Re: [xmca] Arne Raeithel's "genealogy"

[Jonna Kangasoja <jonnakatariina@gmail.com>]

Thanks again Andy,

What is happening in the planning theory field is that planning theory
based on Habermas's Discourse Ethics ('Critical Planning Theory') has
been heavily challenged for a good while now. There seems to be also
some miscommunication on what the nature/scope/aim of CPT theory is,
and whether it actually is a theory of planning at all, or rather a
philosophy of planning communication.

There seems to be a need for a planning theory, which could provide
descriptive and prescriptive  accounts of actual planning practices.
Theoretical resources are being sought elsewhere (Foucault, Deleuze,
STS, CHAT...). This is an ongoing project of which I am part of too.

My question, however, was more on how do people read Habermas'
influence on today's Activity Theorists.

Jonna



2009/11/9 Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net>:
> I think there are a number of people on the list, Jonna, who are familiar
> with Habermas.
>
> Habermas is the youngest of the 2nd generation of the Frankfurt School,
> elder stateman for the current generation. As per Frankfurt School
> traditions, Habermas did a lot of "immanent critique". This meant that, like
> Vygotsky in the 1920s, he trawls around the competing theories of the time,
> mining them for insights (well that's putting it very crudely, ok?). Among
> famous appropriations was his appropriation of Piaget, which I personally
> think was idiotic, leading to H's embrace of the biogenetic hypothesis and a
> rigid schema of historical development following a Piaget-type program.
>
> Among H's many great contributions though was his Discourse Ethics, and all
> CHAT people should study this. His concept of the public sphere is also
> something we should all learn.
>
> The significance of Discourse Ethics is that he replaces conceptions of
> objective truth knowable by rational thought, with a dialogic conception of
> truth, well actually of Right, not truth.
>
> He is very old now and his current trajectory is to come into complete
> agreement with John Rawls.
>
> The next generation of his followers are more interested in G H Mead rather
> than Piaget, which is of course a step forward in theory  though backward in
> time. It is my cherished hope that the Franfurters will one day swallow
> their pride and read Vygtosky. There are millions of young Marxists out
> there waiting to be unleashed on Vygotsky if the Frankfurters were to
> suggest it.
>
> As to H. being an Activity Theorist, no, but I included him in my diagram
> because I think his Discourse Ethics set the Fransfurt School on to a course
> which leads to CHAT. The fact that many of them are still Marxists gives
> added reason for hope.
>
> My main beef, as I have said earlier, is that Habermas sees no role for the
> concept of mediation, seeing culture as a kind of resource which can be
> drawn upon. Here is an article on the question of why followers of Habermas
> should read Vygotsky:
>
> http://home.mira.net/~andy/works/critical-theory-and-psychology.htm
>
> and a review of Habermas's most recent book:
>
> http://home.mira.net/~andy/works/habermas-review.htm
>
>
> Hope that helps.
> Andy
>
>
>
> Jonna Kangasoja wrote:
>>
>> Dear all,
>>
>> I would be especially interested if someone could say something
>> (anything) about the influence/role of Habermas in the picture. I am
>> working nowadyas with (urban) planning theorists, to whom Habermas is
>> a very central, although contested figure. Most of my colleagues have
>> never heard of Activity Theory, and the one's who have, regard present
>> day Activity Theorists as 'Habermasian' - I am not sure if this is
>> quite the way to put it, or at least I never thought Habermas to be
>> very central in e.g. Engestöm's theory - does anyone have any comments
>> on this?
>>
>> best, Jonna
>>
>>
>>
>> 2009/11/9 Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net>:
>>>
>>> I've been thinking ... What these diagrams lack is any information about
>>> why
>>> a writer is included and what they contributed to CHAT. Would anyone on
>>> the
>>> list like to put their hand up to write a paragraph (max 100 words
>>> probably)
>>> on a writer on the diagram explaining their contribution to CHAT and
>>> their
>>> sources? I would be happy to collate them and fix the essays to
>>> hyperlinks
>>> on the names of each writer? ... if others do most of the writing ...
>>> then
>>> the diagram might be genuinely useful.
>>>
>>> Andy
>>>
>>> Andy Blunden wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Mmmmm. I didn't sign up for an intellecual map of the universe here! The
>>>> French Revolution produced a mass of political theory of course, but
>>>> also,
>>>> it is widely regarded as the inspiration for Classical German
>>>> Philosophy,
>>>> which is one of our sources.
>>>>
>>>> World War One?  I don't know, but I have thought in the past that what
>>>> Vygotsky called "The Crisis in Psychology", viz., the myriad of
>>>> conflicting
>>>> currents in psychology suddenly contesting each other after WW1, was
>>>> some
>>>> kind of reaction to WW1 and the Russian Revolution.
>>>>
>>>> The Reformation and the Industrial Revolution deserve mention somewhere
>>>> too, in the atlas of ideas. ...
>>>>
>>>> Andy
>>>>
>>>> mike cole wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hmmmmm, like the French revolution or world war I for example?
>>>>> :-)
>>>>> mike
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 4:18 PM, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net
>>>>> <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>   Both Arne's and mine are listed on
>>>>>   http://lchc.ucsd.edu/MCA/Paper/index.html and both are in that
>>>>>   directory. I too would be interested in seeing some other versions.
>>>>>   Something might emerge out of the crowd.
>>>>>
>>>>>   It is interesting isn't that it is a quite small number of ... what
>>>>>   do you say? ... millieux? events? movements? which produced the main
>>>>>   ideas, via a whole mass of individual writers.
>>>>>
>>>>>   Andy
>>>>>
>>>>>   mike cole wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>       I think your pictured genealogy is interesting, Andy. I thought
>>>>>       Arne's was too, and I a sure others can make interesting
>>>>>       modifications. If anyone could do this in three D it could get
>>>>>       really fascinating.
>>>>>
>>>>>       Part of what makes for the partiality of any such attempt is the
>>>>>       position of the creator. Arne was a radical cultural historical
>>>>>       cognitive scientist of the
>>>>>       70's-90's (roughly), an importatant odd hybrid and unusually
>>>>>       nice guy.
>>>>>       Maturana, who is on his list, with Varela, were central figures
>>>>>       on bringing
>>>>>       dynamic systems into the discussion but you do not know about
>>>>>       him just
>>>>>       as many of us do not know some of the figures you name, and the
>>>>>       connections such as Dilthey-Wundt or Mead-Dilthey-American
>>>>>       pragmatism are poorly known altogether, but fascinating (to me!)
>>>>>       in their implications.
>>>>>
>>>>>       And, of course, the historical events that various of us might
>>>>>       highlight as
>>>>>       most relevant are going to vary as well.
>>>>>
>>>>>       Thanks for the new tool to think with. I'll try to get Arne's
>>>>>       genealogy put
>>>>>       up where yours is and perhaps others will contribute from their
>>>>>       perspectives.
>>>>>       mike
>>>>>
>>>>>       On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 6:42 AM, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net
>>>>>       <mailto:ablunden@mira.net> <mailto:ablunden@mira.net
>>>>>       <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>          Well, here's my shot at it:
>>>>>            http://lchc.ucsd.edu/mca/Paper/Genealogy-CHAT.pdf
>>>>>          I have tried to deal with your very valid point, Martin, that
>>>>>       it is
>>>>>          more the milieux than individuals, but I have also just
>>>>> omitted
>>>>> a
>>>>>          billion possible arrows so it is readable. It needs more than
>>>>> one
>>>>>          person to do this.
>>>>>
>>>>>          Andy
>>>>>          Martin Packer wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>              My question about the map is what the links represent.
>>>>> After
>>>>>              all, one scientist or philosopher may accept the ideas or
>>>>>              another, or react against them, or modify them, or
>>>>>       misunderstand
>>>>>              them. Seems to me each of these is a different link. Also,
>>>>> a
>>>>>              family tree indicates two parents for every progeny, where
>>>>>              Arne's genealogy seemingly shows spontaneous generation -
>>>>> one
>>>>>              figure alone can produce another. And wouldn't we want to
>>>>>       have a
>>>>>              way to map the milieus within which people were working?
>>>>>       Perhaps
>>>>>              something along the lines of the social fields that
>>>>>       Bourdieu was
>>>>>              fond of sketching, but with an added historical dimension.
>>>>>
>>>>>              Martin
>>>>>
>>>>>              On Nov 4, 2009, at 1:44 AM, Andy Blunden wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>                  To tell the truth Louise, there are a couple of names
>>>>> I
>>>>>                  don't know and half a dozen I know so little about I
>>>>>       don't
>>>>>                  know why they're included ... or not. Two of the three
>>>>>                  "outcomes" are people who think humans are a type of
>>>>>                  computer, so I am not surpised that this genealogy is
>>>>>       odd to
>>>>>                  me. But there is sooooo much out there. So much to
>>>>>       read. :(
>>>>>
>>>>>                  Up till a few weeks ago I thought that starting with
>>>>>                  Descartes was not justified, but I take that back
>>>>>       now. But
>>>>>                  somehow, Rene's nemesis, Aristotle, needs to be
>>>>>       included as
>>>>>                  well.
>>>>>
>>>>>                  I don't know anything about Vico, but I find Locke,
>>>>>       Berkeley
>>>>>                  and Leibniz to be rather peripheral to *our* story.
>>>>>
>>>>>                  Kant certainly deserves an important place, but I
>>>>>       think his
>>>>>                  nemesis, Goethe, may be more important for us.
>>>>>
>>>>>                  Fichte is actually the inventor of Activity as a
>>>>>                  philosophical concept (I just learnt that Hegel asked
>>>>>       to be
>>>>>                  buried next to Fichte; like Goethe, very under
>>>>>       recognized in
>>>>>                  the Anglophone world).
>>>>>
>>>>>                  Hegel is the inventor of Cultural Psychology, so
>>>>>       agreed there.
>>>>>
>>>>>                  I think Stirner and Mach are total diversions from our
>>>>>                  tradition. But maybe someone can explain to me their
>>>>>       role.
>>>>>
>>>>>                  Wundt and Dilthey are important, though I don't know
>>>>>       them well.
>>>>>
>>>>>                  Feuerbach is a bit of a footnote, but if you're going
>>>>> to
>>>>>                  have Feuerbach, you've gotta have Moses Hess, author
>>>>> of
>>>>>                  "Philosophy of the Deed", and inspiration for "Theses
>>>>> on
>>>>>                  Feuerbach". Of course if you think Frege, Russell and
>>>>>       Turing
>>>>>                  are important to the genealogy of CHAT, then you
>>>>> wouldn't
>>>>>                  want Hess.
>>>>>
>>>>>                  MARX, obviously, in CAPS.
>>>>>
>>>>>                  And I would have lines from a whole bunch of people
>>>>>       going to
>>>>>                  Dewey, as well as Peirce and Mead, but even though
>>>>> Peirce
>>>>>                  was the elder, I don't think you can give him such
>>>>>       priority.
>>>>>                  Dewey surely was the leader. Arguable.
>>>>>
>>>>>                  And where are the Gestaltists? Again, not for computer
>>>>>                  cognition, but there needs to be lines between Goethe
>>>>> and
>>>>>                  Kant and then to von Ehrenfels, and on to Koehler and
>>>>> Co.
>>>>>
>>>>>                  Russian linguists like Potebnya, but I don't know
>>>>>       where they
>>>>>                  came from.
>>>>>
>>>>>                  And these threads are all tied together with LS
>>>>>       Vygotsky, yes?
>>>>>
>>>>>                  Freud has to be mentioned (I forget his sources), with
>>>>>                  arrows to Luria. And after Vygotsky and Luria you
>>>>>       have ANL
>>>>>                  and thus to present day people,
>>>>>
>>>>>                  I guess, you can't leave out Piaget, and I don't know
>>>>>                  Piaget's sources.
>>>>>
>>>>>                  I know some people rate Merleau-Ponty, but if you're
>>>>>       going
>>>>>                  to give Merleau-Pony a seat, you have to put in
>>>>>       Lukacs and
>>>>>                  Horkheimer. I guess Habermas for discourse ethics,
>>>>> etc.
>>>>>
>>>>>                  I have no idea why Husserl and Heidegger get a
>>>>>       mention. I my
>>>>>                  humble opinion, as clever as they might be, their
>>>>>       impact on
>>>>>                  Activity Theory has only been negative.
>>>>>
>>>>>                  I have no idea why Bergson is mentioned: was he a
>>>>>       source for
>>>>>                  Piaget? Don't know why Nietzsche is there.
>>>>>       Interesting guy,
>>>>>                  but so are many others. Why von Uexhill?
>>>>>
>>>>>                  I agree that Wittgenstein rates a mention, though I
>>>>> don't
>>>>>                  know how much of a source he has been for us. He is
>>>>> some
>>>>>                  kind of version of Activity Theory.
>>>>>
>>>>>                  Frege, Russell and Turing are nothing to do with
>>>>>       CHAT. What
>>>>>                  about anthropologists??
>>>>>
>>>>>                  Never heard of Maturana.
>>>>>
>>>>>                  That's my reaction,
>>>>>
>>>>>                  Andy
>>>>>
>>>>>                  Louise Hawkins wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>                      Andy,
>>>>>                      I remember seeing this diagram a number of years
>>>>> ago,
>>>>>                      and I found it useful as a big picture diagram to
>>>>>       get my
>>>>>                      head around the significant theorist.
>>>>>                      Regards
>>>>>                      Louise Hawkins
>>>>>                      Lecturer - School of Management & Information
>>>>> Systems
>>>>>                      Faculty Business & Informatics
>>>>>                      Building 19/Room 3.38
>>>>>                      Rockhampton Campus
>>>>>                      CQUniversity
>>>>>                      Ph: +617 4923 2768
>>>>>                      Fax: +617 4930 9729
>>>>>                       -----Original Message-----
>>>>>                      From: Andy Blunden [mailto:ablunden@mira.net
>>>>>       <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>
>>>>>                      <mailto:ablunden@mira.net
>>>>>       <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>>] Sent: Wednesday, 4 November
>>>>>                      2009 01:05 PM
>>>>>                      To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
>>>>>                      Subject: [xmca] Arne Raeithel's "genealogy"
>>>>>
>>>>>  http://lchc.ucsd.edu/MCA/Paper/Theoretical%20connections.jpg
>>>>>                      I never found this map very useful to be honest.
>>>>>                      Andy
>>>>>                      mike cole wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>                          Have you found Arne Raeithel's "genealogy" of
>>>>>                          cultural-historical, activity theory thinkers
>>>>>       from
>>>>>                          several years back. I am sure it is somewhere
>>>>> at
>>>>>                          lchc.ucsd.edu <http://lchc.ucsd.edu>
>>>>>       <http://lchc.ucsd.edu>
>>>>>                          <http://lchc.ucsd.edu>. Perhaps you (and Andy,
>>>>>                          and.....) could update it with
>>>>>                          more detail. Hegel generated so much that has
>>>>>       been
>>>>>                          "laundered" by subsequent "original" thinkers
>>>>> its
>>>>>                          totally amazing, and ditto Mead (whose
>>>>> writings
>>>>> i
>>>>>                          know far better, although very inadequately).
>>>>>
>>>>>                      _______________________________________________
>>>>>                      xmca mailing list
>>>>>                      xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
>>>>>       <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>>
>>>>>
>>>>>                      http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>>>>>                      _______________________________________________
>>>>>                      xmca mailing list
>>>>>                      xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
>>>>>       <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>>
>>>>>
>>>>>                      http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>                  --
>>>>>
>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>                  Andy Blunden http://www.erythrospress.com/
>>>>>                  Classics in Activity Theory: Hegel, Leontyev,
>>>>>       Meshcheryakov,
>>>>>                  Ilyenkov $20 ea
>>>>>
>>>>>                  _______________________________________________
>>>>>                  xmca mailing list
>>>>>                  xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
>>>>>       <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>>
>>>>>
>>>>>                  http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>          --
>>>>>
>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>          Andy Blunden http://www.erythrospress.com/
>>>>>          Classics in Activity Theory: Hegel, Leontyev, Meshcheryakov,
>>>>>          Ilyenkov $20 ea
>>>>>
>>>>>          _______________________________________________
>>>>>          xmca mailing list
>>>>>          xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
>>>>>       <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>>
>>>>>
>>>>>          http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>   --
>>>>>
>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>   Andy Blunden http://www.erythrospress.com/
>>>>>   Classics in Activity Theory: Hegel, Leontyev, Meshcheryakov,
>>>>>   Ilyenkov $20 ea
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>> --
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Andy Blunden http://www.erythrospress.com/
>>> Classics in Activity Theory: Hegel, Leontyev, Meshcheryakov, Ilyenkov $20
>>> ea
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> xmca mailing list
>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>>>
>>
>
> --
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Andy Blunden http://www.erythrospress.com/
> Classics in Activity Theory: Hegel, Leontyev, Meshcheryakov, Ilyenkov $20 ea
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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