Michael and Andy--
I found your two forumations very useful to think with.
I wonder if you could, in terms of your two formulations, adress the
possibililty of empirical (not empiricist!) consequences that might guide
research.
mike
On 11/29/06, Wolff-Michael Roth <mroth@uvic.ca> wrote:
>
> HI,
> I don't think that it is quite as Andy suggested. The subject (of
> consciousness) and the object (of consciousness) are different AND
> are not different. They are not entities, and above all they are NOT
> elements in the activity system. They are moments, which I understand
> as identifiable structures that cannot stand on their own but are
> mutually constitutive with all the other structures.
> An object (of consciousness) always is the object of consciousness
> to a subject of consciousness. At the level of activity and action,
> it orients the intentions (motives, goals) of collectives and
> individuals.
> If you want to use the triangle as a crutch, then think of it as
> existing twice---not just the object----materially and in consciousness.
> Michael
>
>
> On 29-Nov-06, at 7:28 AM, ERIC.RAMBERG@spps.org wrote:
>
>
> Andy:
>
> I know this may oversimplify things, but. . . .
>
> isn't THESIS - ANTITHESIS > SYNTHESIS
>
> THE explanation for this? You being the Hegelphile i hope you could
> clarify.
>
> thanx,
> eric
>
>
>
> Andy Blunden
> <ablunden who-is-at mira.n To: "eXtended
> Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> et> cc:
> Sent by: Subject: RE: [xmca]
> Empirical Evidence for ZPD
> xmca-bounces who-is-at web
> er.ucsd.edu
>
>
> 11/28/2006 03:22
> PM
> Please respond
> to "eXtended
> Mind, Culture,
> Activity"
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Big question Michael.
> See http://www.marxists.org/archive/lektorsky/subject-object/
> index.htm for
> a book-length answer from Lektorsky.
>
> Subject and object are always two distinct entities, but the subject
> (some
> self-conscious system of activity) arises out of some definite,
> objective
> system of activity when it becomes self-conscious, and the activity then
> constitutes (in AN Leontyev's words) the "intertraffic" between
> subject and
>
> object. The activity of the subject then is to objectify itself in the
> object, giving its activities material forms deposited in the objective
> world around it, vested with meanings by which the subject
> "institutionalises" itself.
>
> So in the beginning there is no distinction, because the relevant
> system of
>
> activity has not yet become self-conscious, and in the end there is no
> distinction because the subject has "naturalised" its activity and
> become
> indistinguishable from the object. These are of course both
> tendencies, and
>
> not absolute truths, and the whole life of a subject exists between
> these
> two poles.
>
> Andy
>
>
> At 02:03 PM 28/11/2006 -0500, you wrote:
> > Andy and Paul,
> >
> > What is the argument that a dialectical approach, even dialectical
> > materialism, dissolves the difference between subject and object?
> > I guess
>
> > we are all influenced by what we have been reading lately, but it
> > seems
> > that it is difficult for a dialectic based perspective to escape the
> > idealism trap.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Michael
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-
> > bounces@weber.ucsd.edu] On
> > Behalf Of Andy Blunden
> > Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2006 5:09 AM
> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> > Subject: Re: [xmca] Empirical Evidence for ZPD (was= Does
> > VygotskyAccept
> > the "Assistance Assumption"?)
> >
> > Paul, surely you overstate the matter.
> >
> > ZPD is, like all scientific concepts, a theory-laden object. To say
> > that
> it
> > exists says that certain more or less well-defined procedures
> > understood
> > within the Vygotskyan theory, will produce this or that verifiable
> > result.
> > Otherwise what is the useof the concept and the theory of which it
> > is a
> > part? While there are lots of concepts within the Vygotskyan theory
> > which
> > are new and unique, or have a Marxist genealogy, there are also plenty
> > which are shared with all pedagogical theories and common sense. In
> > fact,
> > all scientific theories must incorporate "common sense" concepts into
> their
> > framework in order to be truly scientific. "Empiricism" denies that
> > scientific objects are "theory laden" and that there is anything
> > problematic in the idea of a purely factual test for the existence
> > of some
> > object. But to deny Empiricism is not to deny the validity and
> > necessity
> of
> > empirical evidence.
> >
> > And surely it is wrong to say that in Marxism or Vygotsky "the subject
> > object distinction is dissolved". The absolute independence and
> > separateness of subject and object is certainly denied by Marx and
> > Vygotsky, but neither claim that "subject" and "object" are invalid
> > concepts, or concepts between which no distinction can be made. For
> > example, Marx does not claim that an object (e.g. ZPD) exists
> > insofar as a
> > subject (Vygotskyan psychology) incorporates the concept in its
> > activity,
> > so that empirical refutation of the concept is ruled out in
> > principle. No
> > subject exists in absolute separateness from every other subject, all
> > subjects exist in a material and therefore infinitely interconnected,
> > world. So the identity of subject and object can only be relative, not
> > absolute.
> >
> > Andy
> >
> > At 12:26 AM 28/11/2006 -0800, you wrote:
> >> Isnī't the idea of "empirical" evidence for the ZPD something of an
> >> oxymoron in itself? Didn{t Vygotsky develop his thinking within the
> >> framework of dialetical materialism, something that many north
> americans
> >> and others seem all too ready to forget? Isn't the concept of a
> >> ZPD a
> >> dialectical model in itself, which is to say, a model in which the
> >> subject object distinction is dissolved, a dissolution which
> >> defies the
> >> concept of empirical?
> >> Paul Dillon
> >
> > Andy Blunden : http://home.mira.net/~andy/ tel (H) +61 3 9380
> > 9435, AIM
> > identity: AndyMarxists mobile 0409 358 651
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
>
> Andy Blunden : http://home.mira.net/~andy/ tel (H) +61 3 9380
> 9435, AIM
> identity: AndyMarxists mobile 0409 358 651
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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 Jan 03 2007 - 07:14:22 PST