[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [xmca] "The Teaching About Emotions" in Russian?
Vygotsky wants to make the point that the associations between physical processes and mental feelings are pretty arbitrary, giving the whole of the Cartesian scheme a kind of structureless, aimless, and mechanical feel.
So he is merrily telling stories about Descartes and the Princess Elizabeth, his student. Descartes says that hunger makes you sad and "anorexia" makes you happy.:
Декарт связывает голод с печалью и анорексию с радостью.
Princess Elizabeth, who lived a notoriously austere life, complains. So Descartes agrees, that a full stomach makes you sad and an empty one makes you happy.
>From this we can see:
a) Princess Elizabeth really is an anorexic, and she's paying the bills
b) Poor Rene is torn between being a mercilessly mechanical rationalist and a Gallic gastronome.
c) In Russian, the word " анорексию " can also mean not eating because you are full.
Or maybe it is just after lunchtime and people are not thinking straight. My students are like that too.
David Kellogg
Seoul National University of Education
It must be after lunchtime. But
--- On Tue, 2/22/11, David Kellogg <vaughndogblack@yahoo.com> wrote:
From: David Kellogg <vaughndogblack@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [xmca] "The Teaching About Emotions" in Russian?
To: "Culture ActivityeXtended Mind" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
Date: Tuesday, February 22, 2011, 6:17 PM
Sorry, I need some help again. On p. 148, Vygotsky's got this:
"Но эта особая наука не только означает упразднение старой объяснительной психологии, но даже, по мысли Дильтея, обеспечивает ей возможность дальнейшего плодотворного развития."
I guess that means: "But this special science (recognizing the connection of physiological and psychological phenomena--DK) does not only imply doing away with the old explanatory psychology (which "explained" the connection sort of the way a rider "explains" a horse--DK) but even, according to Dilthey, implies the possibility of further productive development (of the old explanatory psychology--DK)."
Obviously, this doesn't make sense. But if we add another negative to the first negative "не только" and make it "not only does NOT imply...." it makes perfect sense: not only does this special science, according to Dilthy, NOT imply doing away with Cartesian explanatory psych, it holds out to the Cartesians the possiblity of progress in the direction of a modern descriptive psychology.
But I have heard that in Russian a double negative is simply a negative, and not an affirmative (like French and colloquial spoken English). So that rules that out. Or does it?
Perhaps I am reading this in too English a way?
David Kellogg
Seoul National University of Education
For those who need more context. Here's the Russian:
Душевная жизнь имеет природную сторону и подлежит естественнонаучному изучению и причинному анализу. Это и есть задача объяснительной, или физиологической, психологии. Но ни одна существующая в настоящее время объяснительная психология не может быть положена в основу наук о духе. Она не в состоянии дать адекватного не только объяснения, но и описания сложных высших специфических для человека психических процессов. Поэтому наряду с ней должна существовать понимающая, структурная, телеологическая, описательная
психология. Объяснительная психология как система не может ни теперь, ни в будущем привести к объективному познанию связей психических явлений. Именно отсутствие всякой осмысленной, понятной связи между чувством, сведенным к ощущению гусиной кожи и расширенных ноздрей, и всей остальной душевной жизнью, как мы видели, составляет самую отличительную черту объяснительной психологии эмоций, развиваемой Джемсом. Познание связей этих {198} психических явлений поэтому и должно составить предмет особой науки. Но эта особая
наука не только означает упразднение старой объяснительной психологии, но даже, по мысли Дильтея, обеспечивает ей возможность дальнейшего плодотворного развития. Между объяснительной и описательной психологией устанавливается, таким образом, тесное сотрудничество на основе разделения труда и сферы познания.
And here's the English:
Mental life has a natural aspect and is subject to natural-science study and causal analysis. This is the task of explanatory or physiological psychology. But not one explanatory psychology that exists at present can form the basis for sciences of the spirit. It is not in a state to give either a sufficient explanation or even a description of complex higher mental processes specific to man. For this reason, together with it, there must be cognitive, structural, teleological, and descriptive psychology. Explanatory psychology as a system cannot now nor in the future lead to an objective knowledge of the connections of mental phenomena. Specifically the absence of any intelligent, understood connection between feelings, reduced to sensing goose bumps and extended nostrils, and all the rest of mental life comprises the most distinctive trait of the explanatory psychology of emotions developed by James, as we have seen. For this reason, recognizing the
connections of these phenomena must be the subject of a special science. But this special science not only implies eliminating the old explanatory psychology, but even, according to Dilthey’s idea, providing for it the possibility of further productive development. Thus, a close cooperation on the basis of division of labor and sphere of knowledge between explanatory and descriptive psychology is established.
dk
__________________________________________
_____
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
__________________________________________
_____
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca