RE: [xmca] Attachment attached

[Peter Smagorinsky <smago@uga.edu>]

I put the whole article into the translator, and here's what I got. I think I hit the word max at some point.

Everything in the world is intertwined! And often, as the poet said, by my own hand. Neither individual scientists or research school does not occur in a vacuum. All European science has its roots in ancient Athens. Care about these roots historians of science. Experimental (scientific) psychology in Imperial Russia, as in many other countries, has its roots in Germany.
Its interesting weaving and crossing a Russian-Ukrainian psychology. Offered his trial analysis of such intersections and influences that are most often mutual. Arbitrarily take shape IM Sechenov, who rightly regarded as the father of Russian physiology. We assume his grandfather Russian psychology. He worked at several universities in Germany, at the St. Petersburg University. Has left its mark, and Ukraine, as head of the department of physiology at the Novorossiysk University in Odessa (1871-1876 gg.), Then in Moscow. In Odessa tradition IM Sechenov continued NN Lange (Trained at the Leipzig school, Wundt, in the universities of Berlin, Paris), which had a great influence on many psychologists Russia and Ukraine. Direct disciple of N. Lange was DG Elkin (1895-1986), many decades in charge of the Department of Psychology of the University of Odessa, and had close contacts with psychologists in Moscow, Kiev, Kharkov.
Leave for a while, and Odessa with GI Chelpanov who graduated from Novorossiysk University, move to Kiev. It is possible that GI Chelpanov also crossed paths with NN Lange. In Kiev, he became a professor of psychology and philosophy, and in 1907 he moved to Moscow. In 1910-1911. he became acquainted with the work of psychological laboratories and institutes in Germany and the U.S.. In 1912, there was the most important event in the history of Russian psychology: GI Chelpanov opened the Psychological Institute, built by the merchant SI Shchukin. Of course, Russia and to the creation of the Institute of Psychology has developed a number of universities, in 1908, VM Bekhterev opened huge at the time Psycho Institute. Soon, however, from about 1910, became a psihorefleksologiyu psychology, and in 1917 - in a "clean" reflexology. Time has shown that reflexology for psychology proved fruitless. Moreover, she, like many psychologists physiology before and after it, allowed herself to the psychology of unfriendly acts, and even aggression. VM Bekhterev, unlike IP Pavlova, reacted negatively to the creation of the Psychological Institute. He expressed the wish that the science is not artificially driven into a "privileged Chamber University" and once served as a practice. In 1929 VM follower Bekhterev young reflexologist BG Ananiev even compared with the psychology of alchemy and denied its right to exist. (When BG Ananiev matured, he argued that psychology - is the central science in the human studies.) Compared with reflexology reactology KN Kornilov in chelpanovskom Institute came much later and was a minor episode in his development. The reason is that the GI Chelpanov went to psychology in a natural way, not of the brain, and from the head and heart of the philosophical views of the world, soul and mind. His students GG Shpet and VV Zenkovsky still in Kiev, wrote special treatises in defense understood as the science of the soul of the physiological psychology of reductionism and psychophysical parallelism. Who knows, maybe psychologists knowingly hurt by physiologists: suddenly their own mind, thought and consciousness really a function of the brain? A gray matter of the cerebral cortex - the body of the soul. Maybe they are, in fact, to think at the level of reflexes, it is still what - unconditional, conditional or associative? Then they need to not be offended, do not argue with them, and sympathize with them, do not be surprised new associations and combinations, the transition from collective reflexology to social brain. We will wait for the new results: the latter differs from the anti-social or antisocial brain ... And before you know it will live up to phrenology.
Psychological Institute became the cradle and school of LS Vygotsky, who gave birth to the Kharkov school of psychology. Great help in the creation of the Institute G.I.Chelpanovu had invited his student from Kiev GG Shpet. Last complete its Kiev education, working in the libraries of Berlin, Edinburgh, London, talking with the head of the Würzburg school of psychology O. Külpe. He attended the lectures of Husserl, he worked in his seminars and has worked closely with him. In the 1920-s. in Moscow there are interesting intersections and not too inspiring event. According to contemporaries, in 1923, student Chelpanov KN Kornilov wrote to the Central Committee of the CPSU (b) a denunciation of his teacher, accusing him of idealism that he still considers the psychology of science of the soul, and he became director of the institute. Even at KN Kornilov in 1923, comes to the Institute of AR Luria and finds in it a student A. Leontief, who considered himself a disciple Chelpanov, and began under the direction of AR Luria study affective reactions. In 1925, on the recommendation of AR Luria and hosted by KN Kornilov came to the Institute of LS Vygotsky, who in 1913-1917 gg., Among law faculty of Moscow State University, studied the historical-philological faculty of the National University of AS Shanyavsky. There he attended lectures GG Shpet and worked for two years in his seminar (in which he, though he never admitted). Now, when it published nearly 10 volumes of the GG Shpet, we know that he owned at least prolegomenon to the cultural-historical theory of consciousness. Only in his later memoirs AN Leontiev only once mentioned the name of GG Shpet, calling it the most famous professor of the Institute of Psychology.
On pedological faculty 2nd MSU at the end of the 1920s. lectures Kiev PP Blonsky, GG Shpet listened and future participants of the Kharkov school VI Asnin, LI Bozovic and Kievan AV Cossack (there is done and the teacher from the Lower Volga Zinchenko, but was not accepted and met them already in Kharkiv). But the main teacher LI Bozovic and A. Cossack considered LS Vygotsky.
I will not discuss the reasons for which the Muscovites, including newly made in the early 1930s. became uncomfortable in Moscow and fascinated the capital of Ukraine - Kharkiv. One way or another, the LS Vygotsky, MS Lebedinsky, AR Luria, AN Leontiev were invited to Kharkov, then joined LI Bozovic and A. Cossack. All but the LS Vygotsky, who appeared in Kharkiv, in neuropsychiatric Academy, and then they "occupied" and other institutions, which distributed "psychological contagion." Of course, even before their arrival in the old university town of Kharkov (University was founded in 1805) had its psychological traditions. Suffice it to recall AA Potebnya that psychologists, linguists, and philosophers believe my colleague, pedology AS Zaluzhny, psychophysiology labor FR Dunaevsky and others. Explication of these traditions we have to EF A. Ivanova and Yasnitskomu.
To understand why not go to Kharkov LS Vygotsky, already approved by the autumn of 1931 as head of the department of the State Institute of Genetic Psychology training Commissariat Ukraine, back to Odessa. In 1920, N. Lange received invited philosophical education in Germany, SL Rubinstein at the Department of Psychology of the University of Odessa. The only useful for psychology consequence the October Revolution was that philosophers SL Rubinstein and PP Blonsky (as GG Shpet, who studied at the University of Kiev in GI Chelpanov and who taught at the People's University of Vygotsky) reasonably shifted from philosophy to psychology. After the death of NN Lange in 1921 for one year SL Rubinstein became head of the psychology department. Then he wrote his famous article "The principle of creative activity", which is justly considered as the beginning of the activity approach in psychology. I suspect that he was fired in 1922 for the same reasons that this university was once dismissed II Swordsmen. SL Rubinstein, in contrast, was not in Paris, and in Leningrad, where in 1930 he headed the Department of Psychology LGPI them. Herzen. That he invited LS Vygotsky take the place of MJ Basov, who died in a 1931 LS Vygotsky accepted the invitation and in the fall 1931 was systematically go to Leningrad. Later SL Rubinstein invited and AN Leontiev. LS Vygotsky continued to collaborate with their colleagues and students bylymi, visited Kharkiv arrivals. In Leningrad, he met his new pupil, who became vygotchaninom to the bone - DB Elkonin. It was he who at a conference organized in 1938 by the Kharkov Pedagogical Institute, gave the old and the new name of Kharkov "Kharkov psychological school." But LS Vygotsky then there was not, and AN Leontiev and AR Luria lived in Moscow. Head of the department instead of A. Leontief was AV Cossack.
Back in 1932 newcomers met in Kharkov psychologists PY Halperin, A. Rosenblum, VI Asnina, FV Bassin, PI Zinchenko, GD Bows, OM End and others.
Leave aside the content side of the remarkably productive decade for which was incredibly much. This did not stop even relatively early departure from Kharkov AN Leontiev and AR Luria (between 1934 and 1936.). It is difficult to say what the development of the school would have received if not for the Great Terror and the Great War, unleashed blood brothers or blood brothers - Stalin and Hitler.
In an age of terror has lost AI School Rosenblum. She came out of the war without loss, although the PI Zinchenko and GD Bows fought. But losses were peaceful. It left the Kharkov Muscovites joined by other. In 1942, SL Rubinstein created department of psychology at MSU and invite to it already starts either jealous, or in competition with like-minded people on the activity approach - AN Leontiev, AR Luria, PY Halperin and A. Zaporozhets. All of them made up the core of future office, and then the Faculty of Psychology of Moscow State University (then as S. Rubinstein attempted to demobilize who turned out for a short time in Moscow Lieutenant Zinchenko, but did not, it was sent back to the front). GD Bows settled in Leningrad, was engaged in military psychology. LI Kotlyarova moved to the city. TI Titarenko permanently left psychology, she went to work party, then in Moscow completed her graduate studies, Academy of Social Sciences in Moscow and soon passed away. But the school was not at all anemic. Begins the post-war phase of its development. Established close ties with Kiev. Director of the Kiev Institute of Psychology, GS Kostiuk organizes psychological laboratory in Kharkiv - a branch of his institute. Kharkiv actively publish their work in the "Scientific notes" the Kiev Institute of Psychology. Do not break off and ties with Moscow. Until 1948, I watched the comings in Kharkiv PY Halperin, A. Zaporozhets, AN Leontiev. Then they were joined by VV Davydov and your humble servant, who came not only "on leave" home, but also on service engineering psychology matters. Moscow sent here VV Repkina and GV Repkin. were other alumni. Grown and raised their shots. But that's another story. It should tell others.
A few words about myself. Our generation was happy. We have learned from SL Rubinstein, BM Teplov KM Gurevich, B. Zeigarnik, brilliant anthropologist JJ Roginsky, as well as in the former "harkovchan": PY Halperin, A. Zaporozhets, AN Leontiev, AR Luria. I felt the location of LI Bozovic, who moved to Moscow FW Bassin, he did not lose contact with psychologists. He's in the magazine "Psychology Issues" debated with AN Leontiev on the subject of psychology, defended AR Luria physiologists from the attacks, accused the founder of neuropsychology in idealism. However, thanks to them. Defensively, Aleksandr Romanovich antireductionist wrote an article that was published posthumously in "Problems of Philosophy" in the number 9 for 1977 FV Bassin, organized in conjunction with AS Prangishvili and AE Sherroziya in 1979 in Tbilisi at the time completely implausible topics and scale conference on the unconscious, invited her many psychologists. Do not forget me. He took my report "Installation and operation: whether paradigm?", In which I developed the idea of ​​AV Zaporozhets the presence of human hierarchy settings.
I got the impression that DB El'konin felt full Kharkov. In his dialogue with PY Halperin, A. Zaporozhets, PI Zinchenko always sounded kind of touching note. DB El'konin and gave me his location, but when I grew up, even friendship. During visits to the college years, I have been to Kharkov examiner VI Asnin. And examiner lot stricter than my direct teacher, and grumbled about their liberalism. He was both right and wrong. Many lessons have become part of me.
I think that I have outlined, of course, incomplete, somewhat hypothetical and problematic version shows the normal path of formation and development of the scientific school. The best proof of the fact that school was held, was the arrival of Rubinstein to Kharkov to the above conference in 1938 Although he did not accept the DB Elkonin that the School is in the second edition of "Fundamentals of General Psychology" SL Rubenstein cited studies of Kharkiv, made before the war. Of course, with the Leipzig School of Wundt nobody can compete, but Vyurtsbtsrgskoy, Marburg and Berlin Kharkiv could easily compete.
II
In the first part, I outlined the formation of the outer fabric of the Kharkov school of psychology. It will try to identify and briefly describe its achievements, mostly staying in the first decade of its existence incomplete. Leave empty disputes about who first proclaimed an active approach or a psychological theory of activity. First, the approach is, but the theory is still not. She's not even in the classical German philosophy. Of course, SL Rubinstein in 1922 wrote an article about the activity. While AN Leontiev was still a student and about any activity theory does not think. PA Florensky, GG Shpet, M. Bass and other domestic philosophers, educators and psychologists have written about the activity, but not its theory. The absence of the psychological theory of "object", the operational content of the writing and PY Halperin. PA Florensky argued that the theory of activity, as well as personality theory, in principle, not possible as both a violation of the law of identity. Arguments about the structure and functions of the two theories are not a substitute. VF Humboldt, one of the first to treat language as an activity, and in 1922 by GG Shpet in "Aesthetic Fragments", in 1927 in the "internal form of the word" developed these ideas. His analysis of the structure of the outer and inner forms of a word has made a significant contribution to overcoming the classical opposition of the external and internal. Here he was adamant, saying that there is not a single atom without internal appearance. My whole soul is the exterior. But and strokes, which are applied to it - wrinkles and scars on the external face of this. Unfortunately, this contribution for decades been seen (ignore?) Psychologists. Yet I suspect that the GG Shpet had an impact on those who heard his lectures LS Vygotsky, A. Zaporozhets and others, although they may not be aware of this.
Returning to activity theory, I would say that generally does not create a school of theories, they create individual scholars, of course, if they are lucky and have enough intelligence and talent. In the early 1970's. EG Yudin has rightly observed that the essence of the activity approach is action (GF Hegel would add: it is valid identity). For example, PI Zinchenko quite definitely that the common unit of structural, functional and genetic analysis of involuntary and voluntary memorization is human action. Of course, the action is carried out in the broader context of life. And the action, not the activity has become a major subject of research Kharkov school. Not just action, and mental action in his gun and symbolic, that is, in cultural forms (Vygotsky's influence). In this case, most of the research carried out on the children, which allowed the formation of track and organize the formation of certain actions. Let me give some examples.
• PY Halperin studied the emergence and formation of simple gun action in children. In the postwar years, the line was extended AV Zaporozhets in studies of voluntary movements, and PY Halperin studied the stages of formation of mental actions and concepts.
• AV Cossack studied the development of sensory and perceptual actions. Under his leadership, the dissertation was completed LI Kotlyarova that compared the active and passive touch. He also began to study the mental actions and proposed a scheme of two-act: the first act - the opening point, the second - giving value. In the postwar years, AV




AV


NN



 
VI VI

NA




        
                                           


AV


AV


AV







AV

AV

VI
PI

***





Moscow.
New! Click the words above to edit and view alternate translations. Dismiss
Google Translate for Business:Translator ToolkitWebsite TranslatorGlobal Market Finder
Turn off instant translationAbout Google TranslateMobilePrivacyHelpSend feedback

-----Original Message-----
From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole
Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2012 2:59 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture,Activity
Subject: [xmca] Attachment attached

La plus ca change. Cole forgets to attach an attachment! Khoo wood half thought it?
:-)
mike

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