Abstract
This chapter takes as its point of departure the view that Vygotsky’s theory should be recontextualized and fundamentally developed as part of a much larger set of major questions arising in the early twenty-first century. It is argued that dialectics can shed light on the way to move beyond both the dogmatic and relativist forms of the reception of Vygotsky’s legacy. Rethinking Vygotsky’s project, taking into account the contemporary crisis in social sciences that were reproduced in a society riven by deep crises and conflicts , is an important step in this direction. Bringing together theory and practice in a dialectical way Vygotsky’s project is internally connected with an active engagement in the struggle for social emancipation.
One often hears: that might be good but it belongs to yesterday. But I say yesterday hasn’t been born yet. It has not really come to pass.
(Osip Mandelstam, The word & Culture)
The stones which the builders rejected is become the head stone of the corner.
(Psalm 118:22; Vygotsky 1997, p. 305)
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Reformulating the quote from Bible that Vygotsky (1997, p. 305) liked to repeat it may be argued that the study of contradictions is the stone which the builders rejected and it can become the head stone of the corner.
- 2.
Derry (2008) detects the shortcoming of the examination of Vygotsky as an adherent of abstract rationality of the Enlightenment. More concrete, it is ignored Hegel’s criticism of Enlightenment and his influence of the formation of Vygotsky’s theory.
References
Barić, H., Baždarić, K., Glasnović, A., & Gajović, S. (2017). Why scholarly publishing might be a bubble. Croat Med J., 58, 1–3. https://doi.org/10.3325/cmj.2017.58.1.
Carolina Consortium on Human Development. (1996). Developmental science: A collaborative statement. In R. B. Cairns, G. Elder, & E. J. Costello (Eds.), Developmental science (pp. 1–6). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Charlton, B. G. (2008). Zombie science: A sinister consequence of evaluating scientific theories purely on the basis of enlightened self-interest. Med Hypotheses, 71(3), 327–329. https://doi.org/110.1016/j.mehy.2008.05.018.
Dafermos, M., & Marvakis, A. (2006). Critiques in psychology–critical psychology. Annual Review of Critical Psychology, 5, 1–20.
Dafermos, M. (2014). Vygotsky’s analysis of the crisis in psychology: Diagnosis, treatment, and relevance. Theory and Psychology, 24(2), 147–165. https://doi.org/10.1177/0959354314523694.
Dafermos, M. (2015). Rethinking the crisis in social psychology: A dialectical perspective. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 9(8), 394–405. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12187.
Dennett, D. (1991). Consciousness explained. New York: Back Bay Books.
Derry, J. (2008). Abstract rationality in education: from Vygotsky to Brandom. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 27(1), 49–62.
Elms, A. C. (1975). The crisis of confidence in social psychology. American Psychology, 30, 967–976.
Goertzen, J. R. (2008). Psychology on the possibility of unification: The reality and nature of the crisis in psychology. Theory and Psychology, 18, 829–852. https://doi.org/10.1177/0959354308097260.
Henriques, G. (2011). A new unified theory of psychology. New York: Springer.
Haenen, J. (1992). Introduction: Piotr Gal’perin and the content of Soviet psychology. Journal of Russian and East European Psychology, 30(4), 3–21.
Holzman, L. (2006). Activating postmodernism. Theory and Psychology, 16(1), 109–123. https://doi.org/10.1177/0959354306060110.
Ilyenkov, E. V. (2009). The ideal in human activity. Pacifica, CA: Marxist Internet Archive.
Jörg, T. (2011). New thinking in complexity for the social sciences and humanities. A generative, transdisciplinary approach. London, New York: Springer.
Kozulin, A. (2016). Foreword: how to reconstruct deconstructions. In A. Yasnitsky, & R. van der Veer (Eds.), Revisionist revolution in Vygotsky studies (pp. xii–xvi). London, New York: Routledge.
Leontiev, A. N. (1981). The problem of activity in psychology. In J. V. Wertsch (Ed.), The concept of activity in Soviet psychology (pp. 37–71). Armonk, NY: Sharpe.
Mironenko, I. A., & Sorokin, P. S. (2015). Culture in psychology: Perennial problems and the contemporary methodological crisis. Psychology in Russia: State of the Art, 8(4), 35–45.
Morin, E. (1999). Seven complex lessons in education for the future. Paris: UNESCO Publishing.
Patelis, D. (2011). Socio-philosophical heritage and the logic of History. Fragmentos de Cultura, Goiânia, 21(7/9), 389–414.
Ratner, C. (2012). Macro cultural psychology. In J. Valsiner (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of culture and Psychology (pp. 207–240). New York: Oxford University.
Robinson, W. I. (2014). Global capitalism and the crisis of humanity. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Schraube, E., & Osterkamp, U. (Eds.). (2013). Psychology from the standpoint of the subject selected Writings of Klaus Holzkamp. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Shotter, J. (1993). Cultural politics of everyday Life. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Staats, Α. W. (1983). Psychology’s crisis of disunity: Philosophy and method for a unified science. New York: Praeger.
Staats, A. W. (1986). Unified Positivism: A philosophy for psychology and the disunited sciences. Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, 6(2), 77–90.
Sternberg, R. J., & Grigorenko, E. L. (2001). Unified psychology. American Psychologist, 56, 1069–1079.
Stetsenko, A. (2003). Alexander Luria and the Cultural-Historical Activity Theory: Pieces for the history of an outstanding collaborative project in psychology. Mind, Culture and Activity, 10(1), 93–97.
Stetsenko, A. (2017). The transformative mind: Expanding Vygotsky’s approach to development and education. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Stetsenko, A., & Arievitch, I. M. (2004a). Vygotskian collaborative project of social transformation: History, politics, and practice in knowledge construction. The International Journal of Critical Psychology, 12(4), 58–80.
Stetsenko, A., & Arievitch, I. (2004b). The self in cultural-historical activity theory: Reclaiming the unity of social and individual dimensions of human development. Theory and Psychology, 14(4), 475–503.
Tolman, C. W., Coughlan, R., & Robinson, C. N. B. (1996). The postmodernist appropriation of Vygotsky. In J. Lompscher (Ed.), Lernen und entwicklung aus kulturhistorischer sicht: Was sagt uns Wygotski heute? (Vol. 1, pp. 117–129). Marburg: BdWiVerlag.
Valsiner, J. (1988). Developmental psychology in the Soviet Union. Bloomington, Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.
Valsiner, J. (2005). General Introduction. Developmental science in the making: the role of Heinz Werner. In J. Valsiner (Ed.), Heinz Werner and developmental science (pp. 1–18). New York: Kluwer Scientific/Plenum Publishers.
Valsiner, J. (2012). Introduction: Culture in psychology: A renewed encounter of inquisitive minds. In J. Valsiner (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of culture and psychology (pp. 3–24). New York: Oxford University.
Vazjulin, V. A. (1988). The logic of history. Questions of theory and methodology. Moscow: Moscow State University Press.
Veresov, N. (2014). Refocusing the lens on development: Towards genetic research methodology. In M. Fleer, & A. Ridgway (Eds.), Visual methodologies and digital tools for researching with young children (pp. 129–149). Springer.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1997). The historical meaning of the crisis of psychology. In R. Rieber, & J. Wolloc (Eds.), The collected works of L. S. Vygotsky (Vol. 3, pp. 233–344). New York, London: Plenum Press.
Wertsch, J. (1996). The role of abstract rationality in Vygotsky’s image of mind. In A. Tryphon & J. N. Voneche (Eds.), Piaget-Vygotsky: The social genesis of thought (pp. 25–45). Hove: Psychology Press.
Yasnitsky, A., & van der Veer, R. (Eds.). (2016). Revisionist revolution in Vygotsky studies. London, New York: Routledge.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Dafermos, M. (2018). Epilogue: The Relevance of Vygotsky’s Legacy. In: Rethinking Cultural-Historical Theory. Perspectives in Cultural-Historical Research, vol 4. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-0191-9_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-0191-9_10
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-13-0190-2
Online ISBN: 978-981-13-0191-9
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)