I need time to absorb all that Larry and I may not be alone. Meantime, here is a paper by Eugene Subbotsky that he said I could pass along and that he believes relevant to the issue of layers and stages. His work is always interesting! mike On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 6:13 AM, Larry Purss <lpscholar2@gmail.com> wrote: > Mike and others reflecting on layers/stages > I wasn't sure if I should add to your post on definitions and the role of > superordinate categories as imlpicated the increasing decontextualization > of formal definitions. I decided I should start a new thread. > As the article states, the cognitive ability to generate decontextualized > abstract FORMAL definitions is considered a cental ability for > catergorizing > persons into IQ subgroups. Acquiring this ability is often viewed as a > hallmark of individual diplays of intelligence and an excellent tool for > creating "ability groupings" and people who "lack this innate ability" are > viewed as "lacking" intelligence. > Therefore, if it can be shown that this "ability" is not an individual > attribute but rather a culturally valued bias implicit in the sociocultural > traditions of formal schooling, it raises fundamental questions about our > notions of IQ and what is measured. Every school psychologist as part of > there professional education should be required to read AND grasp the ideas > in this article. Thank goodness the sociocultural turn in psychology is > challenging the basic assumptions in this cognitive model. > > "Developing" decontextualized definitions and abstract ways of thinking > from > a sociocultural perspective is a matter of practicing generating "formal > definitions" in institutional structures which value this particular genre > as a performance. > > This article's focus on the centrality of practice can also be seen as > another example that can be used to capture the tension in the various > accounts of the layering/stages antinomy. If the culture values > decontextualized ways of thinking then this "ability" will be privileged > over more concrete ways of thinking and be labeled as "higher". However, > as the article points out previous ways of constructing are not transcended > or sublated. Our horizon of understanding expands to include our emerging > capacity to use formal definitions as an often more efficient practice > especially in the "assembly-line" institutional structures of FORMAL school > settings. However, as B. Rogoff reminds us, assembly line practices are not > ALL pervasive, even in formal school settings. Other models of learning > co-exist with the assembly line practices. However, the dominant structure > is formal and the formal tests of vocabulary development capture who are > efficient in these particular situated genres. > > In the spirit of considering the layering/stages antinomy I want to discuss > another "skill" that is often judged to be foundational for categorizing > persons into ability groups and is often theorized as "innate ability". > This "skill" is verbal expression which is of central importance in > American culture. I want to suggest this is another example of American > cultural values [biases], which are historically situated, but are > often theorized as a universal developmental dynamic. I will be > summarizing > Suzanne Kirschner's account of "verbal expression" as articulated in her > article > > "The Assenting Echo: Anglo-American Values in Contemporary Psychoanalytic > Developmental Psychology" (1990) in the journal SOCIAL RESEARCH, vol. 57, > No.4. > > Suzanne's article highlights how Freudian ideas [and ideals] when > transported to North America, are culturally transformed when translated > into a new cultural tradition. The hermeneutical process she articulates > when giving an historical account of psychodynamic developmental theory in > America is another example of the sociocultural embeddedness of all our > theories [including developmental theories]. If one rejects the basic > premises and assumptions of psychoanalytic accounts, then reading an > historical account of how these "invalid" notions could so profoundly > influence cultural notions of development becomes a hermeneutical narrative > that highlights how historically situated sociocultural processes develop. > > Suzanne points out that American tradition values and articulates 3 > dominate themes when reshaping, reframing and reconstituting developmental > theories from an American cultural imaginary. Her article documents the > translation of pyschodynamic developmental theory when these European > notions were TRANSLATED in America. However, the historical process she > articulate in her article specifically for psychoanalytic developmental > theory is relevant to the translation of other developmental theories as > they are "borrowed" from other cultural traditions and become elaborated in > the American cultural imaginary. > > The 3 American values which Suzanne suggests are often implicit in American > versions of developmental theories are > 1) Self-reliance 2) Self-direction and 3) verbal expression. > Suzanne believes these 3 values are central and pervasive in American > cultural imaginaries. The perceived "lack" in an individual of these > values is often theorized as an indication of a lack of maturity or > becoming stuck at an earlier developmental stage. By examining the value > assumptions implicit in the cultural biases of developmental theories that > posit particular human expressions as "lacking" in the person's > development > we can glimpse the pervasive constraints of cultural traditions on our > theories. > > Suzanne points out the lack of "self-reliance" is viewed as being stuck in > DEPENDENCY. Takeo Doi a Japanese psychiatrist points out there is a > cultural assumption in America that others can help a person ONLY INSOFAR > AS > THE PERSON HELPS HIM OR HER SELF. To help a child become independent "is > probably the single most important goal of American parents" [Kirschner] > and > overdependence is seen as a lack of development. Developmental progress is > viewed as displaying increasing self-reliance and detachment from > dependency > relationships. The goal of development is the achievement of autonomy and > the ability to regulate a life of ones own choosing. Suzanne suggests > along > with this bias to valorize self-reliance is a sense of "separateness" and > "detachment" as one focuses on the capacity to improve ones own life > THROUGH > ONES OWN INITIATIVE. > > The 2nd cultural ideal is the developing capacity for SELF-DIRECTION. This > cultural ideal assumes one should know what is in ones heart and mind and > that one should make choices and live in accordance with these inner > beliefs > and feelings. It is by examining the perceived negative qualities of the > LACK of self-direction that the cultural value of "self-direction" is > implicated in our developmental theories. The opposite of self-direction > is > COMPLIANCE with someone else's desires which distorts, constricts, or > suppresses one's true self. If one is seen as compliant and ones true > self > becomes inaccessible then development is seen as stuck or "arrested" at an > earlier stage of development where one lacks autonomy. Again the hallmark > of > "lacking autonomy" is being DEPENDENT on others to give direction to ones > life. Robert Bellah in "Habits of the Heart" describes "finding oneself" > and > being faithful to that self in one's lifestyle as central values of > American > cultural values. [what Bellah calls expressive individualism] > > The 3rd cultural ideal which is implicit in developmental theories is the > ideal of SELF EXPRESSION. There is a cultural bias to encourage using > language as a means of expressing ones own opinions and feelings. > Kirschner > references Joseph Tobin's study of preschool in 3 cultures [Japan, China, > and the United States.] Tobin reported dialogue from an American school in > which the teacher asks > "Do you want juice, Rhonda? Milk? A cracker? What do you want? Don't just > keep shaking your head. How am I supposed to know what you want if you > don't > tell me?" > Kirschner points out 2 assumptions implicit in this exchange. 1) Everyone > is > entitled to freedom of choice and a variety of options 2)You CANNOT EXPECT > ANOTHER TO INTUIT OR ANTICIPATE YOUR PREFERENCES - you must state them > explicitly. In other words you cannot DEPEND on another person to > ANTICIPATE > your needs. Takeo Doi in Japan documents a different cultural account > of development. In Japan the cultural ideal is to be able to anticipate > anothers needs intuitively and it is rude to wait until the other expresses > an explicit need. In the American context to communicate verbally is > highlighted as a sign of higher development. "EMPATHIC COMMUNICATION CANNOT > BE RELIED UPON TO COMMUNICATE NEEDS AND WISHES TO THE OTHER" [kirschner] > > As Kirschner summarizes in her article, these 3 cultural ideals imply a > tradition of hyperindividualism which Kirschner traces to the historical > situation of America's radical Protestant heritage and its secular > offshoots. She suggests developmental theories in America have developed > along similar lines in their idealization of the self-regulated and > self-reflective autonomous individual. In the context of our discussion on > layering and stages the idea of layering allows recognition of the > CONTINUING tension between a sense of DEPENDENCY AND INDEPENDENCE and is > capable of valueing both sides of the tension. In contrast the concept of > stages idealizes one side of the tension and views dependency as a LACK > of development. Seeing human needs as "immature" and "lacking" because of > being embedded in relations of DEPENDENCY which the person must separate > from has parallels to the account of developing decontextualized > definitions. > As a psychological tool decontextualization and decentering are ways to > expand a person's horizon of understanding BUT NOT AT THE EXPENSE OF > RECOGNIZING EARLIER WAYS of being at home in the world. > > Mike, this is another reflection on the discussion of layers/stages and the > implicit values and judgements within accounts of development. > > Larry > _______________________________________________ > xmca mailing list > xmca@weber.ucsd.edu > http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca >
Attachment:
Ghost in the Machine edited.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document
_______________________________________________ xmca mailing list xmca@weber.ucsd.edu http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca