Re: [xmca] Vygotsky & Kurt Lewin

[Greg Thompson <greg.a.thompson@gmail.com>]

Thanks Andy!

On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 8:37 AM, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net> wrote:

> Lewin attached
>
> Greg Thompson wrote:
>
>> Andy and Michael,
>> First off, I didn't see where the Lewin article was. Can you direct me to
>> it or send it my way perhaps?
>>
>> As for the beef with Aristotle, non-Aristotelianism often refers to a
>> rejection of system that was developed from Aristotle's work and is often
>> more of a critique of common sense thinking than it is a critique of
>> Aristotle himself. Lewin was also hanging out with Count Korzybski who was
>> developing a non-Aristotelian system circa 1930's called General
>> Semantics.
>> It is very clear that this was not a critique of Aristotle but instead a
>> critique of common sense thinking that begins with Aristotelian laws of
>> logic - something that Korzybski argued was a result of the
>> subject-predicate nature of language.
>>
>> Similar to Lewin, Korzybski was developing an approach that was processual
>> and relational, and which didn't make the Aristotelian (i.e. common sense)
>> mistake of emphasizing things as essences.
>>
>> -greg
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 9:15 AM, Michael Glassman <MGlassman@ehe.osu.edu
>> >wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> Hi Andy,
>>>
>>> I think the reason Lewin gave short shrift to Aristotle is that he was
>>> less interested in getting Aritstotle right and more interested in
>>> attempting to foster change in the way psychologists and others think by
>>> pushing the Gallilean model.  It's funny, but it seems Lewin was always
>>> throwing things out or picking them up based on the needs of the moments.
>>>  Before 1946 Lewin was committed to social research as a documentable
>>> science.  But after 1946 and his work in Action Research and his starting
>>> of the National Testing Laboratory he said that maybe we shouldn't be
>>> worrying so much about science for the foreseeable future and concentrate
>>> on the processes of change - which had half of his team at MIT doing
>>> backflips, and the other half (led by Festinger) pulling their hair out.
>>>
>>> The more I read about him the more I think this guy must have been a hoot
>>> to be around - not your normal academic.
>>>
>>> Michael
>>>
>>> ______________________________**__
>>>
>>> From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu on behalf of Andy Blunden
>>> Sent: Fri 6/22/2012 11:53 AM
>>> To: Anton Yasnitsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
>>> Subject: Re: [xmca] Smolucha - pronunciation/genealogy (Systems of
>>> functions, Vygotsky & Kurt Lewin's Uebergang)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Well Anton, thanks to Martin, I have now read the Lewin paper. If Lewin
>>> had sent this paper to Vygotsky c. 1926, I could believe that it caused
>>> some reconsideration in his approach. But you say this happened c. 1930.
>>> I find this odd. The "Aristotlean" features of science which Lewin
>>> critiques I find Vygotsky well on top of at least from 1928. I don't
>>> tend to put a lot of weight on his pre-1928 works and rely mostly on T&S
>>> and the manuscripts of the last period, so maybe I'm missing something.
>>> The critique of "neo-Aristotleanism" applies to mainstream trends of
>>> psychology to this day but I don't see them as relevant to criticism of
>>> Vygotsky. And also, I am surprised that Lewin treats Aristotle in such a
>>> one-sided way. There is much in the very things for which he condemns
>>> Aristotle which were given a rational form in Hegel's critique of
>>> positivist science, but Lewin makes no mention of this. But I had always
>>> assumed that Lewin was a significant source of LSV's knowledge of Hegel.
>>>
>>> Andy
>>>
>>> Anton Yasnitsky wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Michael,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yep, there is such evidence. In his letters (published by now) there are
>>>>
>>>>
>>> several references to the fact that he had just received
>>>
>>>
>>>> the book from Lewin (i.e. directly from him). Also, here and there in
>>>>
>>>>
>>> his writings one can come across references to Lewin's methodological
>>> ideas
>>>
>>>
>>>> before the Uebergang paper, i.e. to the methodological works of
>>>>
>>>>
>>> mid-1920s that he apparently started reading and--even more importantly--
>>>
>>>
>>>> understanding by the end of the decade. I tend to interpret this process
>>>>
>>>>
>>> as truly groundbreaking experience for Vygotsky that started gradual
>>> change
>>> in
>>>
>>>
>>>> his mindset from the mechanicism of his instrumental period of 1920s to
>>>>
>>>>
>>> really holisitc psychology of the last couple years of his life. Indeed,
>>> everything was changing
>>>
>>>
>>>> very fast, but that's the way it was for late Vygotsky, i.e. for
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Vygotsky from the end of 1930 until the summer of 1934. In terms of
>>> languages, I believe our character
>>>
>>>
>>>> was way more comfortable with German, but I still would assume that he
>>>>
>>>>
>>> could read English with relative fluency, too. On the other hand, judging
>>> by the
>>>
>>>
>>>> quotes from Shakespeare's Hamlet, one of the most essential fiction
>>>>
>>>>
>>> oeuvre for him, he read it in Russian translation. So, in other words, I
>>> am
>>> not quite sure
>>>
>>>
>>>> about English, but given that he directly corresponded with Lewin, the
>>>>
>>>>
>>> author could have easily sent him the work in the original, i.e. in
>>> German.
>>>
>>>
>>>> In addition, there were a bunch of guys there with first-hand knowledge
>>>>
>>>>
>>> of Lewin and his work(s), with whom he could converse in their native
>>> Russian:
>>>
>>>
>>>> the fact is that three former Lewin's students eventually landed in
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Moscow and, from 1930 were working/collaborating with Vygotsky and Luria
>>> too, I guess.
>>>
>>>
>>>> As to Lewin's field theory and its impact on Vygotsky I should say that
>>>>
>>>>
>>> as far as I can see it NOW, Lewin's impact, whatever profound it must
>>> have
>>> been,
>>>
>>>
>>>> was not too much reflected in Vygotsky's finished work of 1930s. But, in
>>>>
>>>>
>>> any case, the fact is that in some writings of 1930s the high frequency
>>> of
>>> the use of "field"
>>>
>>>
>>>> in various combinations and diverse phrasal expressions is really
>>>>
>>>>
>>> telling. Not to mention the famous/notorious "zone of possible [proximal,
>>> nearest] development" and the
>>>
>>>
>>>> not so famous "social situation of development", the phrases that, to
>>>>
>>>>
>>> me, are very much resemblant of Lewin's topological framework.
>>>
>>>
>>>> Final note: the interrelations between Vygotsky-Luria and Lewin-Koffka
>>>>
>>>>
>>> are a topic of a research in progress. Something has already been
>>> published,
>>>
>>>
>>>> in Russian only, I am afraid, something will be published shortly.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> AY
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ______________________________**__
>>>>  From: Michael Glassman <MGlassman@ehe.osu.edu>
>>>> To: Anton Yasnitsky <the_yasya@yahoo.com>; "eXtended Mind, Culture,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>  Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2012 7:33:00 PM
>>>> Subject: RE: [xmca] Smolucha - pronunciation/genealogy (Systems of
>>>>
>>>>
>>> functions)
>>>
>>>
>>>> Anton,
>>>>
>>>> This is interesting.   Is there any evidence that Vygotsky read Lewin's
>>>>
>>>>
>>> work on the move from an Aristotelian to Galiliean perspective of
>>> relationships.  It would have been a short window I think, and Vygotsky
>>> probably would have had to read the original articles in German - or
>>> perhaps he just discussed them with people.
>>>
>>>
>>>> Do you think this would have also had an impact on how he viewed social
>>>>
>>>>
>>> relationships.  The teaching/learning aspects of Vygotsky are often
>>> presented as being hierarchical in nature, but I'm thinking the Galilean
>>> perspective was Lewin's entry point into Field theory.  Did Vygotsky see
>>> information relationship as more dynamic in his later writings?
>>>
>>>
>>>> Michael
>>>>
>>>> ______________________________**__
>>>>
>>>> From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu on behalf of Anton Yasnitsky
>>>> Sent: Thu 6/21/2012 7:19 PM
>>>> To: Martin Packer; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
>>>> Subject: Re: [xmca] Smolucha - pronunciation/genealogy (Systems of
>>>>
>>>>
>>> functions)
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Martin,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Right, this is exactly my point: much criticized for fairly mechanistic
>>>>
>>>>
>>> distinction between the lower and the higher in his earlier work of
>>> 1920s,
>>>
>>>
>>>> Vygotsky rejected this binary opposition in his later writings of the
>>>>
>>>>
>>> 1930, although he kept using  phrases "higher functions" or, rather,
>>>
>>>
>>>> "higher processes" and the like. The idea of "higher" perfectly fit his
>>>>
>>>>
>>> notion of "peak psychology" of 1932-1934, but the distinction
>>> higher-lower
>>> was gone.
>>>
>>>
>>>> Indeed, the introduction of the idea of systems of functions and
>>>>
>>>>
>>> inter-functional connections/relations rather than isolated functions was
>>> instrumental in
>>>
>>>
>>>> this theoretical shift. In a couple of places he clearly states that
>>>>
>>>>
>>> psychological processes are not built "in two storeys", but are rather
>>> recombinations
>>>
>>>
>>>> of more or less the same set of components, well, let's call them
>>>>
>>>>
>>> functions.
>>>
>>>
>>>> Following Kurt Lewin's methodological works (such as the one on the
>>>>
>>>>
>>> transition from Aristotelian to Galileian thinking),
>>>
>>>
>>>> in 1930s Vygotsky gradually revised his earlier naive binary oppositions
>>>>
>>>>
>>> and his later concepts, I believe, are better thought of as gradients
>>> than
>>> valuative and rigid oppositions.
>>>
>>>
>>>> That's how I understand the evolution of Vygotsky's thought and
>>>>
>>>>
>>> conceptual system, at least.
>>>
>>>
>>>> As to imagination, I am not quite sure that in his late texts he refers
>>>>
>>>>
>>> to it as a function, although he might well have done so here and there,
>>> given his
>>>
>>>
>>>> fairly inconsistent and imprecise use of psychological terminology. As
>>>>
>>>>
>>> to leading, I do not quite recall him referring to any function as
>>> leading,
>>> but, more precisely,
>>>
>>>
>>>> I believe he discusses "leading activity", which makes some difference.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> In any case, indeed, it is really hard to say if imagination is really a
>>> "higher" hmmmm....
>>>
>>>
>>>> psychological phenomenon, especially so, given its transitory character
>>>>
>>>>
>>> in children's development from total boundedness with "visual field"
>>> towards
>>>
>>>
>>>> abstract thinking and volitional behaviour. So, it is "higher" than
>>>>
>>>>
>>> purely motor-perceptual system of an infant, a prerequisite for
>>> preschoolers play, and,
>>>
>>>
>>>> I guess, from Vygotsky's perspective, might be regarded as not so high
>>>>
>>>>
>>> in relation to the "higher" abstract thinking of adolescents and,
>>> obviously, adults.
>>>
>>>
>>>> AY
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ______________________________**__
>>>> From: Martin Packer <packer@duq.edu>
>>>> To: Anton Yasnitsky <the_yasya@yahoo.com>; "eXtended Mind, Culture,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>  Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2012 6:38:06 PM
>>>> Subject: Re: [xmca] Smolucha - pronunciation/genealogy
>>>>
>>>> Anton,
>>>>
>>>> Is your point that LSV moved away from the notions of lower and higher
>>>>
>>>>
>>> psychological functions, towards that of systems of functions? I've been
>>> mulling over the fact that in his late texts on child development
>>> imagination is a leading function in early childhood, and it seems odd to
>>> call that either lower or higher. Or perhaps I'm misinterpreting your
>>> posts.
>>>
>>>
>>>> Martin
>>>>
>>>> On Jun 21, 2012, at 8:05 AM, Anton Yasnitsky wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Like I said, I am under the impression that Vygotsky's expression
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> "higher psychological [mental] functions" for Vygotsky means so many
>>> things
>>>
>>>
>>>> (although in different texts authored in different periods of his life)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> that it is bordering on total meaninglessness. Therefore, rephrasing our
>>> character,
>>>
>>>
>>>> "everything can be ... higher mental function", no problem with that :)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thus, if I may reformulate the question, we are looking for the textual
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> proof that Vygotsky did refer to creativity as higher
>>> mental/psychological
>>> function, right, Peter?
>>>
>>>
>>>> AY
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> P.S.
>>>>>
>>>>> By the way, speaking of mental/psychological, here is a funny thing:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> despite his virtually boundless flexibility in many respects, Vygotsky
>>> NEVER
>>>
>>>
>>>> used the word "mental" (literally: psychic, psychical -- psikhicheskie)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> when he referred to functions, but only "psychological". Later on, this
>>> phrase
>>>
>>>
>>>> was pretty consistently "corrected" by his devoted best students in
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> many --but not all--of his posthumous publications of  Soviet period.
>>> Curious detail,
>>>
>>>
>>>> isn't it? A recent study that has been done back in Germany
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> demonstrates this mysterious peculiarity of Vygotsky's discourse of his
>>> lifetime period
>>>
>>>
>>>> as opposed to his posthumous publications, and will be published
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> shortly in several international languages in PsyAnima, Dubna
>>> Psychological
>>> Journal
>>>
>>>
>>>> ( http://www.psyanima.ru/**journal/2011/4/index.php<http://www.psyanima.ru/journal/2011/4/index.php>).
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ______________________________**__
>>>>> From: Peter Smagorinsky <smago@uga.edu>
>>>>> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
>>>>> Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2012 6:23:57 AM
>>>>> Subject: RE: [xmca] Smolucha - pronunciation/genealogy
>>>>>
>>>>> In any case, in service of the scholarly discussion, I'm genuinely
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> puzzled by the idea that creativity is a higher mental function, and
>>> would
>>> appreciate further clarity to that provided by Anton. Thx,p
>>>
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.**
>>>>> ucsd.edu <xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu>]
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> On Behalf Of Peter Smagorinsky
>>>
>>>
>>>> Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2012 6:20 AM
>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
>>>>> Subject: RE: [xmca] Smolucha - pronunciation/genealogy
>>>>>
>>>>> My apologies to Francine if my mnemonic sounded snide--I was going from
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> the pronunciation guide on the article that I had scanned, and I have no
>>> idea of who put it there. With a name like Smagorinsky (which also might
>>> be
>>> an Ellis Island adjustment), making fun of people's names is not usually
>>> part of my approach. I'm glad to have the correction. Peter
>>>
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.**
>>>>> ucsd.edu <xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu>]
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> On Behalf Of larry smolucha
>>>
>>>
>>>> Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2012 9:22 PM
>>>>> To: xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>>>>> Subject: [xmca] Smolucha - pronunciation/genealogy
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Message from Francine Smolucha:
>>>>> I have been a member of XMCA for several years - anyone could haveasked
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> me how to pronounce my last name.
>>>
>>>
>>>> I not surprised that the discussion of the work my husband and I have
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> donebegins with a snide comment about our last name.Growing up in
>>> Chicago
>>> as a Polish-American, other ethnic groupswould often make fun of your
>>> last
>>> name, and tell insulting Polish jokes abouthow stupid Poles are. Polish
>>> immigrants often had their last names Americanizedby immigration
>>> officials
>>> at Ellis Island. In order for other ethnic groups to be able topronounce,
>>> and spell a Polish last name, Poles would typically use an easy English
>>> pronunciation.
>>>
>>>
>>>> My husband's family would usually say Smo-lou-ka.Some family members
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> would say Smo-lou-cha.The proper Polish pronunciation is Smo-whoo-ha
>>> (Smolucha has an umlaut over the u).The Smolucha family 'Y' chromosome is
>>> Scandinavian (Vikings who settled Eastern Europecirca 800 A.D.) - we had
>>> the National Geographic Society's Genoanthropology project do aDNA
>>> analysis.
>>>
>>>
>>>> When I married into the Smolucha family, I chose to use my married name
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> out of respect formy husband's family. By the way, my maiden name is
>>> Polish
>>> too.
>>>
>>>
>>>> As I have been working on my new paper titled "A Vygotskian Theory of
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Cultural Synergy andCultural Creativity", my conversation with a
>>> Latin-American colleague required that I debunksome popular
>>> misconceptions
>>> about 'white ethnics.' So I retell the story here:
>>>
>>>
>>>> My own family is 'Celtic' Polish in origin (the Krakov area was settled
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> by Celts, Vienna was originally a Celtic village). The European Celts
>>> disappeared from history. Poland itself did not existfor over 150 years
>>> (from approximately 1760 until 1918) - while it was divided among
>>> Prussia(then Germany), Austria, and Russia. [The Palestinian loss of
>>> statehood is not unique in history.]One of my great grandmothers ran an
>>> illegal underground school in her farmhouse near Vilna where she taught
>>> children how to read and write the Polish language. The Czar had
>>> orderedanyone doing so to be shot. Her son (my grandfather) had to be
>>> smuggled out of St. Petersburgon a cattle ship bound for Canada after the
>>> aborted 1905 Russia revolution - he was a memberof a student group being
>>> hunted down by the Czar's orders. Back in Krakov, my other grandfatherwas
>>> serving in Austrian Emperor Franz Joseph's 'Polish' cavalry (Austrian
>>> occupied Poland beingrenamed Galactia) -
>>>
>>>
>>>> grandpa's wife was Spanish Hapsburg.
>>>>> My parents, both first generation Americans, did not attend high
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> school, instead my Dad worked in the Chicago Stock Yards as a teenager
>>> (you
>>> might recall Upton Sinclair's book The Jungle.)My mom was a factory girl.
>>> They grew up in that famous Chicago ghetto known as
>>> Back-of-the-Yards.Five
>>> months after they were married, Pearl Harbor was attacked -  my Dad
>>> served
>>> in the Army fieldartlllery, doing four beachheads in the South Pacific
>>> (Aleutians, Kwajelian, Philippines, & Okinawa).His unit would have landed
>>> in the first wave in the Invasion of Japan - which was cancelled
>>> whenJapan
>>> surrendered after the atomic bombs were dropped. Mom spent the war years
>>> building fighterplanes in a defense plant - yes, Rosie the Riveter.
>>>
>>>
>>>> We come from a family heritage of people who think for themselves and
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> are honor bound to do theright thing.
>>>
>>>
>>>> If anyone is interested in discussing the Vygotsky Theory of Creativity
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> that we have been publishing in thelast 27 years, I welcome the
>>> scholarly
>>> discourse. In addition to my 1992 Reconstruction of Vygotsky'sTheory of
>>> Creativity, you might read our 2012 publication Vygotsky's Theory of
>>> Creativity: Figurative thinking Allied withLiteral Thinking [in
>>> Contemporary Perspectives on Research in Creativity in Early Childhood
>>> Education}.
>>>
>>>
>>>>                           ______________________________**____________
>>>>> _____
>>>>> xmca mailing list
>>>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>>>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/**listinfo/xmca<http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ______________________________**____________
>>>>> _____
>>>>> xmca mailing list
>>>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>>>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/**listinfo/xmca<http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ______________________________**____________
>>>>> _____
>>>>> xmca mailing list
>>>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>>>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/**listinfo/xmca<http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca>
>>>>> ______________________________**____________
>>>>> _____
>>>>> xmca mailing list
>>>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>>>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/**listinfo/xmca<http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> ______________________________**____________
>>>> _____
>>>> xmca mailing list
>>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/**listinfo/xmca<http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca>
>>>> ______________________________**____________
>>>> _____
>>>> xmca mailing list
>>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/**listinfo/xmca<http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> --
>>> ------------------------------**------------------------------**
>>> ------------
>>> *Andy Blunden*
>>> Joint Editor MCA: http://www.tandfonline.com/**toc/hmca20/18/1<http://www.tandfonline.com/toc/hmca20/18/1>
>>> Home Page: http://home.mira.net/~andy/
>>> Book: http://www.brill.nl/concepts
>>>
>>>
>>> ______________________________**____________
>>> _____
>>> xmca mailing list
>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/**listinfo/xmca<http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ______________________________**____________
>>> _____
>>> xmca mailing list
>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/**listinfo/xmca<http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> ------------------------------**------------------------------**
> ------------
> *Andy Blunden*
> Joint Editor MCA: http://www.tandfonline.com/**toc/hmca20/18/1<http://www.tandfonline.com/toc/hmca20/18/1>
> Home Page: http://home.mira.net/~andy/
> Book: http://www.brill.nl/concepts
>
> __________________________________________
> _____
> xmca mailing list
> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>
>


-- 
Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D.
Sanford I. Berman Post-Doctoral Scholar
Laboratory of Comparative Human Cognition
Department of Communication
University of California, San Diego
http://ucsd.academia.edu/GregoryThompson
__________________________________________
_____
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca