[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [xmca] Re: microgenesis?
On 14 October 2012 06:18, Greg Thompson <greg.a.thompson@gmail.com> wrote:
> Not sure if I responded off list first or if Andy did, but we have been
> having a conversation offline that I thought I'd put online.
>
> I find "lytic" to be a fascinating way of describing development if one
> reads the word literally as meaning "dissolving" or "loosen" instead of
> Andy's gloss as "gradual," which, imho, loses important potential of the
> meaning of "lytic development."
>
> Having worked doing cell culture in a lab before, I often had to "lyse"
> cells. This is when you introduce an enzyme or other mechanism to break up
> the cell wall so that you are left with the constituent parts (e.g.
> mitochondria, DNA, mRNA, and lots of other proteins). You can then perform
> further tests on the lysed material that can cause the material to be
> organized in a way that would otherwise have been impossible (e.g., perform
> electrophoresis to see what mRNA are present).
>
> It seems like there is something very important in this sense of the word
> "lytic" for understanding development. It seems that part of what is being
> described here is the sense in which developments can actually involve the
> breaking down (lysing!) of previous psychological "structures" or
> "formations". This seems to me to be a wonderful corrective to the commonly
> assumed model of development as simple linear progression.
>
> For example, there is a classic example of very young kids who can
> conjugate verbs correctly b.c. they have memorized each conjugation for
> each tense (e.g. run - present tense, ran - past tense), but then when they
> start to learn the rules of conjugation, they sometimes will no longer
> produce them correctly b.c. some past tenses don't fit the patterns that
> they are learning - e.g., past tense of "run" is not "runned". So their
> memorized understanding of "ran" must be "lysed"! The result is that from
> the dissolving (loosening?) of that prior structure of meanings a new
> meaning emerges (here the formal rule: add "ed" to the present tense of a
> verb to make it past tense).
>
> Does this jive with others' understandings of "lytic development"?
>
On the whole, yes. Although I would be cautious to make those particular
inductions.
The loosening needn't dissolve the functional capability of the
"sub-components", and likewise there is nothing to to prevent multiple
functional capabilities for conjugating verbs, with a dominant method
primed for a particular context and way of relating.
Huw
>
> -greg
>
>
>
>
> On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 6:47 PM, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net> wrote:
>
> > Unfortunately I can't find the source from where I found the meaning of
> > lytical. It's not in the on-line OED.
> > The context is here: http://www.marxists.org/**
> > archive/vygotsky/works/1934/**problem-age.htm<
> http://www.marxists.org/archive/vygotsky/works/1934/problem-age.htm>where
> I have inserted an explanation to the effect that lytical as opposed
> > to critical means fading from one to the other rather than making a
> sudden
> > "leap" with no stable in-between positions. So by using the two words,
> both
> > with Greek roots, Vygotsky is drawing attention to two interdependent
> types
> > of development: one fading out and in, the other cutting from one to the
> > other. So yes, it is a bit more specific than "gradual".
> >
> > Andy
> >
> > Greg Thompson wrote:
> >
> >> Apologies for the intrusion, but I had a quick point of clarification,
> >> for the uninitiated, what is meant by "lytic"?
> >> (all I could come up with pertained to "lysis" or the breaking down of
> >> cells - which would seem to suggest a different sense of "development"
> - a
> >> breaking down so that things can be reintegrated. Is that the idea?).
> >> -greg
> >>
> >>
> >> On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 9:15 AM, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net<mailto:
> >> ablunden@mira.net>> wrote:
> >>
> >> I don't know where Americans being dolts comes into it, Mike. Some
> >> of my best friends are Americans. :) But let's move on from that.
> >>
> >> The point, as I see it, is trying to extract from what we can
> >> reaonsably understand Vygotsky to be saying, something which we
> >> believe could be correct and significant. To do this I think we
> >> have to understand the concept of "development" always in a
> >> particular context. A truism for anyone here I think. What it
> >> means to me is that I cannot just ask: what transformations in
> >> psychological functioning constitutes "development"? The
> >> necessary, relevant context is what role in what cultural and
> >> historical community is the person to play, in the short term and
> >> in the longer term. So the question of what constitutes
> >> development is age-specific, culturally specific and
> future-oriented.
> >>
> >> (Of course, the world changes, and what was development yesterday
> >> may become oppressive and detestable tomorrow and vice versa, but
> >> let's abstract from cultural and historical change for the moment.)
> >>
> >> >From the standpoint of natural science what I have posed is an
> >> absurdity and incompatible with basic tenets of science ...
> >> because I have made development dependent on events and relations
> >> in the future. In my opinion, that is just as it should be: kids
> >> go to school "for a purpose" - although what we mean by "purpose"
> >> in this context (the child's? the parents'? the state's? in
> >> retrospect? under advice? sponatneous?). But again, let's just put
> >> the problems arising from the idea of human actions being part of
> >> object-oriented activities to the side for the moment.
> >>
> >> So you ask: "what does the word DEVELOPMENT mean in the concept of
> >> a zone of proximal DEVELOPMENT?"
> >>
> >> I have to ask /which/ zone of proximal development, which crisis
> >> or lytic period are we talking about. Now I guess we can manage to
> >> give a general answer to the question: general questions require
> >> general answers. What "development" means is relative to which ZPD
> >> you are talking about. On the other hand, the presence of the ZPD
> >> itself depends on the development being posed. Achievment of a
> >> specific new mode of action with those around you, transforming
> >> your relations and your identity and your actions in the social
> >> situation depends on the expectations of those around you,
> >> according to broader cultural expectations and possibilities.
> >>
> >> A teacher or other "helper" interested in fostering development
> >> (if they can be presumed to reflect general, broader cultural
> >> expectations) has in mind what new functioning will be a necessary
> >> step towards the child becoming an autonomous citizen of the
> >> community.
> >>
> >> As Vygotsky insists, this poses for the child and her "helper" two
> >> different kinds of situation: either /lytical/ development or
> >> /critical/ development. Lytical development is gradual and
> >> prepares the basis for developmental leap. To argue whether the
> >> gradual progress made in strengthening the relevant psychologhical
> >> functions in this phase is or is not development is in my opinion
> >> /just words/. Gradual accumulation of strength in those activities
> >> which the child is basically able to do, but maybe not very
> >> confidentally and well is a necessary preparation for transcending
> >> their age-role and entering into a phase of critical development
> >> in which they have a chance of successfully coming out the other
> >> side. It is by completion of the critical phase of development -
> >> the leap - which transforms the child's identity and role, that
> >> "/the development" is realised/. All the preparation in the world
> >> proves to be not development if it is not realised in facilitating
> >> the critical transformation.
> >>
> >> So, excuse me please for however imperfectly rehearsing
> >> egg-sucking for grandma's erudition.
> >>
> >> I personally regard it as a matter or "mere words" whether "child
> >> X at last managing to recognise the difference between d and b
> >> today," for example, is described as a development. In the context
> >> of course it is; it is a step. You want to call that a
> >> "microgenetic development"? Personally I don't have a problem with
> >> that. David may, but paraphrasing Oscar Wilde: "Microgenesis is
> >> not one of my words." But if the child at last managed to repeat
> >> the Gospel According to St Luke by rote, and you wanted to
> >> describe this as a microgenetic development, I would want to hear
> >> the developmental plan that made that claim coherent.
> >>
> >> Where if anywhere does this leave us?
> >>
> >> Andy
> >> My apologies for using so many words to say so little.
> >> Just trying to be clear and careful.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> mike cole wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Andy--
> >>
> >> Well to begin with, thanks for keeping the discussion alive. I
> >> am away from home without books or control of my time, so I
> >> want to ask a question that may highlight what is central to
> >> my queries here.
> >>
> >> If what you write is correct, what does the word DEVELOPMENT
> >> mean in the concept of a zone of proximal DEVELOPMENT? Its all
> >> fine and dandy to point out what dolts Americans are for not
> >> understanding that learning leads DEVELOPMENT in classroom
> >> instruction, that but classroom lessons are clusters of events
> >> that take place in microgenetic time WITHIN ontogenetic lythic
> >> periods.
> >>
> >> Where does that leave us?
> >>
> >> mike
> >>
> >> PS- the url below lays out in some detail where the idea of
> >> acquisition of reading as a cultural-historical developmental
> >> process. Old and never published. But at least we might refine
> >> what is indexed by the phrase
> >> "learning to read."
> >>
> >> http://lchc.ucsd.edu/People/**NEWTECHN.pdf<
> http://lchc.ucsd.edu/People/NEWTECHN.pdf>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 7:32 PM, Andy Blunden
> >> <ablunden@mira.net <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>
> >> <mailto:ablunden@mira.net <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>>> wrote:
> >>
> >> So this thread does not die ...
> >> You said, Mike, "So I am seeing the same solution to
> thinking
> >> about the ontogeny/microgenesis relationships by analogy
> >> with the
> >> phylogeny/cultural-history relation."
> >>
> >> I don't see the analogy there. Phylogeny and ethnogeny are
> two
> >> (overlapping and mutually determining) processes with two
> very
> >> distinct material bases, viz., genes and artefacts. But
> >> learning
> >> to read/write and development of abstract thinking (and
> other
> >> leading activities in a developmental ZPD) is not such a
> >> relation,
> >> it is a relation between critical phases and lytic (gradual)
> >> phases of development. This is quite a different
> relationship.
> >>
> >> The analogy I would see for something which couold be called
> >> microgenesis would be the /situation/: a concept develops
> >> momentrily in a person and their actions in a situation. The
> >> situation is not a factor in phylo- or ethnogensis, it
> >> essentially
> >> belongs to the very short time scale, and its material
> >> basis is
> >> activity. I grant that no-one might use "microgenesis" in
> >> that way
> >> and no-one may be doing research into that process these
> >> days. I
> >> don't know. But the situation is a distinct material basis
> for
> >> development and one on which Vygotsky did a great deal of
> >> work. On
> >> the other hand, I think /all/ processes of development
> >> have both
> >> critical and lytical phases (c.f. Gould's punctuated
> >> evolution).
> >>
> >> What do you think?
> >>
> >> Andy
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ______________________________**____________
> >> _____
> >> xmca mailing list
> >> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> >>
> >> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/**listinfo/xmca<
> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D.
> >> 883 Spencer W. Kimball Tower
> >> Department of Anthropology
> >> Brigham Young University
> >> Provo, UT 84602
> >> http://byu.academia.edu/**GregoryThompson<
> http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson>
> >>
> >>
> > --
> > ------------------------------**------------------------------**
> > ------------
> >
> > *Andy Blunden*
> > Home Page: http://home.mira.net/~andy/
> > Book: http://www.brill.nl/concepts
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D.
> 883 Spencer W. Kimball Tower
> Department of Anthropology
> Brigham Young University
> Provo, UT 84602
> http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson
> __________________________________________
> _____
> 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