The development of consciousness in Spontaneous and non-spontaneous thought

Vygotsky mentioned the two laws of consciousness. One is the law of conscious awareness formulated by Claparede and another is the law of displacement. From Claparede's point of view, the consciousness of similarity appears later in the child than a conscious awareness of difference. While the law of displacement indicates that to become consciously aware of the operation, it must be transferred from the plane of action to the plane of language; it must be recreated in imagination such that it can be expressed in words. This displacement of the operation from the plane of action to the plane of thought is accompanied by the same difficulties and complications that were encountered when the operation was first learned on the plane of action. Only the tempo changes; the rhythm remains the same. This reproduction on the verbal plane of the difficulties encountered in learning operations on the plane of action constitutes the essence of the second structural law of conscious awareness. 

 He also mentioned the importance of the unification of two lines of thinking: spontaneous vs non-spontaneous thoughts during the development of childhood. Through critiquing Piaget's separated views on these two different kinds of thoughts, Vygotsky highlighted how adults' thinking could be imposed on children without taking account of children's inner foundations of the thinking process.  In this sense, would children experience the conflicts between external conditions and internal conditions? Or shall we also consider other factors in developing children's consciousness? Since many school kids tend to assimilate adults' thoughts without much reflection. And the displacement of the operation from the plane of action to the plane of thought does not happen frequently under the current learning system. Therefore, there might be some other significant factors contributing to formulating specific difficulties which promote children to develop consciousness rather than superficial differences between external and internal conditions of thought development.

From this line, I'm still wondering about the possible role of voluntary attention in those situations. For most daily concepts, I feel like people develop them through involuntary attention since those objects, such as 'brother' mentioned by Vygotsky, are so easily recognized without much reflection. When the child talks about the concept of 'brother', he or she may spontaneously represent it. However, to develop the concept of 'brother' into a scientific concept, I'm wondering what processes or difficulties should the child encounter? And how the child deal with their own spontaneous thoughts and other people's accounts?

As for school systems, many concepts are not quite related to students' experiences and real life. In this situation, most scientific concepts are developed without the unification of spontaneous thoughts. I'm thinking about how this situation would influence students' development of consciousness generally.





Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

ZPD vs. Scaffolding

Reading Wood et al.'s (1976) original article in which they introduce the metaphor of "scaffolding" really makes clear how different this is from ZPD.  There is no collaboration (perhaps a better word is co-operation) between the expert and the child... the expert guides the child's actions through controlling their immediate problem-solving experience. The model of scaffolding assumes that the expert is, in a sense, all-knowing in relation to the problem and is not an active participant in the actions of problem-solving.  Vygotsky's theory really seems to require a much more dynamic social interaction or series of social interactions. I also question to what extent a tutor operating in this way can engage with a child's everyday and scientific concepts in a meaningful way. Having read Smagorinsky's (2018) article once more, it is hard not to be convinced of his position. He confirmed with Anna Stetsenko at CUNY (who earned her PhD in Psychology at Mosco...
Read more

Can scientific concepts be taught as everyday concepts? My middle school physics teacher

Image
I began reading the chapter on the development of scientific concepts and it was interesting to see how Vygotsky differentiates between scientific and everyday concepts. Scientific concepts are simply learned or received in completed form (most commonly introduced as a term along with its definition) which in turn leads to understanding, learning, and comprehension. Whereas, everyday concepts do not have a formal definition, need not be universal but still helps us understand the functioning of the society and the world in which we live. When reflecting on all this, I was reminded of a middle school physics teacher I had (Sadly, we had her only for one year), who would not introduce new concepts as 'words' and definitions but instead, would begin class with a demonstration. One of which is depicted below. I so vividly remember her explaining inertia through this method:                                 ...
Read more

Learning from teaching vs Impactful experiences from child’s play

I remember very little about my past schooling and I am not sure if it is because I have this belief that we should spend little time reminiscing on the past and looking towards the future or is it that my classroom experiences were all “traditional” and are not stored in my active memory. The latter would seem applicable as I really do remember more key events from my “play times” but very few from the formal school settings. Lev S. Vygotsky states: “In play a child is always above his average age, above his daily behavior; in play it is as though he were a head taller than himself. As in the focus of a magnifying glass, play contains all developmental tendencies in a condensed form; in play it is as though the child were trying to jump above the level of his normal behavior” (1967, 16). The interpretation of the above quote can and has taken many forms but I do not agree that children learn more from play and interactions with their peers than in a formal environment. My ...
Read more