[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.
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
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
open to him after about 1934. He was not, i believe, focused on the
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