Re: [xmca] Subject: Verb, Object

Oh, I see what Mike was talking about. To follow up the discussions
better, I have my XMCA folder arranged by threads so when people
change the subject , I lose track of the discussion.

On Jan 1, 2008, at 10:44 PM, Mike Cole wrote:

> Ugh........ Might some enterprising member of XMCA help me out
> here? I have
> a couple of
> reports to complete that are of the "must attend to" variety and
> this topic
> is one that is
> as schizmogenic as they come.
>
> To distract you while you are considering my request for help in
> recovering
> my own words I
> searched under "culture in the middle" cole and came up with a
> review I had
> never seen before
> and which seems to me a reasonable, if brief, account of the book
> including
> a fraction of what
> is written about "culture." It can be found at
>
> http://www.ejop.org/archives/2007/11/cultural_psycho.html
>
> turning off my mail program!!
> mike
>
> On Jan 1, 2008 5:32 PM, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net> wrote:
>
>> I was hesitant in responding to Luisa, and settled for a one-word
>> response
>> because I think as the title of a book by Mike Cole, the words
>> "Cultural
>> Psychology" have become associated with one (Mike's) tendency
>> within the
>> family of tendencies from Symbolic Interactionism to CHAT to
>> "Non-classical
>> Psychology". And I didn't want to narrow the field prematurely.
>> That's
>> all.
>> But also, yes, I'd like to hear what the author of a book with
>> that title
>> meant by it! That's for sure.
>>
>> Andy
>> At 07:55 PM 1/01/2008 -0500, you wrote:
>>> I take it that Andy's asking why this would not be discussed
>>> within the
>>> framework of Mike's book "Cultural Psychology," in which the
>>> meaning of
>>> that terminology, within his framework, is elaborated.
>>>
>>> On Tue, 1 Jan 2008, Paul Dillon wrote:
>>>
>>>> great, but would someone please tell me exactly what "culture"
>>>> means.
>>>>
>>>> Paul
>>>>
>>>> Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net > wrote:
>>>> Sure.
>>>> Andy
>>>> At 10:43 PM 1/01/2008 +0000, you wrote:
>>>>> Andy
>>>>> ... why not "cultural psychology"?
>>>>>
>>>>> Lu疄a Aires
>>>>>
>>>>>> Good question Mike. I never thought about that, and it is
>>>>>> certainly in
>>>>>> ignorance of how these terms are used in academia generally.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I suppose by 'social psychology' I mean a current of
>>>>>> psychology which
>>>>>> utilises a concept of 'extended mind' as its foundational
>>>>>> principle.
>> It is
>>>>>> always the case that other currents contribute insights which
>>>>>> are not
>> so
>>>>>> easily accessible from one's own (so to speak) - even if you
>>>>>> don't
>> accept
>>>>>> the principles of Psychoanalysis, there are still things to
>>>>>> learn from
>> it;
>>>>>> and the same goes for all currents and schools of psychology.
>>>>>> But by
>>>>>> 'social psychology' I mean a real psychology, that is
>>>>>> practical and
>> useful
>>>>>> in dealing with psychological problems and copes with the
>>>>>> reality of
>>>>>> individual difference and so on. A 'social psychology' which sees
>>>>>> individuals as purely and simply instances of their social
>>>>>> position
>> does
>>>>>> not warrant the name in my opinion. And 'social psychology' in
>>>>>> the
>> sense
>>>>>> that Max Horkheimer (I think) used it, which deal only with the
>> phenomena
>>>>>> of crowds and so on, is also 'not worthy' of the name.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So I am looking for a tool which can give me a way of
>>>>>> understanding
>> how
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> Zeitgeist is formed, how it is changed, practically how to
>>>>>> intervene
>> in
>>>>>> it.
>>>>>> I do not expect a 'social psychology' to go further and
>>>>>> provide me
>> with a
>>>>>> social or political theory as such, but it need to be able to
>>>>>> bridge
>> the
>>>>>> gap, so to speak. Let's face it! If we can change the
>>>>>> Zeitgeist which
>> gets
>>>>>> people like George W Bush and John Howard elected in democratic
>> countries,
>>>>>> into one in which genuinely good people get elected, then the
>>>>>> rest
>> will
>>>>>> look after itself and I can enjoy my retirement.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Why not a meta-psychology? Apart form my idiosyncratic dislike of
>> "meta" I
>>>>>> don't want a metapsychology, I want a psychology which has a
>>>>>> metapsychology
>>>>>> which is sound and able to cope with the sociality of
>>>>>> consciousness.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Why not a "science of human nature"? "Human nature" is such a
>> problematic
>>>>>> term, it carries such a lot of unwanted 19th century baggage.
>>>>>> And I am
>>>>>> interested in consciousness, not "nature" in general.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sure, social psychology is a sub-discipline within psychology.
>>>>>> There
>> are
>>>>>> things which belong to psychology which are not centre-stage
>>>>>> for me.
>> Sure,
>>>>>> brain injury or other defects are a serious topic, as is child
>>>>>> development,
>>>>>> etc., etc.. I guess I am talking about a psychology whose central
>> thread
>>>>>> is
>>>>>> a social psychology rather than a neurobiology, for example.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I need a social psychology which recognises that social
>>>>>> movements are
>> not
>>>>>> just large numbers of people with the same feeling, but
>>>>>> subjects, and
>>>>>> individuals are neither passive victims of social processes nor
>> absolutely
>>>>>> free agents. But a *real*, practical, living school of
>>>>>> psychology,
>> with
>>>>>> people using it in designing curricula, healing depressed people,
>> running
>>>>>> half-way houses, training teachers, organising self-help
>>>>>> groups, etc.,
>>
>>>>>> etc.
>>>>>> and doing real, experimental science with it, critiquing and
>>>>>> improving
>> its
>>>>>> concepts down the years.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Does that make sense?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Andy
>>>>>>
>>>>>> At 05:14 PM 30/12/2007 -0800, you wrote:
>>>>>>> Andy-- This is the second time you have declared your goal to be
>>>>>>> answering
>>>>>>> questions within the framework of social psychology. Why do
>>>>>>> you use
>> this
>>>>>>> term? Why not a
>>>>>>> meta-psychology? Why not a "science of human nature"?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I ask because I am used to social psychology being viewed as a
>>>>>>> sub-discipline within psychology.
>>>>>>> The only dept of social psych I know of that takes on your
>>>>>>> questions
>>>>>>> seriously is at the LSE. One branch of cultural psychology in
>>>>>>> the US
>>>>>>> comes
>>>>>>> out of experimental social
>>>>>>> psychology here, but I do not think you have that in mind.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This query is not to distract from the main line of
>>>>>>> discussion, but
>>>>>>> rather
>>>>>>> to locate what you are striving for better.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> mike
>>>>>>> On Dec 30, 2007 4:34 PM, Andy Blunden wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I think David and Peg's messages were out of sync., yes?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This all raises that most difficult of questions for a social
>>>>>>> psychology
>>>>>>>> that wants to deal with the tasks I am asking it to deal
>>>>>>>> with, how
>> do
>>>>>>> you
>>>>>>>> deal with the knock-on effect of an action, which is
>>>>>>>> predictable
>> from
>>>>>>>> on-high, but unknown to the actors themselves? We rely on
>>>>>>>> the basic
>>>>>>>> insight
>>>>>>>> that what goes on in the head first went on between people -
>>>>>>>> whether
>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> form given to it by Fichte, Hegel, Marx, CS Peirce or
>>>>>>>> Vygotsky. What
>>
>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>> Hegel's Logic about? About the underlying "logic of events",
>>>>>>>> how
>> this
>>>>>>> or
>>>>>>>> that policy or statement or whatever ultimately leads to
>>>>>>>> this or
>> that
>>>>>>>> problem which was at first invisible. Life experience will
>>>>>>>> tell you
>>>>>>> this,
>>>>>>>> but if you don't have life experience, it will happen
>>>>>>>> according to
>> the
>>>>>>>> logic of events anyways and you should learn. Basically, I
>>>>>>>> think we
>>>>>>> can
>>>>>>>> only make sense of this if we get right away from the idea
>>>>>>>> of the
>>>>>>>> "individual-as-subject" but remember that no subject exists
>>>>>>>> other
>> than
>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>> and through individual human beings.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> With the ANL example of the child and the father, I have
>>>>>>>> always had
>>>>>>>> trouble
>>>>>>>> with "examples" and methods which presuppose a leader or a
>>>>>>>> father or
>> a
>>>>>>>> facilitator, a person who knows what the experimental
>>>>>>>> subject or
>>>>>>> student
>>>>>>>> or
>>>>>>>> self-help group really needs to do, and organises things
>> accordingly.
>>>>>>> Of
>>>>>>>> course, I understand that all you teachers and teacher-
>>>>>>>> trainers,
>> child
>>>>>>>> psychologists, etc., work and have a responsibility to work in
>>>>>>> precisely
>>>>>>>> that circumstance. But I do not think this is the paradigmatic
>>>>>>>> relationship. The father can only do his bit in "leading"
>>>>>>>> the child
>>>>>>> into
>>>>>>>> an
>>>>>>>> activity where its "best interests" will be served if the
>>>>>>>> father can
>>>>>>> act
>>>>>>>> as
>>>>>>>> a kind of transmitter of life experience, and kind of short-
>>>>>>>> cut the
>>>>>>>> process
>>>>>>>> for the child. So it is not the father's technique which is the
>>>>>>> paradigm,
>>>>>>>> but the bitter life experience which the child may or may
>>>>>>>> not have
>> as
>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>> result of choosing to do this or that.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Andy
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> At 07:54 AM 30/12/2007 -0800, you wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Dear Andy and Peg:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Here's some stuff from my notes; I happen to know that Andy
>>>>>>>>> can't
>>>>>>> get
>>>>>>>>> ahold of a copy of ANL's Problems of the Development of the
>>>>>>>>> Mind. I
>>
>>>>>>> hope
>>>>>>>>> I don't get those funny marks that always show up when I paste
>> in...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> p. 402 ANL points out how 'only understandable' motives for
>>>>>>> homework
>>>>>>>>> such as wanting to get a good mark can be replaced by 'really
>>>>>>> effective'
>>>>>>>>> motives such as doing it so you can go out to play.
>>>>>>>>> However, after
>>>>>>> some
>>>>>>>>> weeks of really effective motives, it is also possible that
>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> child
>>>>>>>>> will find that the only understandable motives become really
>>>>>>> effective,
>>>>>>>>> e.g. the child will leave off doing homework because it＊s
>>>>>>>>> untidy
>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> child is now afraid of getting a bad mark.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> p. 403: ANL writes: 'It is a matter of an action＊s result
>>>>>>>>> being
>>>>>>> more
>>>>>>>>> significant in certain conditions than the motive that
>>>>>>>>> actually
>>>>>>> induces
>>>>>>>>> it. The child begins doing its homework conscientiously
>>>>>>>>> because it
>>>>>>> wants
>>>>>>>>> to go out quickly and play. In the end this leads to much
>>>>>>>>> more not
>>>>>>>> simply
>>>>>>>>> that it will get the chance to go and play but also that it
>>>>>>>>> will
>> get
>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>> good mark. A new "objectivation" of its needs come about which
>> means
>>>>>>>> they
>>>>>>>>> are understood at a higher level.'
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 'The transition to a new leading activity differs from the
>>>>>>>>> process
>>>>>>>>> described simply in the really effective motives becoming
>>>>>>>>> in the
>>>>>>> case of
>>>>>>>>> a change of leading activity, those understandable motives
>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>> exist in
>>>>>>>>> the sphere of relations characterizing the place the child can
>>>>>>> occupy
>>>>>>>>> only in the next higher stage of development rather than in
>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> sphere
>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>> relations in which it still actually is. The preparation of
>>>>>>>>> these
>>>>>>>>> transitions therefore takes a long time because it is
>>>>>>>>> necessary for
>>
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> child to become quite fully aware of a sphere of relations
>>>>>>>>> that are
>>>>>>> new
>>>>>>>>> for it.§
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> ANL compares a child＊s performance in a school play with the
>>>>>>> child＊s
>>>>>>>>> learning of study as an independent activity. The child
>>>>>>>>> begins the
>>>>>>>> school
>>>>>>>>> play as an assignment, and later continues for the
>>>>>>>>> approbation the
>>>>>>> child
>>>>>>>>> receives during a successful performance. As with learning
>>>>>>>>> to study
>>
>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>> good mark instead of just studying for the opportunity to
>>>>>>>>> go out
>> and
>>>>>>>>> play, a ※merely understandable§ motive has now become
>>>>>>>>> ※really
>>>>>>>>> effective§ and a new activity is established.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> But only in the case of independent study (according to
>>>>>>>>> ANL) is
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> new
>>>>>>>>> activity developmentally significant (※objectively§)
>>>>>>>>> because the
>>>>>>> child
>>>>>>>>> is not going to become a professional dramatist (if the
>>>>>>>>> child were,
>>
>>>>>>> then
>>>>>>>>> the performance in the play would be study). Thus only in the
>> latter
>>>>>>>> case
>>>>>>>>> can we say there is a new leading activity.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Here's what I make of this:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> a) ANL really does NOT interrogate the subject as to the
>>>>>>>>> object
>>>>>>>>> orientation of the activity: the object (study, the
>>>>>>>>> completed play)
>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>> indeed given in advance. As far as ANL is concerned, ONLY
>> Chaiklin's
>>>>>>>>> "objective" ZPD exists, and there is NO subjective ZPD. But
>>>>>>>>> Andy's
>>>>>>> idea
>>>>>>>>> of "immanent critique" is NOT an objective critique; it has
>>>>>>>>> to do
>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>>> following up (just like Sarah's) the subject's way of
>>>>>>>>> seeing things
>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>> seeing where it leads.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> b) In the development discussion (San Diego-Helsinki) Dr. Olga
>>>>>>> Vasquez
>>>>>>>>> raised the question of whether "leading activity" is the
>>>>>>>>> same as
>>>>>>>>> "neoformation", and Dr. Pentti Harakarainnen really did not
>>>>>>>>> answer
>>>>>>> it
>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>> instead talked about Dr. Engestrom's even more general
>>>>>>>>> concept of
>>>>>>>>> activity. But here we can see that "leading activity" and
>>>>>>> "neoformation"
>>>>>>>>> are quite different: LSV used "neoformation" to talk about
>>>>>>> transitional
>>>>>>>>> structures during crisis periods that COMPLETELY disappear
>>>>>>>>> (for
>>>>>>> example,
>>>>>>>>> the child's autonomous speech at one and the child's
>>>>>>>>> "negativism"
>> at
>>>>>>>>> three) as well as neoformations which become the leading
>>>>>>>>> activity
>>>>>>> during
>>>>>>>>> normal growth. Only the latter is a "leading activity" for
>>>>>>>>> ANL.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> c) There is still a STRONG behaviorist streak in ANL's
>>>>>>>>> reasoning:
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> difference between the "really effective" and "merely
>>>>>>>>> understood"
>>>>>>>>> reasoning can very easily be described, in ALL of ANL's
>>>>>>>>> examples,
>> as
>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>> simple lengthening of the time distance between the
>>>>>>>>> behavior and
>> the
>>>>>>>>> positive reinforcement. Bruner, in a quote that I have long
>>>>>>>>> since
>>>>>>> lost,
>>>>>>>>> suggests that development can be described this way, but I
>>>>>>>>> don't
>>>>>>> think
>>>>>>>>> LSV ever would have done so: for LSV the key thing about
>>>>>>>>> humans is
>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>> they are dogs that can ring their own bells.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> David Kellogg
>>>>>>>>> Seoul National University of Education
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> ---------------------------------
>>>>>>>>> Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with
>>>>>>>>> Yahoo!
>>>>>>>> Search.
>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> xmca mailing list
>>>>>>>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>>>>>>>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Andy Blunden :
>>>>>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/tel <http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/
>>>>>>> tel> (H)
>> +61 3
>>>>>>> 9380 9435,
>>>>>>>> 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/<http://
>>>>>> home.mira.net/%7Eandy/>tel (H) +61 3 9380 9435,
>>>>>> 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/<http://home.mira.net/%
>>>> 7Eandy/>tel (H) +61 3 9380 9435,
>>>> mobile 0409 358 651
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> xmca mailing list
>>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------
>>>> Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> xmca mailing list
>>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>>>
>>> Tony Whitson
>>> UD School of Education
>>> NEWARK DE 19716
>>>
>>> twhitson@udel.edu
>>> _______________________________
>>>
>>> "those who fail to reread
>>> are obliged to read the same story everywhere"
>>> -- Roland Barthes, S/Z (1970)
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> xmca mailing list
>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>>
>> Andy Blunden : http://home.mira.net/~andy/<http://home.mira.net/%
>> 7Eandy/>tel (H) +61 3 9380 9435,
>> 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

David Preiss, Ph.D.
Subdirector de Extensión y Comunicaciones
Escuela de Psicología
Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile
Av Vicuña Mackenna 4860
Macul, Santiago
Chile

Fono: 3544605
Fax: 3544844
e-mail: davidpreiss@uc.cl
web personal: http://web.mac.com/ddpreiss/
web institucional: http://www.epuc.cl/profesores/dpreiss

_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
Received on Tue Jan 1 18:28 PST 2008