[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [xmca] Honestly....

I am not sure that I agree with you about there being no innate drive.
There is psychological data to show that orphan children, who are simply
dumped in a cot and has no interaction with a caregiver (except for getting
a bottle) either grow up impoverished socially, or worse, die. Luckily,
since we know that, crèches are a bit more caring.

On 26 April 2010 16:52, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net> wrote:

> Eric, I think it quite possible to hold at the same time different
> positions on intersubjectivity and on the question of innate/acquired. There
> is no doubt that there are social animals whose sociality is innate and who
> can therefore acquire new skills socially. But I believe CHAT is a current
> of thought which holds that becoming human is possible only through
> interaction with other people using culturally acquired artefacts (i.e.,
> intersubjectivity plus artefacts), but even the tendency to engage in
> interaction is acquired only because other human beings around the child
> "summon" the child to interaction. There is no innate drive to sociality in
> human beings. A. I. Meshcheryakov's book is definitive on this question I
> believe.
> Does that answer your question, Eric? I wasn't sure I got your meaning
> exactly.
> Andy
> ERIC.RAMBERG@spps.org wrote:
>> ....didn't realize equating Piaget with intersubjectivity would create a
>> conflaguration of misunderstanding.
>> Am I incorrect in my understanding of intersubjectivity?  I believe it to
>> be based on innate abilities rather than appropriated skills.  Perhaps
>> Bahktin did not write on this, I must admit I am shallow in my understanding
>> of Bahktin.
>> Initially in my study of LSV and the CHAT tradition I was a person who
>> prioritized innate abilities but as I have studied and practiced teaching I
>> have come to  realize that being human IS developed via interactions and
>> attachments.  Biological genetics must play into it but I have a hard time
>> believing that intersubjectivity is biological in nature.
>> Am I talking in circles or drowing in misunderstanding?
>> eric
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/>+61 3 9380 9435 Skype andy.blunden
> An Interdisciplinary Theory of Activity: http://www.brill.nl/scss
> _______________________________________________
> xmca mailing list
> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca

6 Andover Road
Johannesburg 2092
011 673 9265  082 562 1050
xmca mailing list