Chasing Vygotsky’s Dogs: Retrieving Lev Vygotsky’s Philosophy for a Workers’ Paradise

Article

Abstract

In an article published in 1930, Lev Vygotsky refers explicitly to the seventeenth century Dutch philosopher Benedictus de Spinoza. From a close reading of Vygotsky’s remarkable piece, ‘The socialist transformation of man,’ the extraordinary parallels in the lives and philosophies of Vygotsky and Spinoza are revealed. Then the strengths and weaknesses are assessed of the analytical approach Vygotsky may have inherited from Spinoza. It is suggested that there are analytical ramifications arising from Vygotsky’s possible reliance on Spinoza’s nuanced but essentially dualistic philosophy. The conclusion is that the key limitation of this methodology is the elision of radical doubting with radical unknowability.

Keywords

Vygotsky Spinoza Soviet Union Hypostatisation Dualism Unknowability 

References

  1. Au, W. (2007). Vygotsky and Lenin on learning: The parallel structures of individual and social development. Science & Society, 71(3), 273–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bauer, R. (1952). The new man in soviet psychology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Blanck, G. (1992). Vygotsky: The man and his cause. In L. Moll (Ed.), Vygotsky and education: Instructional implications and applications of sociohistorical psychology (pp. 31–58). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Bruner, J. (1987). Prologue to the English edition. In R. Rieber & A. Carton (Eds.), The collected works of L.S. Vygotsky (Vol. 1, pp. 1–16). New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
  5. Callinicos, A. (2006). The resources of critique. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
  6. Chaiklin, S. (2003). The zone of proximal development in Vygotsky’s analysis of learning and instruction. In A. Kozulin, B. Gindis, V. Ageyev, & S. Miller (Eds.), Vygotsky’s educational theory in cultural context (pp. 39–64). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Den Uyl, D. (2003). Autonomous autonomy: Spinoza on autonomy, perfectionism, and politics. Social Philosophy and Policy, 20(2), 30–69.Google Scholar
  8. Derry, J. (2004). The unity of intellect and will: Vygotsky and Spinoza. Educational Review, 56(2), 113–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Engels, F. (1886/1976). Dialectics of nature. Moscow: Progress Publishers.Google Scholar
  10. Engels, F. (1894/1978). Anti-Duhring: Herr Eugen Duhring’s revolution in science. Moscow: Progress Publishers.Google Scholar
  11. Ewing, E. T. (2001). Restoring teachers to their rights: Soviet education and the 1936 denunciation of pedology. History of Education Quarterly, 41(4), 471–493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fitzpatrick, S. (1979). Education and social mobility in the Soviet Union 1921–1934. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Foster, J. B., Clark, B., & York, R. (2008). Critique of intelligent design: Materialism versus Creationism from antiquity to the present. New York: Monthly Review Press.Google Scholar
  14. Gillen, J. (2000). Versions of Vygotsky. British Journal of Educational Studies, 48(2), 183–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gredler, M. (2007). Of cabbages and kings: Concepts and inferences curiously attributed to Lev Vygotsky (Commentary on McVee, Dunsmore & Gavelek, 2005). Review of Educational Research, 77(2), 233–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hampshire, S. (1951). Spinoza. Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar
  17. Holzman, L. (2002). Vygotsky’s zone of proximal development: The Human activity zone. Presentation, annual meeting of the American Psychological Association. http://www.eastsideinstitute.org/vygotskyzone.html.
  18. Israel, J. (2001). Radical enlightenment: Philosophy and the making of modernity 1650–1750. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Jacob, M. (1981). The radical enlightenment: Pantheists, freemasons and republicans. London: George Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
  20. Kashap, P. (1977). Review: Some recent works on Spinoza’s thought. Journal of the History of Ideas, 38(3), 541–548.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kozulin, A. (1990). Vygotsky’s psychology: A biography of ideas. New York: Wheatsheaf.Google Scholar
  22. Langford, P. (2005). Vygotsky’s developmental and educational psychology. New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
  23. Lenin, V. (1917/1975). The state and revolution: The Marxist theory of the state and the tasks of the proletariat in the revolution. Moscow: Progress Publishers.Google Scholar
  24. Lima, E. (1995). Vygotsky in the international scene: A brief overview. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 26(4), 490–499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Marx, K. (1873/1977). Afterword to the second German edition, 24 January. In (F. Engels, Ed., S. Moore, & E. Aveling, trans.). Capital I: A critique of political economy (pp. 22–29). Moscow: Progress Publishers.Google Scholar
  26. Minick, N. (1987). The development of Vygotsky’s thought: An introduction. In R. Rieber & A. Carton (Eds.), The collected works of L.S. Vygotsky (Vol. 1, pp. 17–34). Plenum Press: New York.Google Scholar
  27. Nadler, S. (2001). Spinoza: A life. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Newman, F., & Holzman, L. (1993). Lev Vygotsky: Revolutionary scientist. London & New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  29. Pass, S. (2004). Parallel paths to constructivism: Jean Piaget and Lev Vygotsky. Charlotte: Information Age Publishers.Google Scholar
  30. Rieber, R., & Robinson, D. (2004). Section introduction. In R. Rieber & D. Robinson (Eds.), The essential Vygotsky (pp. 221–225). New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.Google Scholar
  31. Rosa, A., & Montero, I. (1992). The historical context of Vygotsky’s work: A sociohistorical approach. In L. Moll (Ed.), Vygotsky and education: Instructional implications and applications of sociohistorical psychology (pp. 59–88). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  32. Rowlands, S. (2000). Turning Vygotsky on his head: Vygotsky’s ‘scientifically based method’ and the socioculturalist’s ‘social other’. Science & Education, 9, 537–575.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Smith, M. (2009). Against dualism: Marxism and the necessity of dialectical monism. Science & Society, 73(3), 356–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Spinoza, B. (1670/1958). Tractatus theologico-politicus (a treatise on religion and politics). In (A. Wernham, Ed., & trans.). Benedict de Spinoza: The political works, Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  35. Spinoza, B. (1677/1958). Tractatus politicus (a treatise on politics). In (A. Wernham, Ed., & trans.). Benedict de Spinoza: The political works, Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  36. Spinoza, B. (1677/1955). Spinoza’s Ethics and De Intellectus Emendatione. London: J.M. Dent & Sons.Google Scholar
  37. Van der Veer, R., & Valsiner, J. (1989). Overcoming dualism in psychology: Vygotsky’s analysis of theories of emotion. Quarterly Newsletter of the Laboratory of Comparative Human Cognition, 11(4), 124–131.Google Scholar
  38. Van der Veer, R., & Valsiner, J. (1991). Understanding Vygotsky: A quest for synthesis. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  39. Vygotsky, L. (1962). Thought and language. In (E. Hanfmann, & G. Vakar Eds., & trans.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  40. Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  41. Vygotsky, L. (1994a). The socialist alteration of man. In R. van der Veer & J. Valsiner (Eds.), The Vygotsky reader (pp. 175–184). Oxford: Blackwell. [Vygotsky, L. (1930). Sotsialisticheskaja peredelka cheloveka. VARNITSO (Journal of the All-Union Association of Workers in Science and Technics for the Furthering of Socialist Edification), 9/10, 36–44.].Google Scholar
  42. Vygotsky, L. (1994b). The problem of the environment. In R. van der Veer & J. Valsiner (Eds.), The Vygotsky reader (pp. 338–354). Oxford: Blackwell. [Vygotsky, L. (1935). Lecture 4. In M. Levina (Ed.), Osnovy Pedologii (Foundations of Pedology). Leningrad: Izdanie Instituta, 58–78].Google Scholar
  43. Wertsch, J. (1985). Vygotsky and the social formation of mind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Education, Faculty of the ProfessionsUniversity of New EnglandArmidaleAustralia

Personalised recommendations