Re: [xmca] activity (was concepts)

[Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>]

On 23 April 2011 06:41, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net> wrote:

> I'll leave Marx on comm9odity Fetishsm for the moment, Martin, and solely
> to make the point that I am not alone on this business of meaning as act.
>
> For example, V P Zinchenko's "Vygotsky's ideas about units for the analysis
> of mind', iubn Culture, Communication and cognition: Vygvotskyan
> Perspectives, ed J V Wertsch CUP 1985, pp. 94-118:
>
>   “one can consider tool-mediated action as being very close to
>   meaning as unit of analysis.”
>

Quick question, Andy.  Are you distinguishing instances and classifications?

I can demonstrate a plan by executing it.  I can refer to the execution as
an example of my plan.  But the execution in not a plan.

Huw


>
> and Engestrom's "Learning by Expanding":
>
>   “According to Vygotsky, the instrumentally mediated act ‘is the
>   simplest segment of behavior that is dealt with by research based on
>   elementary units’.”
>
> Andy
>
>
>
>
>
> Martin Packer wrote:
>
>> I'm still not seeing your argument, Andy. A word is not a natural object,
>> of course. No more than is a commodity. I haven't claimed that, nor does
>> Vygotsky. I thought you were trying to argue that word-meaning must be an
>> act. Are you suggesting that the commodity-form is an act?
>>
>> Think about it this way. We accept Marx's analysis of the commodity,
>> including the fact that it has a form, and an internal contradiction between
>> two kinds of value. It has these characteristics, of course, by virtue of
>> its constitution in human society, in social practices. But a newborn baby
>> recognizes none of these characteristics. Marx doesn't tell us how a child
>> comes to grasp them. That remains an untold developmental story. To tell
>> that story we don't to rehash what Marx's analysis has already made clear.
>> We focus instead on the child.
>>
>> LSV, similarly, is not directly interested in how human language evolved,
>> or how a language is maintained by a community of speakers. In other words,
>> he does not analyze how words have come to have inner form, or how that form
>> changes historically. He tells us enough to establish the fact that the form
>> does exist, and that it does change. He is focused, rather, on the ways in
>> which a child comes to be a full participant in the world of human language
>> and, in consequence, of human thought.
>> Martin
>>
>> On Apr 22, 2011, at 7:56 PM, Andy Blunden wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> You demonstrate my point exactly, Martin.
>>> The commodity form is a relationship between people mediated by an
>>> artifact., not a thing.
>>> Andy
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
> __________________________________________
> _____
> 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