Re: [xmca] Humans and nature

Dear Mike, thanks! getting a short list together will be very kind for
you, I could also contribute to the enquiry (even though not
immediately),

and I like your metaphors,

Michalis Kontopodis

research associate
humboldt university berlin
tel.: +49 (0) 30 2093 3716
fax.: +49 (0) 30 2093 3739
http://www.csal.de
http://www.iscar.org/de/culthistanthpsy/

On Mar 20, 2008, at 6:06 PM, Mike Cole wrote:

> Hi Michalas--- The protean composition of XMCA makes it inevitable
> that we return to earlier discussions which even those who first
> participated them often forget. I will get together a short list of
> such articles that appeared in MCA. Perhaps others can suggest others.
> And, when someone takes the initiative to start discussing them, we
> can.
>
> The issues are almost never resolved, only "chewed over" again for
> the intellectual
> nourishment they can yield.
>
> mike
>
> On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 8:39 AM, Michalis Kontopodis <michalis.kontopodis@staff.hu-berlin.de
> > wrote:
> Dear Mike, thanks a lot! I am familiar at some extent with the work
> of A. Lang, but I am a younger member of MCA and did not know that
> such discussions have already taken place. I will look into the
> archives.
>
> 'Expanding' the concept of mediation of Vygotsky in a similar way to
> that of Latour and others, would probably prove important for
> theory, practice and research in regard to educational technologies,
> transnational internet projects for youngsters etc.
>
> What's more: if psychological knowledge (and cultural-historical
> approaches, too) are m e d i a t e d, we may view our own discourses
> and practices on children and childhood in new ways.
>
> However: if their is no Peirceian influence on Vygotsky himself, I
> would suggest that one should be very careful in expanding Vygotsky
> in such a way.
>
> I have indeed more questions in regard to this issue than answers,
>
> Michalis Kontopodis
>
> research associate
> humboldt university berlin
> tel.: +49 (0) 30 2093 3716
> fax.: +49 (0) 30 2093 3739
> http://www.csal.de
> http://www.iscar.org/de/culthistanthpsy/
>
>
>
>
> On Mar 20, 2008, at 4:09 PM, Mike Cole wrote:
>
>> I believe a lot of people are thinking along lines you suggest,
>> Michalis.
>> I do not know of any direct influence of Pierce on Vygotsky, but
>> you can
>> certainly
>> find it on people like Arne Raeithel and Alfred Lang who
>> participated in
>> this discussion
>> in earlier years; in the discussions among Latour, Engestrom,
>> Hutchins in
>> MCA, and
>> more. The discussion in MCA by Meitennen on AT and ANT and his
>> discussion of
>> Dewey
>> in this regard are very worthwhile.
>>
>> Could the Vygotskian concept of 'mediation' be used in a non-modern
>> way, as Serres or Latour would define it?
>>
>> My answer is, of course. The question then becomes why, to what
>> end, with
>> what results.
>> mike
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 7:27 AM, Michalis Kontopodis <
>> michalis.kontopodis@staff.hu-berlin.de> wrote:
>>
>>> Dear Steve, I have been reading your contributions since long time
>>> and
>>> very much approve of your positions. I have also read the 'socialist
>>> alteration of man' as a very interesting and indicative for
>>> Vygotsky's
>>> Trotskian and Nietzscheian influences piece of work.
>>>
>>> Addressing this remark to everybody in the list I would like to
>>> relate
>>> my following argumentation to the recent discussion about agency and
>>> Latour.
>>>
>>> Vygotsky in the Socialist Alteration of the Man, as also in other
>>> pieces of his work, is absolutely modernist. Not only he reproduces
>>> the modern dichotomy between human and non-human (or in-human), he
>>> does also refer to the general 'Man', the ideal human subject that
>>> is
>>> of course historically constituted, however totally abstract.
>>>
>>> Quite a lot of social movements have posed the notion of the ideal
>>> human subject in question (not only speaking about class, but also
>>> about gender, ethnicity, color, etc.). Thus the notion
>>> 'subjectivities' came into play. Other terms that seem to gain
>>> attention in critical theory are these of 'techno-science' or of
>>> 'species'. In my view, it is possible to be critical, reflective,
>>> utopian etc. and follow a very different theoretical direction than
>>> that outlined in the Socialist Alternation of Man-- a non-modern or
>>> anti-modern one:
>>> Not only late scholarship such as the last book of D. Haraway (When
>>> Species Meet), the work of I. Stengers (philosophy of science,
>>> 'Cosmopolitiques' etc.), the 'Reassembling the Social' of Latour
>>> etc.
>>> but also the natural philosophy of the beginning of the 20th century
>>> (at some extent contemporary to Vygotsky) have examined radical
>>> alternatives in conceptualizing the relations between humans and
>>> nature, subjectivities and objectivities.
>>>
>>> The works of Whitehead, of Peirce and/or of Dewey provide different
>>> examples of such theoretical attempts. Does anybody know at which
>>> extend Vygotsky has been influenced by Peirce?
>>>
>>> Could the Vygotskian concept of 'mediation' be used in a non-modern
>>> way, as Serres or Latour would define it?
>>>
>>> just some introductory thoughts,
>>>
>>> thanks a lot,
>>>
>>> Michalis Kontopodis
>>>
>>> research associate
>>> humboldt university berlin
>>> tel.: +49 (0) 30 2093 3716
>>> fax.: +49 (0) 30 2093 3739
>>> http://www.csal.de
>>> http://www.iscar.org/de/culthistanthpsy/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mar 20, 2008, at 1:02 AM, Steve Gabosch wrote:
>>>
>>>> Here are the words Vygtotsky used to describe his take on the
>>>> humans
>>>> over nature question in the essay The Socialist Alteration of
>>>> Man ...
>>>>
>>>> "The second source from which springs the alteration of man resides
>>>> in fact that at the same time as the old fetters disappear, an
>>>> enormous positive potential present in large scale industry, the
>>>> ever growing power of humans over nature, will be liberated and
>>>> become operative."
>>>>
>>>> My interpretation of this is that Vygotsky believed that large
>>>> scale
>>>> industry increases humankind's power (the term 'triumph' seems odd,
>>>> not a term I would personally would use) over nature, and this ever
>>>> growing potential is a positive thing. I have little doubt that
>>>> LSV
>>>> would be horrified to see how modern industry as we know it has
>>>> also
>>>> been laying the basis for destroying more and more of the planet as
>>>> a viable habitat for humans and many other species. I also have
>>>> little doubt that like many socialists of his time, especially
>>>> those
>>>> supportive of the Russian revolution, Vygotsky would have been
>>>> quick
>>>> to point out that industry organized under socialism is a totally
>>>> different entity from industry organized under capitalism. But
>>>> that
>>>> only begs the question.
>>>>
>>>> In Crisis, Vygotsky refers to Marx's core idea of social
>>>> revolution:
>>>> that the potential for revolution becomes ripe when new forces of
>>>> production outgrow and can no longer be organized by the old social
>>>> system and its old relations of production. Some would argue that
>>>> this also applies to the environment and nature, which are the
>>>> ultimate sources of production. Capitalism, according to this
>>>> thinking, is less and less able to rationally organize an
>>>> integrated
>>>> system of the forces and sources of production, and in fact, is
>>>> becoming more and more of an obstacle. The ever growing capacities
>>>> of modern technology, the steady growth of world population, and
>>>> the
>>>> ever-growing expectations about the right to and hope for health,
>>>> peace and prosperity that continue to sweep across the human race,
>>>> are causing people everywhere to ask what kind of a social system
>>>> *could* integrate human society and nature in a way that, to use
>>>> Stephen Jay Gould's excellent term, fulfills humankind's role as
>>>> "steward" of the planet earth and all its species, while also
>>>> creating a just and plentiful world for humanity.
>>>>
>>>> Mike's point that humans trying to "triumph" "over" nature is a
>>>> problem, is well taken. And perhaps Vygotsky's term "power" over
>>>> nature is a little old-fashioned, now that we know so much more
>>>> about how the forces and sources of production must work together
>>>> ecologically and sustainably. Human beings are certainly *in* and
>>>> *of* nature, and this must be our starting point. But because we
>>>> are the species of activity, we also act *upon* nature, and there
>>>> is
>>>> the rub.
>>>>
>>>> - Steve
>>>>
>>>> PS Thanks all for the tip on the Foster book, I will look for it.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mar 19, 2008, at 12:36 PM, Martin Packer wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I second this recommendation: it's an excellent book
>>>>>
>>>>> Martin
>>>>>
>>>>> On 3/19/08 11:04 AM, "C Barker" <C.Barker@mmu.ac.uk> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Mike, Steve, Peter (hullo Peter!)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think Mike is right. So, I think, would good old Karl Marx.
>>>>>> There's a very
>>>>>> good
>>>>>> discussion in Marx's Ecology: Materialism and Nature, by John
>>>>>> Bellamy Foster,
>>>>>> Monthly
>>>>>> Review Pres 2000
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Colin Barker
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Steve & Peter. In 2007 you have no difficulty with the idea of
>>>>>> "Man's
>>>>>> triumph *OVER *nature?? I have other concerns with other points,
>>>>>> but this
>>>>>> one strikes me as really dangerous. Human beings are in and of
>>>>>> nature. We
>>>>>> are consuming and "triumphing" ourselves out of existence.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Check it out.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> mike
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 3:35 AM, Peter HICK <P.Hick@mmu.ac.uk>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks for that Steve,
>>>>>>> an excellent contribution, very interesting
>>>>>>> Pete Hick (new member, Manchester UK)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Before acting on this email or opening any attachments you should
>>>>>> read the
>>>>>> Manchester
>>>>>> Metropolitan University's email disclaimer available on its
>>>>>> website
>>>>>> http://www.mmu.ac.uk/emaildisclaimer
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> 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
Received on Thu Mar 20 10:45 PDT 2008