Re: [xmca] Emotion at Work

Hi Andy. I am trying to echo Vygotsky's call for
seeking the "cell" of psychology, and for
developing a general science of psychology. If I
spoke of discovering this "cell" or "unit of
analysis" as an "end" then perhaps I was going
overboard - it would be more accurate to say it
is a quest for a method, for a means, than the
"end" of a quest. The larger goal is the
development of a unified, new general science of
psychology. I totally agree with your point
about looking for a "contretisation of the
notion," what Ilyenkov called a "concrete
universal," as a very important part of this "quest".

Here are a couple quotes from Vygotsky that I
really like that capture these ideas for me:

"He who can decipher the meaning of the cell of
psychology, the mechanism of one reaction, has
found the key to all psychology." From The
Historical Meaning of the Crisis in Psychology: A
Methodological Investigation, 1927, chapter 13,
page 320 in the Plenum Press Collected Works vol 3, pg 320.

"I advance the thesis that the analysis of the
crisis and the structure of psychology
indisputably testifies to the fact that no
philosophical system can take possession of
psychology directly, without the help of
methodology, i.e., without the creation of a
general science. The only rightful application of
Marxism to psychology would be to create a
general psychology – its concepts are being
formulated in direct dependence upon general
dialectics, for it is the dialectics of psychology." pg 329-330

transcribed by Andy himself (very appreciated) at
http://www.marxists.org/archive/vygotsky/works/crisis/psycri13.htm

.- Steve

At 10:00 AM 8/1/2007 +1000, you wrote:
>Steve, I was surprised by your description of
>the "unit of analysis" as something which lay at
>the end of a quest. The way I see it is this:
>the "unit of analysis", like Marx's commodity or
>Dalton's molecule is an "abstract notion" which
>forms the starting point of a science; what
>happens from the selection of a unit of analysis
>onward is a "concretisation" of the notion, not
>a "quest". Of course, if a problem absolutely
>lacks a scientific basis for its solution, then
>there is a place for a "quest" for a "unit of analysis."
>What did you mean?
>Andy
>At 12:55 PM 31/07/2007 -0700, you wrote:
>My sketchy outline of a quest for a "unit of
>analysis" and "model" of the *individual* psychological process -
>
>_______________________________________________
>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
Received on Tue Jul 31 23:47 PDT 2007