Ideological Prolegomena of the Soviet-Russian Activity Theory

The article examines the system-methodological and conceptual foundations of the psychological activity theory that arose in the Soviet Union under the influence of the ideology of Marxism-Leninism. The author demonstrates the process of incorporation of Marxism-Leninism dogmas into the canonical form of the activity theory as a scientific knowledge that does not need any scientific confirmation. The pseudoscientific discourse that arose at the same time served to strengthen the position of the ideologists of the bureaucratic system, who found “objective confirmations” of the truth of Marx’s teachings in the data of psychological science. The scientific community, subjected to ideological transformation, tried to defend itself from the destructive influence of ideology, giving rise to special forms of relations in the scientific and psychological environment, which led to the struggle and confrontation of scientific schools and groups. As a result of ideological expansion, psychological knowledge has become to some extent a tool for the bureaucratic system to overpower scientific dissent. That was clearly manifested in the discussion on the results of the Zagorsk experiment, in which an incorrect, partially falsified, attempt was made to prove the development of the human psyche of children born deaf and blind. The influence of ideology can also be traced in the confrontation of scientific schools in physics, genetics, biology and physiology. The article discusses prospects and new trends in the development of the activity theory after exclusion of the ideological concepts of Soviet socialism from its systemconceptual foundations. We observe the formation of new psychological concepts that reflect non-classical and post-non-classical forms of scientific rationality. Attempts are made to create and study the models of the psyche developed within the framework of the theory of organized complexity and the concepts of autopoietic self-organization and evolution.

Download Full-text

Psychological and Social Problems of Automation and Computerization

Information and Communication Technologies, Society and Human Beings ◽

10.4018/978-1-60960-057-0.ch012 ◽

2011 ◽

pp. 136-146

Author(s):

Vladimir Munipov

Keyword(s):

Soviet Union ◽

Complex Systems ◽

Cognitive Processes ◽

Former Soviet Union ◽

Social Problems ◽

The Soviet Union ◽

Information Models ◽

Cognitive Revolution ◽

Psychological Knowledge ◽

The Relationship

This chapter discusses the ergonomic, psychological and social problems of operators of large complex systems. It is noted that the category of activity is the most important one in the Russian ergonomic and psychological knowledge. It is analyzed the relationship between information models and conceptual-image ones. It emphasizes that in the Soviet Union the notion of cognitive revolution makes not sense because cognitive processes were treated in the works of L. Vygotsky, S. Rubinstein and A. Leontiev as forms of activity. The article indicates the influence of works of G. Bradley on the development of social and psychological aspects of ergonomics in the former Soviet Union and Russia.

Download Full-text

Activity Theory

Using Activity Domain Theory for Managing Complex Systems ◽

10.4018/978-1-60566-192-6.ch004 ◽

2010 ◽

pp. 65-77

Author(s):

Lars Taxén

Keyword(s):

Soviet Union ◽

Activity Theory ◽

Domain Theory ◽

Socialist State ◽

Marginalized Groups ◽

Direct Descendant ◽

The Soviet Union ◽

Activity Domain

In this chapter I will give an account of some ideas in the Russian Theory of Activity or Activity Theory (AT) that have influenced the Activity Domain Theory (ADT): activity, mediation, and meaning. The activity domain in ADT is a direct descendant from “activity” in AT, while “mediation” and “meaning” are necessary prerequisites for the activity modalities construct in ADT. The AT was an attempt to apply the ideas of Marx and Engels to psychology in the early decades of the new socialist state, the Soviet Union. The front figure in this pioneering movement was the Russian psychologist and semiotician L. S. Vygotsky (1896-1934) together with his collaborators A. N. Leont’ev (1903-1979) and A. R. Luria (1902-1977). Other prominent researchers in this spirit were V. N. Vološinov (1895-1936) and M. M. Bakhtin (1895-1975). With the advent of the Stalinist era the momentum of the AT was more or less crushed. However, small but marginalized groups kept the ideas of AT alive. One of the most prominent philosophers was the previously mentioned E. Ilyenkov (1924-1979). During the last couple of decades, AT has gained a renewed momentum among Western researchers and been further developed by the works of M. Cole, J. Wertsch and Y. Engeström and others.

Download Full-text