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

Re: [xmca] Fwd: Private Speech and Self Regulatiion

True about not being able to do it all.  What Luria did do was amazing.

This passage in Luria's The Working Brain seems to be a partial answer to my question about how did he evaluate Vygotsky's suggestion for a sign-mediated neural connection.

"Many years have passed since psychologists regarded mental functions as isolated *faculties*, each of which could be localized in a certain part of the brain. However, the time has also passed when it was thought that mental processes could be represented by models of a *reflex arc*, the first part of which was purely afferent in character and performed the function of sensation and perception, while the second, effector part, was entirely concerned with movement and action."

That helps a lot. That clearly explains why Vgotsky's S-R framework is out of use. I think I've run into that explanation before, but this time it is sinking in. At the same time, the question of how do objects and signs get processed at the neuropsychological level still seems to be a good one. Perhaps Luria addressed that concept from a different angle? And perhaps it was not within the grasp of the technology of his time to get very far with it. How all those neurons and connections organize themselves is still very dimly understood, but a great deal more is known today than in the mid-20th Century. Perhaps what is missing is a cultural-historical approach. What Luria might have been able to do with an MRI! With so many in modern psychology today looking to brain activity patterns and neurotransmitters as direct explanations for behavior, Vygotsky's idea that neuronal versions of objects and signs are always found together in the operations of the higher functions seems especially refreshing and potentially fruitful.

- Steve

On Jul 30, 2010, at 8:12 PM, mike cole wrote:

I think all of this is closely related to what Tolman wrote about the
division of (specifically human) labor giving rise to conscious action,
consciousness, which appears as a special kind of co-knowledge,

Luria theorized mediation in a really interesting way, combining
phylogenetic and cultural lines of development in one of the only ways left open to him after about 1934. He was not, i believe, focused on the level of
local activities or how these activities are linked to their large
socio-cultural context, except in ritual speech.

We can't do it all! We can't get it all right.
I think he understood this perfectly.

xmca mailing list