Re: [xmca] [ISCAR-ANNOUNCE] Sydney-2014 ISCAR Congress Website now open!

[mike cole <lchcmike@gmail.com>]

Thanks for the paper, Jussi.
And I fully agree with the following:


In my reading Vygotsky's theory is really multivoiced. That's why there can
be many different incompatible theories based on his work. The meaning of
the historical analysis for me is not to find "the real" Vygotsky, but to
better understand our actual differences in theorizing in Vygotsky's
tradition.

mike


On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 3:15 AM, Jussi Silvonen <jussi.silvonen@uef.fi>wrote:

> Hi Larry!
>
> Here comes the published version of my paper.
>
> Foucault remarks that we should be careful in using the concept of
> epistemological break, because there are usually many thresholds of
> discontinuity in the development of a new theory. In Vygotsky's case the
> analysis is extremely difficult, because it is obvious that the different
> phases in his thinking are to some extent overlapping. In my view, however,
> we can reconstruct some clear theoretical transitions in Vygotsky's
> thinking.
>
> The first transition, invention of mediated action,  is a break with
> behaviorism and starts a new methodological approach in entire psychology.
> But the second, the move from CHP1 to CHP2, on is not so obvious. If my
> analysis is correct, then we can say that there is real difference in
> Vygotsky's first and second understanding on the nature of mediation, and
> consequently of the nature of cultural psychology.
>
> In my reading Vygotsky's theory is really multivoiced. That's why there
> can be many different incompatible theories based on his work. The meaning
> of the historical analysis for me is not to find "the real" Vygotsky, but
> to better understand our actual differences in theorizing in Vygotsky's
> tradition.
>
> I am a "semiotic Vygotskian", and I think this is the most productive way
> to understand Vygotsky's work. But other genuine interpretations are of
> course possible, and can be productive too. I don't believe we could have
> one "right" interpretation on Vygotsky's work. Instead we should have an
> ongoing dialogue between competing interpretations, which - in my Finnish
> experience - is not always easy. But a learning debate is best we can
> have...
>
> JusSi
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu] On
> Behalf Of Larry Purss
> Sent: Friday, May 31, 2013 5:49 PM
> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> Subject: Re: [xmca] [ISCAR-ANNOUNCE] Sydney-2014 ISCAR Congress Website
> now open!
>
> Martin,
> Here is the article by Jussi attached;
> Martin, I am intrigued by the notion of time-consciousness implicit in
> this article. The understanding of historical duration as *epochs*, *eras*,
> *phases*, *periods* as dynamic process.
> Mike mentions this has become the canonical understanding of vygotsky and
> the chat school.
> This way of exploring epistemological barriers [frameworks] and
> epistemological breaks [openings or gaps] AS epochal processes I find
> presents fascinating narratives through time.
>
> A clear distinction in the article is the two versions of cultural
> historical theory. In the 1st instrumental version signs ARE psychological
> TOOLS. Signs and tools are more similar or equivalent. In the early work
> the unit of analysis was *object-oriented* action mediated by cultural
> *tools and signs* [instrumental tools and signs that get grasped, used, and
> put down]. Mediation BY social relations and OTHERS was not theoretically
> integrated in the 1st instrumental mediational triangle.
> larry
>
>
> __________________________________________
> _____
> 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