RE: real and virtual worlds

From: Andy Blunden (ablunden@mira.net)
Date: Sun Jan 04 2004 - 22:09:17 PST


http://www.marxists.org/archive/vygotsky/works/1925/ch09.htm

found using the search engine on
http://www.marxists.org/archive/vygotsky/index.htm

Andy
At 10:18 PM 4/01/2004 -0500, Eugene Matusov wrote:

>Dear Ricardo
>
>
>
>Can you describe Vygotskys example you are referring to below, please?
>Sounds very interesting but it does not ring a bell, so to speak.
>
>
>
>Thanks,
>
>
>
>Eugene
>
>
>
>----------
>From: Ricardo Japiassu [mailto:rjapias@uol.com.br]
>Sent: Thursday, January 01, 2004 7:11 AM
>To: xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>Subject: Re: real and virtual worlds
>
>
>
>On topic 1:
>
>
>
>Maybe Vygotsky's "law" of reality of feeling (Psychology of Art and Art
>and Imagination in Childhood ) can drop more light on the issue - his
>classic example of real feeling started by distorted perception of a
>(wo)man that take, at night, her-his trench coat by a theaf inside the room.
>
>
>
>
>
>Ricardo Ottoni Vaz Japiassu
>Universidade do Estado da Bahia/Uneb
><http://www.uneb.br>http://www.uneb.br
>
>----- Original Message -----
>
>From: <mailto:victor@kfar-hanassi.org.il>Oudeyis
>
>To: <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>
>Sent: Wednesday, December 31, 2003 10:21 PM
>
>Subject: Re: real and virtual worlds
>
>
>
>Andy and Gene and Ricardo,
>
>It appears to me that we are discussing two or three issues simultaneously:
>
>1. The relationship between virtual reality and false consciousness
>
>2. The emergence and non-emergence of class-consciousness among social
>classes
>
>3. Class consciousness and false consciousness.
>
> Concerning the first issue, I would just like to clarify one point:
>
>Virtual reality, as the term is used today, is a constructed replication
>of objective conditions - a product designed through the model-building
>process of rational thinking to imitate objective conditions - and not to
>be confused with lkyenkov's ideational character of
>perception. Perception emerges out of a life-time of exposure to
>objective conditions, and while it is certainly the product of social
>relations, hence ideational, it is not designed nor is it -as perception
>- a model of anything but itself. As such, perception is neither virtual
>or false but simply situated; in space, in time, and most of all in
>historical-social conditions.
>
>
>
>The second question is more ethnological and historical than
>theoretical. In Europe, and especially in Great Britain, class
>consciousness is much more widespread than it is, say, on the North
>American continent -save Mexico and Central America. In Great Britain,
>for example, the various classes have a degree of cultural and political
>self-consciousness that would be unthought of in the USof A . This
>class-consciousness can be accredited to a very strong awareness and even
>pride of most Europeans of their not so ancient Medieval past (remember
>our discussion on the English Flag?). In the US something like
>class-consciousness may be found in the traditional culture of the old
>Confederacy, though here as in much of S. America this class-consciousness
>is - or was- connected to race and is ultimately related to the history of
>conquest and slavery of the North American South and of Hispanic America.
>Gene is correct, the most class-conscious social class in Anglo-North
>America is that of the old rich. There are a number of theories
>concerning this phenomenon - none based on strictly economic issues.
>During the course of my college and University experience I've had an
>opportunity to mix with scions of old, wealthy families (a lot of them
>used to study Anthropology) and my general impression is that most of
>their class image is cultural - even aesthetic - rather than economic.
>
>
>
>Andy's point that Class consciousness and solidarity are attitudes which
>have to be learnt through definite kinds of experience is well taken here
>- especially as regards Anglo-North Americans. The US and Canada have
>witnessed local and sometimes even Nationwide movements that have been
>self-consciously working class in goals and practices, but these have
>generally been sporadic and related to extended periods of economic
>crises such as the great depression and the midwestern farm crises of the
>70's and 80's. Interestingly enough, these have never actually produced a
>permanent working-class consciousness, except among American Blacks where
>the economic issues were usually totally hidden by ideologies of race.
>Most of the other longish-lived working class movements - mostly expressed
>in energetic Trade Union organization - usually emerged from large working
>class groups sharing a recent past outside the US (immigrants). The Irish
>Unions of the mid to late 19th century and the Jewish and Italian Unions
>of the first half of the 20th century maintained their strength for a
>generation or two, but declined in size and vigour as the sons and
>grandsons of their founders "became real Americans." In fact, American
>society has at least till now been a very mobile one with enough people
>moving up and down the class ladder even in a single generation to
>compromise the development of strong class consciousness.
>
>
>
>Class-consciousness and false consciousness is, as I've written earlier, a
>non-issue that sells Newspapers and makes spurious reputations for moral
>crusaders of both left and right.
>
>Regards,
>
>Victor
>
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>
>From: <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>Andy Blunden
>
>To: <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>
>Sent: Wednesday, December 31, 2003 5:50 AM
>
>Subject: RE: real and virtual worlds
>
>
>
>Well, yet again I need to be more precise, don't I.
>
>I suppose what I mean it that, on one end, no two people see the world
>just the same way, and at the other we all share the "illusion" that money
>has value. I suppose this means that we all start with a number things we
>pick up from living in the same capitalist world: the Zeitgeist, the world
>market, the dominant social forces and realities, which are the basis of
>"ideology". Although we all look at the world from different viewpoints,
>we all look at the same world, with its characteristic mirages and
>illusions. It could be said that someone looking at it from a "privileged"
>position is more able to free themselves from what is illusory, in a
>better position to be critical at least in thought if not in action.
>
>Andy
>
>At 08:26 PM 30/12/2003 -0500, you wrote:
>
>
>Dear Andy
>
>
>
>It will be interesting to check/test your (and Victors?) hypothesis about
>*all* member of bourgeois society& sharing& the same illusions. I
>personally doubt that members of upper class (old moneys) would agree with
>I believe if you put an effort into anything, you can get ahead&(Strauss,
>1992, p. 202) But it will be nice to check that. I wish somebody made a
>study like Claudia Strauss did with members of working, middle, and upper
>class people.
>
>
>
>What do you think?
>
>
>
>Eugene
>
>
>
>----------
>From: Andy Blunden [mailto:ablunden@mira.net]
>Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2003 7:39 PM
>To: xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>Subject: RE: real and virtual worlds
>
>
>
>Here we come back to what someone (Victor?) said about *all* members of
>bourgeois society, whatever class, sharing in the first place, the same
>illusions. Class consciousness and solidarity are attitudes I think which
>have to be learnt through definite kinds of experience; such experiences
>are not to be had in the home, generally are not conveyed in TV; perhaps
>the first experiences are in gang-like interactions at school?
>
>Andy
>
>At 07:23 PM 30/12/2003 -0500, you wrote:
>
>
>Dear Andy, I think you are right on the target talking about, what Jim Gee
>calls, projective identity. The question that I have is how and why
>working class people participate in middle-class cultural model(or way of
>talking).
>
>
>
>It is not the case that working class people accept any middle class
>cultural modelthat available via TV or other popular media. Although I do
>not have much data about that but I doubt that many working class people
>would buy middle class cultural model of child fostering based on
>constantly giving kids choices. So the question is why some working class
>people project themselves in self-actualizationmiddle-class cultural model
>but not in child-rearing through choice-makingmiddle-class cultural model.
>I do not think the preference of working class people in adapting
>middle-class models can be explained simply by watching TV. Any ideas?
>
>
>
>What do you think?
>
>
>
>Eugene
>
>
>
>----------
>From: Andy Blunden [mailto:ablunden@mira.net]
>Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2003 6:38 PM
>To: xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>Subject: RE: real and virtual worlds
>
>
>
>We could put this together with Jim Gee's observations about play. People
>are growing up acting out characters that they see on TV. They believe
>that they can make their own character. But this turns out to be a
>frustrated experience; they only get to play Doug Heffernan. ... Andy
>
>
>Claudias study shows that also working class men widely hold this
>self-actualizationcultural model they do and cannot enact it (but rather
>they act out of necessity-based being a breadwinnercultural model). Victor
>or anybody else, can you explain what makes proliferation of cultural
>modelsthat people deeply hold but cant enact, please?
>Eugene



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Feb 01 2004 - 01:00:09 PST