Vygotsky—Closing the Cognition-Emotion Gap
1487
post-template-default,single,single-post,postid-1487,single-format-standard,bridge-core-3.0.1,qode-page-transition-enabled,ajax_fade,page_not_loaded,,qode_grid_1200,qode-theme-ver-29.4,qode-theme-bridge,disabled_footer_bottom,qode_header_in_grid,wpb-js-composer js-comp-ver-6.8.0,vc_responsive

Vygotsky—Closing the Cognition-Emotion Gap

Vygotsky—Closing the Cognition-Emotion Gap

March 17, 2013

Lev Vygotsky was a brilliant psychologist who lived and worked in the first decades of the Soviet Union. His writings and teachings—he began very young (when only 19) and died very young (when only 38)—have been inspiring and teaching psychologists and educators for many decades. His understanding of human learning and development, of how important play is to development, and of what language is, were revolutionary during his time.

Vygotsky’s approach was cultural. To him, human beings create who we are—on the species level and the person level—by creating culture, adapting to the culture we create, re-creating it, adapting to the re-creation, and so on.

Vygotsky’s approach was social. To him, what we do we do with others—like learning to speak by having “conversations” with our mothers, brothers, sisters and fathers, long before we know the language— and that’s how we become the unique person each of us is.

Vygotsky’s approach was developmental. To him, what we need to be looking at is not merely who people are now, but also—and at the same time—who they are becoming. Because if we only relate to who we are and what we can do today, we’ll never learn to do new things.

Vygotsky’s approach was monistic and wholistic. To him, human intellect and human emotion are a unified process, not two separate and distinct human systems that compete with each other. To separate them and focus only on the intellectual, he said, creates “a one-sided view of the human personality.”

Sadly, despite interest in his work all around the world by academics and cursory reference to him in education courses, Vygotsky’s ideas are still rarely implemented on a mass scale—so entrenched are the cognitive, behavioral and individualistic biases that characterize the psychological and educational institutions of our day.

As someone who, for decades, has been “Vygotskian-izing” how education, psychology and psychotherapy are done, I’ve experienced its power and humanity in many different contexts and countries. If you want to learn more and help spread the word, here’s a few places to start:

 Mind in Society (a short introduction to Vygotsky’s own writing)

Lev Vygotsky (a documentary film about his life and current implementations of his ideas)

Mind, Culture and Activity on Vimeo (lectures and interviews with Vygotskian scholars)

Lev Vygotsky: Revolutionary Scientist (Fred Newman’s and my understanding of Vygotsky’s ideas and importance)

Vygotsky at Work and Play (my book showing some of what the Vygotskian-izing of psychotherapy and education looks like)

11 Comments
  • loisholzman
    Posted at 00:01h, 25 October

    Well, it’s scattered throughout his writings (in the volumes of his Collected Works). And his very early The Psychology of Art also touches on the subject, but in a more traditional way, e.g., catharsis of the theatre.

  • Mats
    Posted at 08:51h, 21 October

    Thank you! Two questions: What would be a good place to read up on Vygotsky’s take on emotion? I’ve just read the book “The Social Mind” (Valsiner & Van der Veer 2000) and on page 382 they write that Vygotsky was inspired by Spinoza’s (1677/ 1955 Ethics.) and Irons’ (1895) work on emotions, in criticizing Jame’s theory for being too dualistic in its distinction between lower emotional processes (of the body) and more “intellectual” emotional processes (of the “soul”), but that he failed to provide an alternative account himself. Would you agree with that?

  • Sali Mustafic
    Posted at 09:39h, 01 April

    i enjoyed your summary of Vygotsky – it has rekindled my interest which, incidentally, began in the 70’s when I was enjoying teacher training. His work was a mainstay of the pedagogy at the time and is still influencing primary teaching UK in spite of the current political climate.

  • loisholzman
    Posted at 23:24h, 21 March

    Thanks, Robert. I completely agree. Fortunately, there are many who practice that don’t do this, and they need to be promoted and supported, don’t you think?

  • Robert Michel
    Posted at 22:52h, 21 March

    A much needed breath of fresh air. I’m afraid we have reduced patients to brains without a context of meaning. All the narrow field chemical symptom suppression that goes on in the name of fixing. All the essential wisdom about who we are getting dealt out by :”evidenced based” quantitative obsessions that make insurance company happy and have nothing to do with non measurable imaginative patterns that make for healing.

  • loisholzman
    Posted at 15:49h, 20 March

    Hi Simon,
    Thanks for your comment. Yes, many people reference Vygotsky, but school practices are, on the whole, still Piagetian (at best). And while it may not be obvious from this particular post, a lot of my work has been to bring Vygotsky into other areas of human life, including therapy/emotional development and youth work—by supporting practitioners to create with Vygotsky’s insights.

  • Simon Robinson
    Posted at 10:54h, 20 March

    Hi Lois

    I studied cognitive psychology and Nottingham University. David Wood taught child psychology, and he very much taught Vygotsky alongside Piaget. He references his work a lot in his book “How Children Think and Learn.” But you are right I feel. Piaget is referenced a lot but not Vygotsky.

  • loisholzman
    Posted at 17:59h, 19 March

    Thanks for filling out my brief remarks, Emily. I agree in part, mainly because the vast number of schools (those in inner cities are the ones I am most familiar with) show no Vygotskian impact. There’s much more to be done! I might also emphasize that how he has been understood and what’s been put into practice, when it has, is not his learning-and-development perspective but a focus on learning in itself. At least that’s my experience. It’s wondeerful if yours is different!

  • Emily Cahan
    Posted at 14:19h, 19 March

    A good and succinct summary of basic Vygotskian concepts. I would add however, that, while late in coming, Vygotsky has had an enormous impact on educational theory and practice. There are innumerable secondary works in both psychology and education. Vygotsky has become mainstream in introductory textbooks on Developmental Psychology. An enormous amount of research on peer learning is also Vygotsky inspired. And of course his ideas about the “zone of proximal development” informs any deeply human theory of learning.

  • loisholzman
    Posted at 15:30h, 17 March

    That’s wonderful, Fatima!

  • Fatima Santos
    Posted at 15:12h, 17 March

    Lois,
    Thank you very much for this. Very nice indeed. I will share with my patners. Recently, we have started a new study group at the university about vigotskian ideas, however concerned language teacher education. This will be very profitable for us. Regards. Fátima Santos

Post A Comment