Thank you Andy, there are typos. My doubt about dual stimulation
does arise from its role in intervention. When you say 'just here' I'm
taking you to mean just between notions and grasping abstract concept
'germ cell', though as transitory objects in action research are just
those kind of concepts ( theoretical& explanatory, generating
phenomena and also enabling the transition movement to be revealed) -
which isn't a 'wild' transition' but is intervention based on the
value of achieving evaluation using theoretical analysis.
There's a troublesome reaching back into what is 'notional' with what
is already abstract ( but brought in by a researcher/teacher/some
other), this does happen , though the resources to enable conditions
favourable for exploration in intervention settings are often far
different to 'Ok what's the idea your so keen on, who's any good at
it, let's give it a go'.
When you emphasise that 'Each of those steps (Hegel called them
"grades" rather than "stages" sometimes) includes and sublates others
in a kind of cascade. It is not a neat sequence of events, culminating
in a "new stable form of practice" , this seems to be very true , but
it's also of a form of theoretical thinking to be so. Maybe I'd see
them differently, ( my influences/background's different.:)
• The first action is that of..
expressing disquiet with some situation or practice
• The second action is that of ..
identifying relationships that are significant to those attending to
the expressions or feeling of disquiet
( Here origins and explanatory mechanisms are drawing on theoretical
thinking already - so either this is present in practice , from
varius discipines but not necessarily affording analytical insight
across groups etc. So what is set out below as 'second' is problematic
/Analysis involves mental, discursive or practical transformation
of the situation in order to find out origins and explanatory
mechanisms./
• The third action is that of ...
identifying abstract concepts , and " /modeling a new explanatory
relationship in some publicly observable and transmittable medium.
This means constructing an explicit, simplified model of the new
idea, a germ cell, that explains the problematic situation and
offers a perspective for resolving and transforming it./" ( as
there are various potentialities)
• /The fourth action is that of ....
examining the ( relevant aspects through) model/ *S*,
/..... experimenting on it in order to fully
grasp its dynamics, potentials, and limitations../
in relation to actual living practice.
• The fifth action is that of ...
/ concretizing / developing thinking and taking action to evaluate
and refine /by means of practical applications, enrichments,
and conceptual extensions./
• / The sixth and seventh actions are those of reflecting on
and evaluating the process and consolidating its outcomes into a
new stable form of practice./
Though still focussing on moving from notions and dual stimulation
there are conditions conducive and if the germ cell isn't already
there , then such rational thinking isn't what is affording (the aha
moment), 'the conditions' are other aspects. Not to draw too much out
here, I was deepening my reading of Ilyenkov ( I'm still in Chapter
1), by reading VV Davydov's Chapter 2 inActivity Theory and Social
Practice , ' Activity Structure and Content - and his view that
nothing can be said about activity without understanding how
'spititual or organic desire' and how it's tranformed into a need.
Needs and desires make the basis on which emotions function. He says
later the general functions emotions perform is that they enable a
person to set a certain vital task; but they enable a person to decide
from the very beginning whether physical , spiritual and moral means
to fulfil a task are available, if not the task isn't taken up. Seems
that these aspects might be relevant to 'conditions' for whatever
'actions' of whole process.
In this vein 'transitional object' might be more aking to Winnicott's.
Though in schooling teaching 'formal concepts' what happens?
Christine.
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 12:49 AM, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net
<mailto:ablunden@mira.net>> wrote:
Enjoy your Ilyenkov, Christine. If you come across any typos,
please send them to me.
Yes, the third action is the formation of the "germ cell" -
getting to the abstract heart of the problem - and is therefore
exactly what Ilyenkov is talking about in the passage you cite.
But whether the concept of double stimulation helps just here I
don't know. And also, I personally think it is worth devoting some
time to grasping the *whole process* of concept formation and this
paragraph of Engestrom's is one of the few places where a writer
attempts to do this and analyse it. So I would encourage people to
work on that whole process, rather than picking out one action,
important as that also is.
The ideal-typical line of development which Yrjo has presented
here is proposed as ideal-typical of "concept formation in the
wild," as that is the title he himself chose for the special
issue. But it looks much more to me like the ideal-typical
sequence of cognitive acts for an intervention. In general, I find
the germ cell is *discovered* not "constructed" or "modelled."
This moment, the "Aha! moment," has always been one of the most
challenging ones for "logicians" to describe. It is a *leap*. In
general I would say it is a sudden insight that more resembles a
moment of discovery than a "construction."
One the other hand, I think the danger in presenting the concept
of concept as an ideal-typical line of development (something
which I also advocate) is that the reader may easily slip into the
illusion that the given moment (here the discovery of the germ
cell) or action, is a once-off moment. In fact, the germ-cell may
be discovered in what turns out to be a misconception, but may
nonetheless run the full gammet up to objectification and "a new
stable form of practice" before falling into contradiction with
itself and entering into conflict with a new germ cell, and being
sublated into a new, deeper concept of the problem which figures
in "action 1." This applies to all Yrjo's actions listed here.
But one of the great merits of Engestrom's writing is that his
reseach reports are equally much teaching and learning
instruments, and this neat seven-step program functions as an
excellent guide to practice. But one should remember that a real
concept is not an ideal-typical concept (NB readers of Vygotsky).
Each of those steps (Hegel called them "grades" rather than
"stages" sometimes) includes and sublates others in a kind of
cascade. It is not a neat sequence of events, culminating in a
"new stable form of practice" signalling the end of the
intervention and time to settle up and go home. The process of
concept development never stops.
Andy
Christine Schweighart wrote:
Hi Andy,
In the third action, developing an abstraction - Yryo's work
uses a generic model in dual stimulation. This draws upon his
historical development as argued in his research.
Is it not also possible to explore this third action as an
abstraction without that particular model structure, I ask
because I'm reading this section of Chapter 1 of Ilyenkov:
http://www.marxists.org/archive/ilyenkov/works/abstract/abstra1d.htm
"The task of logic as a science grows out of the real needs of
the developing cognition of the phenomena of the surrounding
world. The question with which a thinking man turns to logic
as a science is not at all the question of how abstractions
should be made in general, how one can learn to abstract the
general from the sensually given facts. To do that, one need
not at all ask the logicians’ advice, one merely has to have a
command of one’s native language and the ability to
concentrate one’s attention on the sensually given
similarities and differences.
The question with which one turns to logic and which can only
be answered by logic involves a much more complicated
cognitive task: how is one to work out an abstraction which
would express the objective essence of facts given in
contemplation and notions? The manner in which processing a
mass of empirically obvious facts yields a generalisation
expressing the real nature of the object under study – that is
the actual problem, whose solution is identical with that of
the problem of the nature of concepts as distinct from
abstract general notions."
and it strikes me that dual stimulation might be upon notions
from 'action 2' ...
Christine.
On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 8:54 AM, Andy Blunden
<ablunden@mira.net <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>
<mailto:ablunden@mira.net <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>>> wrote:
Taylor & Francis allows xmca only discuss one article per
issue,
but I see no reason why we couldn't discuss this excerpt from
Engestrom's paper. It concerns "rising from the abstract
to the
concrete," which we were recently discussing, but without
resolution.
--------------------------
Ascending from the abstract to the concrete is achieved
through
specific epistemic or learning actions. Together these actions
form an expansive cycle or spiral. An ideal-typical
sequence of
epistemic actions in ascending from the abstract to the
concrete
may be described as follows:
• The first action is that of questioning,
criticizing, or
rejecting some aspects of the accepted practice and existing
wisdom. For the sake of simplicity, we will call this action
questioning.
• The second action is that of analyzing the
situation.
Analysis involves mental, discursive or practical
transformation
of the situation in order to find out origins and explanatory
mechanisms.
• The third action is that of modeling a new
explanatory
relationship in some publicly observable and transmittable
medium.
This means constructing an explicit, simplified model of
the new
idea, a germ cell, that explains the problematic situation and
offers a perspective for resolving and transforming it.
• The fourth action is that of examining the model,
running, operating, and experimenting on it in order to fully
grasp its dynamics, potentials, and limitations.
• The fifth action is that of implementing the model,
concretizing it by means of practical applications,
enrichments,
and conceptual extensions.
• The sixth and seventh actions are those of
reflecting on
and evaluating the process and consolidating its outcomes
into a
new stable form of practice.
--------------------
MCA 19(1) pp. 288-289.
Andy
__________________________________________
_____
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca