[xmca] Psychological Tools are BOTH prosthetic and indicative devices

[Larry Purss <lpscholar2@gmail.com>]

Further thoughts from John Shotter that can be intertwined with his
elaboration of chiasmic change [from an article he wrote titled "Vygotsky's
Psychology: Joint Activity in a Developmental Zone" 1989]

John elaborates on Vygotsky's notion of psychological tools by contrasting 2
distinct functions of tools - prosthetic and indicative.

PROSTHETIC- The blind man's stick is a prosthetic device that resides "on
the side of the agent" and we come to "dwell in"  these instruments.
(Polanyi). As such prosthrtic devices do NOT have ant content in themselves
but rather embody lived experience as a MEANS through which to achieve our
GOALS.  As prosthetic devices the tools BECOME TRANSPARENT.  Blind persons
do not feel their sticks vibrating in their hands when walking on rough
terrain. Nor do they have to INFER [as if solving a problem] that the
terrain is rough. They EXPERIENCE the rough terrain DIRECTLY. The knowledge
acquired directly can be COMPLETE and not fragmentary [a gestalt] and no
gaps are need to be further investigated. In such direct awareness Polanyi
says we attend FROM ongoing "subsidiary awareness" TO "focal awareness" of
their ORGANIZED RESULT [gestalt]

INDICATIVE- It is when the flow of activity from such prosthetic devices
break down that psychological tools BECOME indicative and no longer
transparent and direct. In their indicative functions psychological tools
move FROM "the side of the agent" TO the "side of the world". It is as
indicative functions that we confront tools as HAVING A MEANING that we must
INTERPRET.  In THIS MODE tools DO have a content.  They indicate a state of
the world. But this world must be constructed FROM FRAGMENTARY incomplete
data. A "from-to structure" of sense making FROM the fragments of data TO an
overall ORGANIZED GESTALT.  Indicators are NOT prosthesis; IMAGINATION is
required to achieve coherence (Shotter, 1989)  With psychological tools AS
prostheis we are in an EMBODIED transparent relationship to the tools. With
psychological tools as indicators our relationship to them is hermeneutical.
[FROM fragmentary data provided by our surroundings, when we REFLECT upon
the tools and world we construct a NEW ARTIFICIAL IMAGINARY context for our
activities.

John Shotter above is exploring the tool/text ambiguity inherent in
psychological instruments. The hermeneutical STANCE hides from us the
equally important prosthetic relation.  Only when the flow of activity
breaks down between ourselves and others do we require interpretation "hence
the APPARENT PRIMACY of an hermeneutic account of language."

As Shotter points out language possesses a tool/text ambiguity "for as each
utterance is USED prosthetically in its SAYING TO MOVE another person" then
the saying AS TEXT remains "on hand" as a text [which does not need
interpreting] However when the "other" is CONTESTING with you the character
of the situation [contesting  recognition] THEN the indicative function of
psychological tools AS TEXT comes to the foreground [of the gestalt]

I find this line of thinking helpful in trying to grasp & interpret the
concept of psychological tools and thought I would share my reflections in
"conversation" with John Shotter.

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