Abstract
In view of the status of mediation as a long standing and widely used developmental principle, it is clear that theoretical challenging of mediation would have far reaching consequences. Therefore, it is assumed that the best strategy to respond to challenge would be to examine the solidity of foundations of both the principle of mediation and the suggested alternative non-mediational position. This strategy has determined the structure of the paper. First, it offers anthropological, cultural-historical, ontogenetic, microgenetic and epistemological foundations of the principle of mediation in order to justify its historical and theoretical status. In the second step, claims which challenge the necessity and fruitfulness of mediation as a developmental principle will be examined. Within the challenging strategy two argumentative patterns will be analysed: first, the validity of interpretation of mediation principle offered by its critics and second, explanatory potentials of non-mediational standpoints. In conclusion, it will be argued that the proposed non-mediational position does not offer sufficient justification for repudiation of mediation principle and adoption of an alternative non-mediational standpoint.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Jedes psychische Phänomen ist durch das charakterisirt, was die. Scholastiker des Mittelalters die intentionale (auch. Wohl mentale) 2) Inexistenz eines Gegenstandes genannt haben, nnd was wir, obwohl mit nicht ganz unzweideutigen Ausdrücken, die Beziehung auf einen Inhalt, die Richtung auf ein Object (worunter hier nicht eine Realität zu verstehen ist),oder die immanente Gegenständlichkeit nennen würden. Jedes enthält etwas als Object in sich, obwohl nicht jedes in gleicher Weise. In der Vorstellung ist etwas vorgestellt, in dem Urtheile ist etwas anerkannt oder verworfen, in der Liebe geliebt, in dem Hasse gehasst, in dem Begehren begehrt u. s. w.S) (Brentano 1874, p. 115)
References
Brentano, F. (1874/2009). Psychology from an empirical standpoint (O. Kraus, Ed.; trans: Rancurello, A., Terrell, D. B., & McAlister, L. M.). London & New York: Routledge.
Cassirer, E. (1923/1975). The philosophy of symbolic forms. Language (trans: Mannheim, R.). New Haven & London: Yale University Press.
Daniels, H. (2015). Mediation: an expansion of the socio-cultural gaze. History of the Human Sciences, 28(2), 34–50. doi:10.1177/09526951 14559994.
Descartes, R. (1637/1978). Discourse on the method. In E. Anscombe & P. T. Geach (Eds. and trans), Descartes. Philosophical Writings (pp. 5–57). Indianopolis: Bobbs-Merrill Educational.
Dilthey, W. (1883 /1988). Introduction to the human sciences: an attempt to lay a foundation for the study of society and history (trans: Betanzos, R.). London: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
Gadamer, H.-G. (2006). Classical and philosophical hermeneutics. (trans: Palmer, R.) Theory, Culture & Society, 23, 29–56.
Horkheimer, M. (1937/1976). Traditional and critical theory. In P. Connerton (Ed.), Critical Sociology (pp. 206–224). Harmondsworth: Penguin Books.
Jovanović, G. (1997). Frojd i moderna subjektivnost (Freud and modern subjectivity). Novi Sad: Svetovi; Beograd: Institut za psihologiju.
Jovanović, G. (2010). Historizing epistemology in psychology. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 44, 310–328. doi:10.1007/s12124-010-9132-9.
Jovanović, G. (2015). Vicissitudes of history in Vygotsky's cultural-historical theory. History of the Human Sciences, 28(2), 10–33. doi:10.1177/09526951 1 5577227.
Marx, K. (1844 – written/ 1994). Economic and philosophic manuscripts. In K. Marx, Selected writings (L. Simon, Ed.), (pp. 54–97). Indianopolis/Cambridge: Hackett Publishing Company.
Marx, K. & Engels, F. (1846-written/1994). The German ideology. In K. Marx, Selected writings (L. Simon, Ed.), (pp. 102–156). Indianopolis/Cambridge: Hackett Publishing Company.
Mead, G. H. (1934). Mind, self & society. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Mikhailov, F. T. (2001). The “other within” for the psychologist. Journal of Russian and East European Psychology, 39(1), 6–31.
Negri, A. (1991). The savage anomaly: the power of Spinoza’s metaphysics and politics. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Ong, W. (1982/2007). Orality and literacy. London & New York: Routledge.
Roth, W.-M. & Jornet, A. (2017). Theorizing with/out ‘mediators’. Integrative Psychological & Behavioral Science, 51(4). doi:10.1007/s12124-016-9376-0.
Ryle, G. (1949/1951). The concept of mind. London: Hutcheson’s University Library.
Taylor, C. (1985). Human agency and language. Philosophical papers, Vol. 1. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Valsiner, J. (2006). Dangerous curves in knowledge construction within psychology. Fragmentation of methodology. Theory & Psychology, 16(5), 587–595.
Valsiner, J. (2007). Culture in minds and societies. Los Angeles: SAGE.
Vygotsky, L. (1925/1986). Psikhologija iskusstva, (Psychology of art). Moscow: Iskusstvo.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1931/1997). The history of the development of higher mental functions. In R. Rieber (Ed.); (trans: Van der Veer, R.). The collected works of L. S. Vygotsky, vol 4 (pp. 1–298). New York: Springer.
Vygotsky, L. (1934/2004). Thought and word. In R. Rieber & D. Robinson (Eds.), The essential Vygotsky (pp. 65–110). New York: Kluwer Academic/ Plenum Publishers.
Williams, R. (1977). Marxism and literature. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Jovanović, G. Can We Abandon Mediation? A Commentary on the Article “Theorizing with/out ‘Mediators’”. Integr. psych. behav. 53, 344–355 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12124-017-9401-y
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12124-017-9401-y