The article does indeed discuss Wartofsky, Michael.
And I am teaching T&L right now too, Vera. (2 degrees of separation?)
I am still hoping for more discussion of the examples in the article under
discussion!!
mike
On 1/20/06, Wolff-Michael Roth <mroth@uvic.ca> wrote:
>
> Hi Vera,
>
> I think we need to differentiate the discussion and include, for
> example, Heidegger's work on signs and when a sign is not a sign. . .
> It also doesn't take into account the work of Wartofsky, according to
> which signs (they are nicely material, even sound is) can be
> organized into three (perhaps even more) levels.
>
> Some people may also be interested in the transition between work-
> related movements of the hand and arm to epistemic movements and to
> symbolic movements, again, movements with the same topology have
> different function, and I cannot flatten all of those by saying "sign".
>
> I think someone should do a cultural-historical analysis of sounds,
> as used among hominids, and then see what possible developments lead
> to a split between the sound envelope and sense, or any other
> material body that comes to be used to stand for something else.
> Otherwise we are going to turn round and round and round. . .
>
> Michael
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 20-Jan-06, at 12:18 PM, Vera Steiner wrote:
>
> Hi.
> Thinking about the possible distinctions between tools and signs, I was
> paying close attention to a painter's comments; he recently shifted from
> landscapes to portraits. When painting the latter, he has
> conversations with
> those who sit for him, quite different from the mountains.
> Signs are profoundly interpersonal in their origins, functions and
> development. It is the human co-participations in improving a sign
> that is
> appropriated by the sign user for her/his use.I interpret Vygotsky's
> distinction between tool and sign as partly linked to this
> difference.Tools,too, are improved by humans, oif course, but they
> are not
> necessarily fundemental to their exchanges.
>
> But then I am , once again, teaching Language and Thought.
>
> Vera
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mary K. Bryson" <mary.bryson@ubc.ca>
> To: "XMCA" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> Sent: Monday, January 16, 2006 2:46 PM
> Subject: Re: [xmca] Artifacts, Tools and Classroom
>
>
> > Well, going back to the text, I find,
> >
> > "The sign acts as an instrument of psychological activity in a manner
> > analogous to the role of a tool in labour. But this analogy like any
> other,
> > does not imply the identity of these similar concepts. We should not
> expect
> > to find many similarities with tools in the those means of
> > adaptation we
> > call signs. What's more, in addition to the similar and common feature
> > shared by the two kinds of activity, we see very essential
> > differences."
> > 52/3
> >
> > I read this, yes, "through a glass darkly", as you put it, Mike -- in
> > particular, through Wertsch's discussion in Vygotsky and the Social
> > Formation of Mind where JW argues that LSV's focus on mediational
> > means
> > interpsychological functioning was concerned with dyadic and group
> > interactions, and not institutional contexts per se. (Wertsch, 60)
> > if we
> add
> > into this mix the notion of "higher mental processes", then
> > paradoxically,
> > one finds a distinction that may have a lot more to do with class than
> > anything else. If we substitute "artifact", then the capacity to
> distinguish
> > tool from sign, from my interpretive site, is about institutional and
> > cultural norms and nothing definitive or ahistorical. And so an
> > analysis
> of
> > mediation and tools provided by someone like Latour locates the
> > objects/artifacts properly in their slippery social and political
> > contexts
> > where such distinctions as between tool and sign no longer make much
> sense.
> >
> > Mary
> >
> > On 1/16/06 9:12 AM, "Mike Cole" <lchcmike@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> I always interpret this passage as indicating relative
> >> orientation, not
> >> total separation,
> >> Mary. Is that they way you interpret it? In both cases, mediators are
> double
> >> sided and must
> >> satisfy, so to speak, constraints at both "ends" in order to
> >> function. I
> >> also find the use
> >> of activities in the last sentence confusing and wonder if it does
> >> not
> arise
> >> from an error in
> >> our naive editing of the translation. That is, I would think that
> >> action
> >> rather than activity would
> >> be appropriate.
> >>
> >> Through a glass darkly.
> >> mike
> >>
> >> On 1/16/06, Mary K. Bryson <mary.bryson@ubc.ca> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On 1/15/06 1:20 AM, "Steve Gabosch" <sgabosch@comcast.net> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> The
> >>>> point LSV is making is that in this respect,
> >>>> tools and signs are similar and not
> >>>> different.
> >>>
> >>> "A most essential difference between sign and tool, and the basis
> >>> for
> the
> >>> real divergence of the two lines, is the different ways that they
> orient
> >>> human behavior. The tool's function is to serve as the conductor of
> human
> >>> influence on the object of activity; it is externally oriented;
> >>> it must
> >>> lead
> >>> to changes in objects. It is a means by which human external
> >>> activity
> is
> >>> aimed at mastering, and triumphing over, nature. The sign on the
> >>> other
> >>> hand
> >>> changes nothing in the object of a psychological operation. It is a
> means
> >>> of
> >>> internal activity aimed at mastering oneself; the sign is internally
> >>> oriented. These activities are so different from each other that the
> >>> nature
> >>> of the means they use cannot be the same in both cases."
> >>> LSV, Mind in Society, P. 55
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> 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
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Feb 01 2006 - 01:00:10 PST