[xmca] How to explain variation in forms of knowledge as cognitive polyphasia

[Larry Purss <lpscholar2@gmail.com>]

I have been reading Sandra Jochelovitch's book "Knowledge in Context" which
is elaborating her understanding of social representational theory.

A key concept in this theory is the notion of cognitive polyphasia which
evolved from Moscovici's engagement with various ancestors.

Sandra understands the project of modernity as a quest for how persons come
to master their own behaviour and how they emancipate themselves from the
dependence and INFLUENCE on situations and traditions as forms of
knowledge.  She suggests that different answers to this central problem of
modernity [how to explain variation in forms of knowledge] explain the
differences between Piaget, Vygotsky, Durkheim, Levy-Bruhl and Moscovici.

For Durkheim and Piaget the TRAJECTORY TOWARDS HIGHER mental
functions [forms of  knowing] DISPLACED lower forms of knowing. Reason is
viewed as progressing from elementary to fully developed forms of
logic based on rationality. Rationality for Durkheim was singular,
permanent, and universal.  Piaget emphasized knowing as progressive stages.

Sandra suggests that Levy-Brul and Vygotsky did not escape this view of
rationality as progress towards mastery of an objective world based on
logical operations that operate at a HIGHER level of functioning than myth
or irrational beliefs.. Levy-Bruhl believed logic was the necessary
condition for liberating thought and was indispensible for its progress.

Vygotsky's research focused on scientific knowledge as higher than common
sense knowledge. Sandra suggests this is a view of social influence and
social design which tends towards producing a particular kind of rationality
that progresses towards mastery of the objective world.

Sandra points out that Vygotsky and Levy-Bruhl could not escape their
historical horizon of understanding in understanding progress. However their
work and approach to development as discontinuous transformations make it
possible to critique development as moving from lower to higher.

Moscovici's point of view is that development is NOT seen as more or less
"advanced" but as various STRUCTURES of knowledge. This perspective posits a
framework where there is cognitive polyphasia [various knowledge structures
CO-EXIST as differences.] Cognitive polyphasia points to the sociocognitive
heterogeneity of  representational FIELDS and is a view of development as
layered.

I'm not sure how others view Sandra's interpretations of the ancestors who
influenced Moscovici's theory of social representations. However, as I was
reading this chapter on the ancestral roots of social representational
theory  it reminded me of the earlier discussion of development as stages or
layers.

Larry
_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca