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

Re: [xmca] MARKED activity within a Dynamic Systems Developmental Model

Thanks, Larry. I believe that a discussion of "quasi motives" would also be
useful. I can contribute two thoughts, for what they are worth.

1. I think it is interesting to think of the words "inscribed" and
"culturally mediated" into the
term, MARKED, in your comments.

2. Am I correct that he developmental process you are describing  emerges
from the  co-incidence of developmental change occuring in two, seemingly
distantly related, developmental domains ; cognition and movement? If so,
this, and a number of other such examples form the core of the account given
in *The Psychology of Children, *which my wife and I published in 1989. We
called such convergence points, "bio-social-behavioral shifts"
that occur in culturally organized activity.

I ascribe that idea to the work of Emde and colleagues and German-Genetic
Field Theory,,,
of which Lewin as a major contributor.

To me it makes sense.

On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 7:58 AM, Larry Purss <lpscholar2@gmail.com> wrote:

> I have been reflecting on Martin's article sent months ago on Lewin and
> field theory and Martin's critique of the concept of "nested" contexts.
> Therefore I'm curious about others reflections on the "Dynamic Systems
> model
> as articulated by Linda Smith and Esther Thelen.
> Earlier I mentioned the centrality of the notion of MARKED INTERSUBJECTIVE
> attuned activity for the emergence of a sense of agency.  Fonagy's
> extension
> of Bowlby's Attachment theory is the best articulation of MARKED activity.
> [Fonagy is critical of Bowlby's notion of early attachment as a TEMPLATE
> that determines future development.  Fonagy instead discusses the
> intersubjective exchanges of MARKED attunement as central to development.
> Smith and Thelan's article [attached] highlights some empirical evidence
> for
> the centrality of MARKED activity for development.  Refer especially to
> page
> 346 where 10 month old infants do the A not B task and the activity that
> becomes MARKED is a shift in posture from a sitting to a standing position.
> This marked shift in posture allows the infant to be in a ZPD that allows
> the infant to be successful on a task that is thought of as being a later
> developing capacity.  Marked intersubjective activity is usually implicit
> but can become explicit.
> Martin,  what are your thoughts on "time" being "nested" in Smith and
> Thelen's model?
> The multiplicity of causal factors in the Dynamic Systems model AND the
> notion of MARKED INTERSUBJECTIVE ATTUNED activity in an EMERGENT model of
> development seems to show promise.
> What do others think?
> Larry
> __________________________________________
> _____
> xmca mailing list
> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
xmca mailing list