actually, aggressively competing for global dominance and ending up as an empty abstraction. So looking at the history of psychology since Vygotsky's death, it seems to me that Cognitivism was the leading branch of psychology in the post-WW2 period, squarely founded on the developments of IT and then neurobiology in the period following the rise in resolution of imaging technology in the past couple of decades. Anyway, Vygotsky's Spiel, which falls somewhere between Hegel, Marx and Thomas Kuhn I am finding a very stimulating read.

mike cole wrote:
Odd to think there is a single answer to the question posted in #1, Andy. Seems like this is some version of the discussion of paradigms and paradigm shifts with a "leading" element tossed in.

mike

On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 7:33 PM, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>> wrote:

    I have just started re-reading Vygotsky's "Historical Crisis" from
    the beginning, for the first time for many years (I have looked a
    cetain "hot" topics, but not read it from the beginning for
    years). There is a pair of insights which he offers which I'd like
    to remind people of.

    (1) He says that at different stages in the history of psychology,
    one or another branch of psychology plays the "leading role."
    First the psychology of the normal adult person, then pathology
    and then the psychology of the unconscious. He asks: "Which
    discipline should lead, unify, and elaborate the basic concepts,
    principles, and methods, verify and systematise the data of all
    other areas?

    He then goes on to consider the same problem in a slightly
    different way: "What makes the most diverse phenomena into
    psychological facts - from the salivation in a dog to the
    enjoyment of a tragedy, what do the ravings of a madman and the
    rigorous computations of the mathematician share?" In other words,
    what is the concept of psychology and its subject matter? He then
    goes on to look at three competing answers, based on reflections
    of the proposed leading roles to be given to subjective
    psychology, animal psychology or psychoanalysis: "For general
    psychology the three answers mean, respectively that it is a
    science of (1) the mental and its properties, or (2) behaviour; or
    (3) the unconscious." This leads very directly to a consideration
    of the concept of psychology in terms of a unit of analysis.

    Could we give an answer to the question as to which branch of
    general psychology plays the "leading role" today, in these very
    historical/objective terms?

    Andy
-- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Hegel Summer School: The New Atheism: Just Another Dogma?
    <http://ethicalpolitics.org/seminars/hss2011.htm>

    __________________________________________
    _____
    xmca mailing list
    xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
    http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca



--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hegel Summer School: The New Atheism: Just Another Dogma? <http://ethicalpolitics.org/seminars/hss2011.htm>

__________________________________________
_____
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca