Культурно-историческая теория деятельности и ее современные смысл и значимость: Идеи, растущие в контексте и времени

В статье анализируется теоретическое наследие А.Н. Леонтьева (как часть культурно-исторической теории деятельности), понимаемое как динамическая, развивающаяся, живая система идей. Смысл и значимость этих идей постепенно становятся яснее в контексте современной концептуальной революции в психологии. Разные направления этого радикального движения сходятся на идее соотносительности (relationality) – в оппозиции к субстанциональной метафизике, которая полагает дискретные элементы единственным уровнем анализа. Показано, что КИТД является пионером этой революции, сделавшим ряд важных открытий относительно телесной воплощенности, ситуационности, распределенности и деятельностного характера познания (ума; mind), а также нон-дуальности "культуроприроды" ("natureculture"), отменяющей постулаты врожденности. В КИТД познание понимается как открытый, динамический, не-линейный и постоянно развивающийся, то есть эмерджентный, процесс без каких-либо преднастроек и предзаданных рамок. Познание состоит из непрерывых взаимопереходов между полюсами единой системы – "человек-действующий-в-мире" – встроeнной в постоянно меняющиеся контексты, т.е. как "гибкиe сонастройки" ("soft assemblages"), зависимые от ситуационных потребностей и возможностей. Более того, КИТД полагает коллективную динамичность осмысленной совместной деятельности в ее историческом развитии в качестве единой онто-эпистемологии развития и познания. В дополнение к этому, КИТД намечает, в набросках, выход за пределы парадигмы соотносительности в направлении трансформационного образа мира (или мировоззрения; transformative worldview), основанного на идее симультанности и недихотомичности процесса со-реализации человека-и-мира.

1. Arievitch I.M. Beyond the brain: An agentive active activity perspective on mind, development, and learning. Boston/Rotterdam: Sense, 2017.
2. Arievitch I. M., Stetsenko A. The “magic of signs”: The developmental trajectory of cultural mediation. In A. Yasnitsky et al. (eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Cultural-Historical Psychology (pp. 217-244). New York: Cambridge University Press, 2014.
3. Bickhard M.H., Campbell R. Editorial. New Ideas in Psychology, 2005. Vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 1–4. DOI:10.1016/j.newideapsych.2005.09.002
4. Bidell T. Philosophical background to integrative theories of human development. In Mascolo M. (eds.), Handbook of Integrative Developmental Science. New York: Routledge, 2020, pp. 3-37.
5. Bruner J. Introduction to Thinking and Speech. In Rieber R.W. (eds.), The essential Vygotsky. New York: Kluwer, 2004, pp. 9-25.
6. Bruner J. Celebrating divergence: Piaget and Vygotsky. Human Development, Vol. 40, pp. 63–73. DOI:10.1159/000278705
7. Costall A., Leudar I. Getting over “the problem of other minds”: Communication in context. Infant Behavior and Development, Vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 289-295. DOI:10.1016/j.infbeh.2007.02.001
8. Derry J. The unity of intellect and will: Vygotsky and Spinoza. Educational Review, Vol. 56, pp. 113–120. DOI:10.1080/0031910410001693209
9. Di Paolo E.A. Enactive becoming. Phenomenology and the CognitiveSciences, Vol. 20, pp. 783–809. DOI:10.1007/s11097-019-09654-1
10. Eagleton After theory. London: Penguin Books, 2004.
11. Fischer K. W., Bidell T. R. Dynamic development of action and thought. In Lerner R. M. (ed.), Theoretical models of human development. Hoboken: Wiley, 2006, pp. 313–399.
12. Gottlieb G. Developmental neurobehavioral genetics:  Development as explanation. In Jones B.C. (eds.), Neurobehavioral genetics: Methods and applications. New York: Taylor and Francis, 2006, pp. 17–27.
13. Greeno J. G. The situativity of knowing, learning, and research. American Psychologist, Vol. 53, no. 1, pp. 5–17. DOI:10.1037/0003-066X.53.1.5
14. Hutto D. D., Myin E. Radicalizing enactivism: Basic minds without content. MIT Press, 2013.
15. Ingold T. Being alive:  Essays on movement, knowledge and description. Abingdon: Routledge, 2011.
16. Laclau E., Mouffe C. Hegemony and Socialist Strategy: Towards a Radical Democratic Politics. London: Verso, 2001.
17. Lave J., Wenger E. Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1991.
18. Leontiev A.N. Deyatel`nost, Soznane, Personality. Moscow: Politidat, 1975. (In Russ.)
19. Leontiev A.N. Problems of the development of mind. Moscow: Progress, 1981.
20. Lerner R.M., Overton W.F. Exemplifying the integrations of the relational developmental system. Journal of Adolescent Research, Vol. 23, pp. 24 –25. DOI:10.1177/0743558408314385
21. Maidansky А.D. Evolutziyz psikhiki: Predmetnaya deyatel`nost I affect. Pedagogika i psikhologiya prepodavaniya, Vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 8-81. DOI:10.18413/2313-8971-2021-7-3-0-6 (In Russ.).
22. Marx K., Engels F. The German ideology. In Tucker R.C. (ed.), Marx/Engels reader. New York, NY: Norton, 1978, pp. 146–200
23. Miller R. Vygotsky in perspective. New York: Cambridge University, 2011.
24. Morawski J. G. Reflexivity and the psychologist. History of the Human Sciences, Vol. 18, 77–105. DOI:10.1177/0952695105058472
25. Narvaez D., Moore D.S., Witherington D. C., Vandiver T.I., Lickliter R. Evolving evolutionary psychology. American Psychologist, 2022. Vol. 77, no. 3, 424–438. DOI:10.1037/amp0000849
26. Newen A., De Bruin L., Gallagher S. (eds.), The Oxford handbook of 4E cognition. Oxford University Press, 2018.
27. Oyama S. Evolution’s eye. Durham:  Duke University Press, 2000.
28. Robbins P., Aydede M. (eds.), Cambridge handbook of situated cognition. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2007.
29. Slife B. D., Williams R. N. What’s behind the research? Discovering hidden assumptions in the behavioural sciences. Thousand Oaks: Sage, 1995.
30. Spencer P., Clearfield M., Corbetta D. Moving toward a grand theory of development: In memory of Esther Thelen.Child Development, 2006. Vol. 77, no. 6, pp. 1521-1538. DOI:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2006.00955.x
31. Stetsenko A. Activity as object-related: Resolving the dichotomy of individual and collective types of activity. Mind, Culture, & Activity, 2005. Vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 70-88. DOI:1207/s15327884mca1201_6
32. Stetsenko A. From relational ontology to transformative activist stance: Expanding Vygotsky's (CHAT) project. Cultural Studies of Science Education, Vol. 3, pp. 465-485. DOI:10.1007/s11422-008-9111-3
33. Stetsenko A. Vygotsky and the conceptual revolution in developmental sciences: Towards a unified (non-additive) account of human development. In Fleer M. (eds.), Constructing childhood: Global–local policies and practices London: Routledge, 2009, pp. 125-142.
34. Stetsenko A. Standing on the shoulders of giants: A balancing act of dialectically theorizing conceptual understanding on the grounds of Vygotsky’s project. In Roth W-M. (ed.), Restructuring science education: ReUniting Psychological and Sociological Perspectives. New York: Springer, 2010, pp.69-88.
35. Stetsenko A. Personhood: An activist project of historical Becoming through collaborative pursuits of social transformation. New Ideas in Psychology, Vol. 30, pp. 144–153. DOI:10.1016/j.newideapsych.2009.11.008
36. Stetsenko A. The challenge of individuality in cultural-historical activity theory: “Collectividual” dialectics from a transformative activist stance. Outlines - Critical Practice Studies, Vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 7-28. DOI:10.7146/ocps.v14i2.9791
37. Stetsenko A. Moving beyond the relational worldview: Exploring the next steps premised on agency and a commitment to social change. Human Development, 2016. Vol. 59, no.5, pp. 283–289.
38. Stetsenko A. The transformative mind: Expanding Vygotsky’s approach to development and education. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, 2017.
39. Stetsenko A. Putting the radical notion of equality in the service of disrupting inequality in education: Research findings and conceptual advances on the infinity of human potential. Review of Research in Education, 2017. Vol. 41, pp.112–135. DOI:10.3102/0091732X16687524
40. Stetsenko A. Confronting biological reductionism from a social justice agenda: Transformative agency and activist stance. Literacy Research: Theory, Method, & Practice, 2018, 67, pp. 44-63. DOI:10.1177/2381336918787531
41. Stetsenko A. Natureculture in a transformative worldview: Moving beyond the “interactionist consensus.” In Jovanovich G. (eds.), The Challenges of Cultural Psychology. London: Routledge, 2018, pp. 37-57
42. Stetsenko A. Cultural-historical activity theory meets developmental systems perspective: Transformative activist stance and “natureculture.” In Edwards A. (eds.), Cultural-historical approaches to studying learning and development: Societal, institutional and personal perspectives. London: Routledge, 2019, 249-262
43. Stetsenko A. Radical-transformative agency: Continuities and contrasts with relational agency and implications for education. Frontiers in Education, 2019. Vol. DOI:10.3389/feduc.2019.00148
44. Stetsenko A. Creativity as dissent and resistance: Transformative approach premised on social justice agenda. In Lebuda I (eds.), The Palgrave Handbook of Social Creativity. London, UK: Springer, 2019,  431-446. DOI:10.1007/978-3-319-95498-1_26
45. Stetsenko A. Transformative-activist approach to the history of psychology: Taking up history from a philosophy of resistance and social justice stance. In  Pickren W.  (ed.), The Oxford research encyclopedia, Psychology. Oxford University Press. Online Publication: February, 2020. DOI:10. 1093/ acref ore/ 97801 90236 557. 013.466
46. Stetsenko, A. Critical challenges in cultural-historical activity theory: The urgency of agency. Cultural-Historical Psychology, Vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 5–18. DOI:10.17759/chp.2020160202
47. Stetsenko A. Radical-transformative agency: Developing a transformative activist stance on a Marxist-Vygotskyan foundation. In Tanzi Neto A. (eds.), Revisiting Vygotsky for social change: Bringing together theory and practice. London: Peter Lang, 2020, 31-62.DOI:10.3726/b16730
48. Stetsenko A. Radicalizing theory and Vygotsky: Addressing the topic of crisis through activist-transformative methodology. Human Arenas: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Psychology, Culture, and Meaning. Published online, 2022. DOI:10.1007/s42087-022-00299-2
49. Stetsenko A., Arievitch I. M. Vygotskian collaborative project of social transformation: History, politics, and practice in knowledge construction. The International Journal of Critical Psychology, Vol. 12(4), pp. 58-80.
50. Stetsenko A., Arievitch I.M. Cultural-historical activity theory: Foundational worldview and major principles. In Martin J. (eds.), The sociocultural turn in psychology: The contextual emergence of mind and self. New York: Columbia University Press, 2010, pp. 231-253.
51. Thelen E. Dynamic systems theory and the complexity of change. Psychoanalytic Dialogues, Vol. 15, pp. 255–283. DOI:10.1080/10481881509348831
52. Thelen E., Smith L.B. A dynamic systems approach to the development of cognition and action. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1994.
53. Toulmin S. The Mozart of psychology. New York Review of Books, 1978, Issue 25, pp. 51-57.
54. Vygotsky L.S. The collected works of L. S. Vygotsky. Volume 3: Problems of the theory and history of psychology (R.W. Rieber and J. Wollock, eds.). New York: Plenum, 1997.
55. Vygotsky L. S. The history of the development of the higher mental functions. In Rieber R. W. (ed.), Collected works of L.S. Vygotsky: Vol. 4. New York: Plenum, 1997, pp. 1–125.
56. Witherington D.C. The dynamic systems approach as metatheory for developmental psychology. Human Development, Vol. 50, pp. 127–153. DOI:10.1159/000100943
57. Witherington D. C., Overton W. F., Lickliter R., Marshall P. J., Narvaez D. Metatheory and the primacy of conceptual analysis in developmental science. Human Development, Vol. 61, pp. 181–198. DOI: 10.1159/000490160