The concept of activity in Soviet psychology: Vygotsky, his disciples and critics.статья из журнала
Аннотация: The concept of activity is deeply ingrained in Soviet psychological theory, and exactly for that reason contemporary Soviet psychologists have found it extremely difficult to define it clearly. This concept was first suggested by Lev Vygotsky as a theoretical remedy for psychological systems that tautologically explained phenomena of consciousness through the concept of consciousness. Vy- gotsky' s disciples, notably Alexei Leontiev, departed from the original concept of their teacher. The demarcation line separating Vygotsky's theory from that of Leontiev oc- curred in the evaluation of the relative importance of se- miotic mediation and practical actions for the development of intelligence. Currently there is a revival of interest in the problem of activity both in the Soviet Union and in the United States. The concept of activity plays as important and ambiguous a role in Soviet psychology as did the concept of behavior in American studies circa 1920 to 1950 and the concept of consciousness in European psychology of the late 19th century. Activity has been the chief category of psycho- logical research in contemporary Soviet psychology since the beginning; and exactly for that reason, the concept of activity has been extremely difficult for Soviet psy- chologists to define clearly. Since the time of its inception in the 1920s, this category has undergone a metamor- phosis and has been the subject of so many disputes that it cannot be adequately comprehended out of the context of its history. The goal of this article is to provide a historical- theoretical analysis of the evolution of the concept of ac- tivity in Soviet psychology. The origin of this concept can be found in the early writings of Lev Vygotsky (1896- 1934), who suggested that socially meaningful activity (Tdtigkeit) may serve as an explanatory principle in re- gard to, and be considered as a generator of, human con- sciousness. Further, I review the process of incorporating the concept of activity into Vygotsky's cultural-historical theory of higher mental functions and discuss its relevance for Vygotsky's studies in the development of language and concept formation. The most dramatic event in the history of the concept of activity occurred in the mid- 1930s when a group of Vygotsky's disciples came up with a version of activity theory that put practical (material) actions at the forefront while simultaneously playing down the role of signs as mediators of human activity. This revisionist position was elaborated theoret- ically by Alexei Leontiev, who subsequently gained the status of official interpreter of Vygotsky's ideas. Thus the myth of succession between Vygotsky's and Leontiev's schools of psychology was born. Only in the late 1970s has this myth been subjected to a critical scrutiny, and Vygotsky's genuine views have attracted a renewed in- terest. For a long period of time, the concept of activity has remained a local affair of Soviet psychology. In his clas- sical book The New Man in Soviet Psychology, Raymond Bauer (1952) neglected entirely the concept of activity. More recent studies, such as those of Ted Payne (1968), Levy Rahmani (1973), and Luciano Mecacci (1979), mentioned this problem but hardly made it a center of their work. The major breakthrough occurred when a volume of translations, The Concept of Activity in Soviet Psychology, edited by James Wertsch, appeared in 1981. Since then, there has been a growing interest among American psychologists in the problem of activity. To comprehend this problem properly, one should, however, be cognizant of its complex history and the current re- evaluation of it by the younger generation of Soviet psy- chologists. Activity as a n Explanatory Principle
Год издания: 1986
Авторы: Alex Kozulin
Издательство: American Psychological Association
Источник: American Psychologist
Ключевые слова: Innovative Education and Learning Practices, Educational and Psychological Assessments, Psychology of Development and Education
Открытый доступ: closed
Том: 41
Выпуск: 3
Страницы: 264–274