La dialéctica en la psicologia del desarrollo: relevancia y significacion en la investigacion

Abstract

ResúmenEl presente artículo examina la significación y la relevancia de la dialéctica en la obra psicológica de Piaget y de Vigotsky. Por un lado se analiza una metodología dialéctica común, presente en las unidades de análisis de las investigaciones. Por otro, se exponen los rasgos peculiares que adquiere la dialéctica en la explicación del desarrollo en ambos desarrollo. Finalmente, en base a los análisis realizados, se caracterizan los rasgos de la dialéctica. También se discute su unicidad y su carácter apriori en la Psicología del Desarrollo y en las Ciencias Humanas, justificándose su diversidad, en función de las temáticas que se indagan, así como a ciertos límites en el uso de esa categoría en la indagación empírica. Su implementación exige que adopte formas diferentes, pertinentes a los distintos problemas y focos teóricos. Palabras clave: Dialéctica, Unidad de Análisis, Contradicción, Inferencia Dialéctica, Equilibración. AbstractThe present article analyses the signficance and relevance of dialectic in Piaget's and Vigotsky's psychological studies. On one hand, it highlights the common dialectical methodology present in units of analysis in research. On the other hand, it focuses on the peculiar features dialectic acquires within both authors' explanation of psychological development. Lastly, a characterization of dialectic features based on previous analysis is introduced. The present article argues against the unique dialectic and its a priori features in Developmental Psychology and Human Sciences areas. It also justifies its diversity in relation to the subject matters under investigation as well as the existence of certain limits in the use of that category in empirical research. The use of dialectics requires the adoption of diverse forms regarding different issues and theoretical focuses. Keywords: Dialectic; Unit of Analysis; Contradiction; Dialectic Inference; Equilibration.* Dirección: Universidad de Buenos Aires, Facultad de Filosofía y Letras, Instituto de Investigaciones en Ciencias de la Educación, Puán, 480, 4° Piso, Buenos Aires, Argentina, 1406. E-mail: iiceuba@gmail.com La historia del pensamiento dialéctico exhibe una pluralidad de interpretaciones: desde el Taoísmo en la cultura china, Heráclito y Platón en la antigüedad clásica griega, pasando por Kant, Hegel y Marx, en el pensamiento moderno, luego los diferentes interpretaciones marxistas que incluyen el estructuralismo de Althusser, pasando por Gramsci, Colleti y Luporini, hasta la versión del open marxism de Holloway. Por otro lado, las revoluciones científicas en la física y la geometría de principios del siglo pasado suscitaron una renovada interpretación epistemológica de esta categoría en los términos de la interacción entre la teoría y la experimentación, entre lo dado y lo construido, lo apriori y lo aposteriori en las obras de Bachelard y de Gonseth (Castorina & Baquero, 2005).Aunque a veces se ha postulado un denominador conceptual para todas las posiciones dialécticas, es preciso reconocer que cualquier caracterizació...

Producing transformations to study them

“…The opposition of these tasks is rooted in the exercise that Vygotsky was proposing in the frame of his project of concrete psychology. In such project, he tried to develop a Marxist psychological science, which for him means no other thing that "true" science-in opposition to a bourgeois one that contributes to the production of a biased or limited representation of reality (Castorina & Baquero, 2005). Such effort, Vygotsky's concrete psychology, intended to be a general psychological theory.…”

“…The way in which a Marxist science is constructed, on the other hand, is more strongly articulated with the opposition of descriptive and explanatory analysis. Following Castorina and Baquero (2005), the right scientific method for Vygotsky involved not only the abstraction of the phenomena, which is common to every science. Instead, it should take the initial represented concrete, as a starting point to revisit the multiple determinations it has in reality, and to come back afterwards as a new represented concrete, now rich in determinations and relations.…”

Dialectical Inferences in the Construction of Social Domain Knowledge

“…This approach does not replace empirical research speci c methods in psychology, but makes research possible: On the one hand, the research object is seen as a dynamic unit by the articulation of opposite components, such as schema and observable; subject and object; structure and procedure, assimilation and accommodation, etc. (Castorina, 2010;Castorina and Baquero, 2005) Particularly, within the units of analysis, a multiple determinations synthesis perspective, or as a dynamic unity of what is diverse, recognizes an evident kinship with Hegel's and Marx's ideas. In other words, by studying the problems of cognitive development, Piaget approached constitutive relations in terms of their reciprocal interactions.…”

Tensions, articulations, and novelty in the ontogenetic development of historical thinking: Contributions of cultural–historical psychology

“…The cultural tools available in the social environment are not mechanistic determinants of human behaviour since they only have an effect when subjects use them (Azeri, 2020;Wertsch, 1997b). This relationship between the subject and cultural tools would allow the appearance of authentic novelty, a new process that does not follow a natural continuity but results from qualitative transformations in development (Castorina, 2010).…”