No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
Subjectivity, Conflictuality, and Generalization in Social Praxis
Abstract
In this chapter, generalization is identified as a subjective process in praxis in which the way praxis is coordinated, the things we deal with in it, and the generalizations develop together. Further, generalizations are regarded as subjective and social at the same time. In this conception, generalizations are about common causes in praxis, and both are concrete as well as contradictory. Moreover, participants have different perspectives on the common causes, which stem from the way they participate in them. The contradictions may play out in different ways in the perspectives. Generalizations are related to concrete conditions in praxis, and as a consequence, our generalizations appear varied in particular ways according to the actual conditions. This theoretical exposition will be elucidated using examples from school life.
... Practice research is based on a philosophical understanding of the relation between theory and practice that transcends its hierarchical dichotomisation (Holzkamp, 2013a;Jensen, 1999). As such, theory development is not regarded as an activity reserved for scientists (Axel & Højholt, 2019). Whether a teacher, a researcher, a parent, or even a child, we all participate across structures of social practices in which knowledge and theories are continuously developed, adjusted, and refuted in order to understand and change the social practices that we are constantly in the process of (re)producing (Axel & Højholt, 2019). ...
... As such, theory development is not regarded as an activity reserved for scientists (Axel & Højholt, 2019). Whether a teacher, a researcher, a parent, or even a child, we all participate across structures of social practices in which knowledge and theories are continuously developed, adjusted, and refuted in order to understand and change the social practices that we are constantly in the process of (re)producing (Axel & Højholt, 2019). ...
... By means of a visual representation, I have created a continuum that shows how our eighth intervention principle both addresses and is situated within the aforementioned historical institutional struggles and contradictions. As shown below, this continuum represents a range of pedagogical approaches revolving around the same so-called common cause (Axel & Højholt, 2019) of wanting to support transformative development within communities of children by means of case-based interventions (Fig. 1). ...
This article presents a methodological approach to educational psychology research in which researchers engage in collaborative transformations of educational practice while developing theory concerning the societal and scientific relevance of these transformative processes. The theoretical inspiration for this approach stems from German-Scandinavian Critical Psychology, Transformative Activist Stance, and the Change Laboratory Framework — three research traditions with common roots in cultural-historical psychology and activity theory. Empirically, the article is based on a transformative research collaboration between the author and a 2nd grade teacher at a Danish municipal primary school. The aim was to develop an intervention framework to support the development of cultures of care within communities of children, while simultaneously producing theoretical knowledge about the conditions that enable the development of such cultures within the contradictory and dilemma-filled historical and socio-political context of Danish municipally governed schools. Empirical excerpts show how a novel intervention principle emerged as a synthesis of the researcher and the schoolteacher’s respective, seemingly contradictory knowledge contributions. Against a backdrop of historical-institutional analyses, it is argued that this intervention principle represents a novel scope of possibilities for educational professionals struggling to manoeuvre within the various contradictions and common problems inherent to Danish municipally governed schools. In the discussion, it is argued that the transformative approach presented here seems particularly promising for the democratisation of knowledge production. This assertion is supported by a demonstration of how the approach is particularly flexible to continuously integrate critique, contributions, and contestations from co-researchers within educational practice, adults as well as children.
... In this study, our focus is on interventions within guidance and welfare work. We understand this social practice as conflictual cooperation (Axel, 2011;Axel & Højholt, 2019;Højholt & Kousholt, 2020). ...
... Conducting our everyday lives together with others entails conflictual cooperation (Axel, 2011;Axel & Højholt, 2019;Højholt & Kousholt, 2020). This means that participants face contradictions, take a stand on them and thus either adapt to the conditions of the practice or change them. ...
... Here, we are not interested in individual struggles, but we seek to understand what conflicts reveal to us about professionals' common practice of intervening (see Højholt & Kousholt, 2020). This understanding makes it possible to reasonably choose whether to develop the common practice and how (Axel & Højholt, 2019;Højholt & Kousholt, 2020). ...
This study aims to understand intervening in early school leaving-related problems at general upper secondary schools in a large Finnish municipality. Sometimes intervening causes a paradoxical situation because professionals follow legislation by providing guidance and support to promote students' progress in their studies but, at the same time, try to strengthen students' wellbeing, which may not always mean continuing their studies in upper secondary school. We focus on professionals’ action and experience which are studied utilising concepts and methodological principles of subject-scientific psychology. The main material of the study consists of recorded and transcribed group discussions with 32 professionals who encounter the phenomenon of early school leaving in their everyday work. The material is analysed qualitatively 1) to identify how professionals perceive the phenomenon as a reason for intervening, and 2) to identify common contradictions they encounter in their everyday work related to early school leaving. The results suggest that professionals understood students' rocky conduct of everyday school life as consisting of 1) choosing the school without thorough consideration, 2) a mismatch of expectations and reality, 3) learning difficulties, 4) problems in social relationships, and 5) difficulties in other life scenes. Further, we identified six common contradictions which related to 1) students' conduct of everyday life, 2) students' broader life trajectories, and 3) professionals' conduct of their professional everyday lives. We argue that it is essential to consider early school leaving situationally, from the standpoint of the subject, instead of specifying risks or statistical probabilities.
... People are connected through the common matters in which they participate. Moreover, common matters are many-sided and contradictory, and there are differences in how people engage with and are positioned within them (Axel, 2020 2 ;Axel & Højholt, 2019;Højholt & Kousholt, 2020). ...
... By analyzing ongoing theorizing in practice, we have sought to contribute to the discussion of scientific quality and the concept of generalizability based on praxis theory (Axel & Højholt, 2019). Working with the concept of conflict helped us in this process. ...
This article contributes to discussions of transmethodology by drawing on experiences from conducting practice research aimed at the development of theory and practice through research collaboration. We analyze efforts to build research communities where researchers and professionals work together to perform analyses and develop knowledge. A collective research project exploring children’s possibilities for participation in school is used as a case for exploring how a research problem develops through such collabora-tion. This research project was designed to explore school life from the perspectives of children, parents, teachers, school leaders, and psychologists, and to analyze conflicts situated in everyday practices while considering political struggles concerning the school as a historical institution. The article emphasizes the often intangible and overlooked processes involved in research collaboration and details how we worked to build a re-search community comprising researchers and professionals that enabled collective mul-ti-perspective analyses. Building on a dialectical approach, we conceptualize conflicts as part of historical processes and as an immanent potentiality that arises from people’s engagement in common but contradictory matters. Hence, the different perspectives of those involved in children’s school life can be seen as linked through common matters, while also being differentiated by their allotted tasks in relation to children’s school life. This approach continuously challenged the researchers to analyze everyday conflicts grounded in the different perspectives of those involved, the different forms of reasoning, understandings, and standpoints, as well as how the different perspectives are connected through the participants’ engagement in a common matter – providing good schools for children. The article concludes by arguing that the discussed approach to theory devel-opment can be linked to a situated concept of generalization.
... People are connected through the common matters in which they participate. Moreover, common matters are many-sided and contradictory, and there are differences in how people engage with and are positioned within them (Axel, 2020 2 ;Axel & Højholt, 2019;Højholt & Kousholt, 2020). ...
... By analyzing ongoing theorizing in practice, we have sought to contribute to the discussion of scientific quality and the concept of generalizability based on praxis theory (Axel & Højholt, 2019). Working with the concept of conflict helped us in this process. ...
This article contributes to discussions of transmethodology by drawing on experiences from conducting practice research aimed at the development of theory and practice through research collaboration. We analyze efforts to build research communities where researchers and professionals work together to perform analyses and develop knowledge. A collective research project exploring children’s possibilities for participation in school is used as a case for exploring how a research problem develops through such collaboration. This research project was designed to explore school life from the perspectives of children, parents, teachers, school leaders, and psychologists, and to analyze conflicts situated in everyday practices while considering political struggles concerning the school as a historical institution. The article emphasizes the often intangible and overlooked processes involved in research collaboration and details how we worked to build a research community comprising researchers and professionals that enabled collective multi-perspective analyses. Building on a dialectical approach, we conceptualize conflicts as part of historical processes and as an immanent potentiality that arises from people’s engagement in common but contradictory matters. Hence, the different perspectives of the participants in the field can be seen as linked through common matters, while also being differentiated by their allotted tasks in relation to children’s school life. This approach continuously challenged the researchers to analyze everyday conflicts grounded in the different perspectives of those involved, the different forms of reasoning, understandings, and standpoints, as well as how the different perspectives are connected through the participants’ engagement in a common matter – providing good schools for children. The article concludes by arguing that the discussed approach to theory development can be linked to a situated concept of generalization
... People are connected through the common matters in which they participate. Moreover, common matters are many-sided and contradictory, and there are differences in how people engage with and are positioned within them (Axel, 2020 2 ;Axel & Højholt, 2019;Højholt & Kousholt, 2020). ...
... By analyzing ongoing theorizing in practice, we have sought to contribute to the discussion of scientific quality and the concept of generalizability based on praxis theory (Axel & Højholt, 2019). Working with the concept of conflict helped us in this process. ...
In this paper, the concept of transmethodology will be reflected in relation to developing research communities and collective multi-perspective analyses that assist in transgressing divisions between theory and practice and isolated knowledge. I will discuss these issues in relation to a collective research project where the aim was to explore children’s possibilities for participation in school through a shared focus on conflicts. Through an exploration of interconnected processes seen from children’s, parents’, teachers’, school leaders’, and psychologists’ perspectives, we addressed how situated conflicts in everyday practices could be analyzed in light of historical and political struggles concerning the school as an institution. We discussed empirical material and everyday dilemmas with the professionals with the aim of analyzing all participants’ different perspectives in connection with their different responsibilities, their conditions, and the different knowledge they had about the children’s school life. This collaboration continuously challenged us to take into account different perspectives, reasons, and worldviews and how they are connected in the same engagement – to make a good school for children. In a dialectical approach, conflicts can be conceptualized as part of historical processes as an immanent potentiality that arises out of people engaging in collective, contradictory practices. The perspectives of the parties involved are linked to common matters, as well as differentiated by the tasks they have in relation to the children’s school life and how they are part of the conflicts. The paper raises discussion about the potentials and dilemmas of engaging with conflicts in research practice and analyses.
... Laerere må decentrere deres perspektiv for at forstå, hvordan undervisningens aktiviteter stiller sig forskelligt for forskellige elever, bl.a. afhaengigt af deres sociale position og personlige situation, for på fleksibel vis at fokusere, prioritere og understøtte samarbejdet med og mellem eleverne på relevante måder i konkrete undervisningssituationer (Axel & Højholt, 2019). Laerere formulerer ofte denne fordring som nødvendigheden af at 'komme til at kende' de enkelte elever. ...
Ambitionen med denne artikel er at bidrage til forståelser af lærerfaglighed og undervisningspraksis, der adresserer, hvordan lærere arbejder med hverdagslivets kompleksiteter og dynamiske samspil som led i at skabe deltagelsesmuligheder for børn og unge i konkrete undervisningssituationer. Vi vil på den måde bidrage til udviklingen af en ’situeret psykologi’ med begreber, der kan styrke forståelser for lærerfaglighed som samarbejdende og udforskende. Artiklen bygger på et begreb om ’situeret ulighed’, der inviterer til at forstå og analysere ulighed som på en og samme tid knyttet til skolen som en særlig samfundsmæssig praksis, sociale samspil og samarbejdsprocesser og børn og unges personlige erfaringer, engagementer og liv på tværs af steder. Det peger på en sammenhæng mellem børn og unges forskellige muligheder for at deltage og lykkes i skolen og professionelles faglige betingelser for at arbejde med deres deltagelsesmuligheder i skolen. Med afsæt i praksisteori, kritisk psykologiske begreber om blandt andet livsførelse samt Donald Schøns teori om faglighed i praksis bidrager artiklen med trædesten til forståelser af lærerfaglighed som situeret i skolens sociale hverdagsliv, hvor lærere og elever samarbejder om forskelle og fælles opgaver. Formålet er herigennem at styrke forståelser af og betingelser for læreres faglighed i arbejde med børns og unges betingelser for deltagelse i skolens læringsfællesskaber.
This chapter proposes a theory with which to understand motives and their re-/presentation. After having argued the usefulness of such “positive” theoretical propositions, I reconstruct the main points of Ute Osterkamp’s theory of motivation from 1976. Her concept of desire for agency, as participation in a general performance of collective anticipatory care, promises a way to overcome the dualism of functionalisms without being trapped by the pure negativity of anti-functionalism. But her theory was largely forgotten, because a lack of attention to the question of how subjects and activities are constituted, framed, and individuated, pushed her tradition into a phenomenological cul-de-sac. So the rest of the chapter unfolds an alternative theory of how care and desire for agency can be analyzed, taking off from those aspects. A dialectics of how We/Us and I/Me are constituted and individuate is proposed (as yet another ‘retake’ of the Hegelian dialectics of recognition). The concept of “liminal technology” is then borrowed from Paul Stenner, in dialogue with a row of theorists of technology (Stiegler, Latour, and others). The technology of text and its “re-/presentation” of activities and motives is highlighted as a fundamental kind. This approach helps us address in a materialist way how activities, participation and motives are formed as objects in such becomings, as well as how to understand transitional moments of (affective) indeterminacy. This finally leads to a section on aesthetics as a way of cultivating meta-motives, beyond function, with Rancière, Adorno, Groys, and others.
Denne artikel diskuterer modsætninger og muligheder i kvalitativ forskning med forskning om ulighed i skolen som eksempel. På baggrund af en begrebsmæssig diskussion af hverdagslivets historiske dimensioner udforskes skolen som en social praksis hvor mange deltagere i situeret samspil med hinanden lever hverdagsliv og udgør betingelser for hinandens livsførelse. Artiklen vil pege på muligheden for gennem kvalitativ udforskning af skolens sociale situationer at fremanalysere sammenhænge mellem politiske konflikter i og om skolen, personlige konflikter i hverdagslivet og ulige betingelser for at deltage i skolelivet – det er netop sådanne sammenhænge kvalitativ metode kan bidrage til at forstå. Herigennem vil artiklen diskutere metodologiske udfordringer for kvalitativ psykologi særlig forholdet mellem forskere, og dem de forsker med - og både i relation til begrebsudvikling, situeret generalisering og mere praktiske guidelines for forskningssamarbejde og feltarbejde. Formålet er at bidrage til udviklingen af sprog, begreber og metodologi for kvalitativ psykologi.
The article presents the results of a study of the activities of educational psychologists working in Danish schools. The discovery is that the most valuable part of the work of school psychologists is done “in between times” and “in the corridor” — in the interval between scheduled meetings, testing and other tasks “according to job descriptions”. The researchers describe the specific types of psy-chologists' work in difficult school situations, the conditions of their professional activities and the di-lemmas that arise when solving professional problems. The authors note that creative, research and context-oriented work aimed at organizing cooperation between various parties is in conflict with the standardized work schedule, which occupies the bulk of the psychologist's working time, while real solutions to complex problems lie in informal communication, cooperation, studying social conditions and analyzing school problems. Choosing between what should and what is needed, the psycholo-gist finds himself in a situation of professionally significant choice and in a conflict situation with him-self, which leads to the need to constantly clarify his own situation and the conditions of his work.
Pedersen, Sofie (2021). Fællesskabets betydning i selvansvarliggørelsens tidsalder: om vinterjordbær, recovery og kollektivt (selv)ansvar i Japan. Tidsskrift for Forskning i Sygdom og Samfund, nr. 34, 133-158
Denne artikel tager udgangspunkt i recovery-tilgangens implicitte fordring om selvansvar ift. psykisk lidelse og problematiserer måden, hvorpå dette individualiseres som en del af arbejdet med recovery. Med afsæt i kulturhistorisk virksomhedsteori og økologisk psykologi søger artiklen at udforske og diskutere, hvordan det individuelle og kollektive ansvar er intimt forbundet, og hvad dette betyder i en socialpsykiatrisk praksissammenhæng. Det empiriske materiale udgøres af deltagerobservationer fra det japanske socialpsykiatriske tilbud, Bethel House, hvor man arbejder ud fra et motto om "by myself, with others". Her er arbejdet til dels centreret omkring 'tohjisha kenkyu', en udforskende tilgang til psykiske vanskeligheder, og til dels et stærkt praksisfællesskab med fokus på fælles produktion af bl.a. jordbær og kombu. Artiklen påpeger nødvendigheden af en tydeligere prioritering af meningsfulde sociale fællesskaber i det socialpsykiatriske recovery-arbejde og et blik for betydningen af noget (meningsfuldt) at forpligte sig på-ellers risikerer fordringen om selv-ansvar at blive et tiltag, der fastlåser mennesker yderligere i deres tilværelser.
This article discusses theoretical challenges in conceptualising the dialectical relationship between historical conditions and the situated interplay between people in concrete everyday practice. The concept of conflict may help us move beyond tendencies within psychology to separate history and situated practice, structure and activity, and micro- and macroprocesses – and to regard social life as unambiguous or as governed through hegemony. Research on the everyday social life of schools describes societal conflicts about education and how school children deal with unequal conditions when handling the conflictuality of their everyday lives. Analyses of coordination and conflicts between various parties (e.g. children, parents, teachers and psychologists) elucidate connections between intersubjective efforts to make things work in everyday practice and historical struggles related to the school as a social institution. Concepts are required that enable understanding of these processes as historical and political, driven by intersubjectivity related to concrete dilemmas, connected to personal and collaborative conduct of everyday life – processes we term the politics of everyday life. From a social practice perspective, we discuss how to grasp the ways in which people constitute the conditions for each other in a situated interplay in which they deal with common problems and – through these activities – also produce history.
Studies of children’s participation in school illustrate both societal conflicts about the school and how children in school deal with quite unequal conditions when it comes to handling the conflictuality of school life. Analyses of situated interplay, coordination and conflicts between the parties involved in children’s school lives (children, parents, teachers, psychologists, etc.) can elucidate the connections between intersubjective means of making things work in everyday practice, and historical struggles relating to the school as a societal institution. These dynamics reveal general conflicts over education policy, the distribution of responsibility and in which directions to change society. From a social practice perspective, and based on empirical studies of children’s everyday lives, this article discusses conceptual challenges concerning how to grasp the ways persons constitute the conditions for the acting of each other in a situated interplay in which, together, they must deal with shared societal and historical issues and problems.
An investigation of a design project is presented with concepts and theory developed within critical psychology in order to understand the process. Investigating the cooperation of the design of a building allows us to see that the building, its design, and its use constitute common contradictory causes. In their coordinated activities, professionals participate from each of their perspectives with different functions and priorities, and in their acts they must take the contradictions into account. Contradictions as incompatible aspects in things and activities make it difficult to keep the common cause stable. This means that the participants’ cooperation is a continuous attempt to produce stability. They are constantly confronted with the possibility of reorganization, development, and conflict in their activities. Therefore, cooperation is conflictual. The theoretical position is based on the fact that our understanding is reciprocally formed with our local, common activities. The theoretical consequences of the position are explored.
Based on contemporary debates about the possibilities and limits of scientific generalization and efforts of epistemological renewal, the chapter delineates three major approaches to generalization in psychological research: (1) numerical generalization, generalizing through representative samples, (2) post-generalizing traditions, conceiving generalization not as a decisive goal in scientific work, and (3) situated generalization, generalizing through subjectivity-in-context. The chapter argues for a theoretical and methodological vocabulary which systematically includes the subjective dimension of human life in psychological inquiry and situates the processes of generalization in persons’ common, social, cultural, and material practices of everyday living. Reconsidering the challenge of psychology to include human subjectivity and everyday life in the production of scientific knowledge, it shows how psychologies of human subjectivity permeate the history of psychology from the very beginning. Within these traditions significant perspectives contributing to the formation of a situated generalization are identified, and finally summaries of the chapters of the book are presented.
Based on a collection of chapters of leading scholars in the field, the purpose of this book is to intervene in current debates on the scientific foundation of psychological theory, methodology and research practice, and to offer an in-depth, situated and contextual understanding of psychological generalization. This book aims to contribute to a theoretical and methodological vocabulary which includes the subjective dimension of human life in psychological inquiry, and roots processes of generalization in persons’ common, social, cultural and material practices of everyday living.
The volume is directed to students, professors, and researchers in psychology as well as to scholars in other branches of the humanities and social science where psychology and especially subjectivity, everyday practice and the development of psychological knowledge is an issue. The volume will be of particular interest to scholars in the field of cultural psychology, critical psychology, psychology of everyday life as well as psychological methodology and qualitative studies of everyday life including the various critical undergraduate, graduate, master, and PhD programs. The book will also be of special interest for scholars working in social psychology, history of psychology, general psychology, theoretical psychology, environmental psychology and political psychology.
How can theoretical psychology develop concepts for analyzing connections between subjective dilemmas in everyday life and contradictions in historical social practice? We discuss this question by analyzing conflicts related to problems in children’s school lives. One frequent conflict is whether school problems should be explored in relation to individual deficits and deviations, family background, how the school is organized, the societal task of education etc. However, such conflicts often become concealed by psychological concepts, which contributes to individualization, categorization and the displacement of problems. We argue that theoretical development of the concept of conflict may support the widespread endeavors to transcend such reductionism by developing contextual and dialectical understandings of personal dilemmas. Through examples from empirical studies, the article illustrates how political conflicts concerning societal institutions (such as schools) form part of both inter-subjective conflicts about common matters and personal conflicts in the conduct of everyday life.
This article argues for the value of working with conflicts in social practice as resources for collaboration, learning and development. The interest in conflicts in social practice is rooted in a preoccupation with social power relations and how to understand and analyse power relations from a subject-science perspective. Following this interest, a methodological framework, best described as a kind of ‘mobile ethnography’, is discussed and exemplified through an empirical example. A preliminary conceptual framework for understanding power as a capacity for action is presented. The overarching ambition of the article is to consider what democratic collaboration and coexistence entails and how it might be supported conceptually and analytically by the notion of conflicts as heuristics for social inquiry and by the notion of power as a capacity for action and social participation.
How can theoretical psychology develop concepts for analyzing connections between subjective dilemmas in everyday life and contradictions in historical social practice? We discuss this question by analyzing conflicts related to problems in children’s school lives. One frequent conflict is whether school problems should be explored in relation to individual deficits and deviations, family background, how the school is organized, the societal task of education etc. However, such conflicts often become concealed by psychological concepts, which contributes to individualization, categorization and the displacement of problems. We argue that theoretical development of the concept of conflict may support the widespread endeavors to transcend such reductionism by developing contextual and dialectical understandings of personal dilemmas. Through examples from empirical studies, the article illustrates how political conflicts concerning societal institutions (such as schools) form part of both inter-subjective conflicts about common matters and personal conflicts in the conduct of everyday life.
This article expands upon current educational research on teachers as important actors for children’s learning and well-being, but it also questions a linear relationship between learning and teaching, addressing the question, “What is teaching in practice?” The theoretical framework for this work is the concept of social practice as presented by Dreier, Lave, Axel and Jensen, among others, and a critical psychological understanding of subjectivity as presented by Holzkamp and Dreier. Additionally, the work is framed by learning theory informed by social practice theory, recognizing that learning is neither exclusively caused by nor the result of teaching. By focusing on everyday teaching, this paper examines what it really means to teach in everyday life. The analysis is based on participant observations in two Danish primary schools and on interviews with four teachers over a period of two years. The analysis strengthens the argument for focusing on teachers as intentional, attentional subjects who act in reasoned ways. The main conclusion is that teachers must do more than “consider social conditions” as a set of circumstances to contend with. Instead, we must recognize that teaching is itself a social practice that inevitably constitutes an integral part of everyday school life.
Based on Critical Psychology from the Standpoint of the Subject the article describes analytical concerns and strategies of critical psychology. In a first step, the development of critical psychologies is located in current discussions on the production of knowledge, and three different typical approaches and major steps toward situated critique as a practice of mutual recognition are delineated. This shift, it is argued, has led to a historically new relevance of critique, and two basic analytical elements of critical research are introduced: Everyday conflictuality as the initiating moment of critique as well as the importance of theory for critical inquiry. On this basis a variety of analytic strategies and concepts are presented which inform Critical Psychology from the Standpoint of the Subject and suggest a constituent move from partial perspectives toward situated generalization.
This paper explores cooperation as contradictory and therefore with a constant possibility for conflict. Consequently it is called conflictual cooperation. The notion is presented on the basis of a participatory observation in a control room of a district heating system. In the investigation, cooperation appeared as the continuous reworking of contradictions in the local arrangement of societal conditions. Subjects were distributed and distributed themselves according to social privileges, resources, and dilemmas in cooperation. Here, the subjects’ activities and understandings took form from each other, their dilemmas, and their previous experience. This meant that they had each their perspective on ongoing praxis. Three observations from the collaboration in the control room are presented, one on stabilizing the function of an object, another on standardizing a procedure, and one on regulating who can use what in what way. Contradictions in the observed activity are discussed. It is argued that for the participants the connections of acts appear in such contradictions in cooperation. This conception is discussed in relationship to the notions of practice, as expounded by Bourdieu and MacIntyre and Schatzki. As a contrast a notion of praxis is set up in which actions are reciprocally differentiated under contradictory conditions, and habitualizations, institutionalizations and conflictual cooperation are identified on this basis. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
Studies of children’s participation in school illustrate both societal conflicts about the school and how children in school deal with quite unequal conditions when it comes to handling the conflictuality of school life. Analyses of situated interplay, coordination and conflicts between the parties involved in children’s school lives (children, parents, teachers, psychologists, etc.) can elucidate the connections between intersubjective means of making things work in everyday practice, and historical struggles relating to the school as a societal institution. These dynamics reveal general conflicts over education policy, the distribution of responsibility and in which directions to change society. From a social practice perspective, and based on empirical studies of children’s everyday lives, this article discusses conceptual challenges concerning how to grasp the ways persons constitute the conditions for the acting of each other in a situated interplay in which, together, they must deal with shared societal and historical issues and problems.
A major and comprehensive study of the philosophy of Hegel, his place in the history of ideas, and his continuing relevance and importance. Professor Taylor relates Hegel to the earlier history of philosophy and, more particularly, to the central intellectual and spiritual issues of his own time. He sees these in terms of a pervasive tension between the evolving ideals of individuality and self-realization on the one hand, and on the other a deeply-felt need to find significance in a wider community. Charles Taylor engages with Hegel sympathetically, on Hegel's own terms and, as the the subject demands, in detail. We are made to grasp the interconnections of the system without being overwhelmed or overawed by its technicality. We are shown its importance and its limitations, and are enabled to stand back from it.
The chapter addresses basic issues about generalization from the perspective of Critical Psychology. It is framed by a critical analysis of the mainstream notion of generalization in psychology because psychologists are educated in this notion and constantly confronted with it in the research literature and in discussions, reviews, and evaluations of their work. This complicates the development of an alternative notion of generalization which does not, implicitly or explicitly, take over key features of the mainstream notion. The purpose of the chapter is to present such an alternative conception of generalization in Critical Psychology by focusing on its key characteristics, accomplishments, issues, and revisions. Human beings are theorized as participants in structurally arranged, situated social practices. Their psychological processes unfold in, and hang together with, their participation and conduct of everyday life in such social practices. So, their psychological processes are always affected by being directed at and part of situated nexuses in subjects’ lives in social practices. We must, therefore, generalize about subjects’ psychological functioning in situated nexuses. But, while it is necessary to establish generalizations in capturing concrete nexuses, it cannot be the sole purpose of research. We must capture how general and particular aspects hang together dynamically in nexuses and how their situated composition affects the qualities and status of the aspect or problem we study. Case studies offer unique possibilities for accomplishing this which is briefly illustrated by an example. It is, finally, argued that grasping phenomena and problems in situated nexuses of social practice is necessary in basic theorizing as well as in knowledge-based expertise and professional interventions in subjects’ problems in the nexuses of their everyday lives.
This article examines a general question about how we in research develop the knowledge we write about and present as ‘result of research’. It scrutinizes research processes as a social practice, where several parties participate, collaborate and learn from a process where researchers involve themselves in exploring specific problems across societal contexts. In this way, the presented discussions can be seen as a critique of tendencies to approach research as an isolated endeavour, where results are produced by applying special methods and techniques that prevent influence from the social world and, in this way, creating knowledge about the world by ‘leaving it’. The article argues for approaching the development of knowledge as a social practice in itself. Research processes transcend different contexts, involve different perspectives, and the researchers seek to analyse connections in a common world by exploring how an explicit problem is connected to social conditions and interplay, thereby achieving a deeper understanding of the problem. In the article, we build on 25 years of practice research projects and involve a specific project as an example in a general discussion of the development of knowledge. Among other things, this project inspired these thoughts because of the following exchange between a researcher and some professionals from the family centre where we were conducting our research (a residential institution for families and children in trouble).
Cambridge Core - Educational Psychology - Learning and Everyday Life - by Jean Lave
The title “Psychology: Social Self-Understanding on the Reasons for Action in the Conduct of Everyday Life” does not intend to put forward some new type of psychology in addition to those already existing. Instead, it argues that psychology in its entirety, as it has developed historically, needs to put itself under such a motto if it wants to fulfil its function within the scientific community of offering a particular access to our experiences and actions. This simultaneously maintains, ex negativo, that the prevailing psychology is unable to master this task; its research misses human problems of life and is incapable of contributing anything substantial to our knowledge in human and social sciences.
Psychotherapy in Everyday Life shows how clients employ therapy in their daily lives. The varied and extensive efforts involved in this are systematically overlooked in therapy research. The book shines important new light on processes of personal change and learning in practice. More generally speaking, it launches a theory of personhood based on how persons conduct their everyday lives in social practice. This approach and many of the book's findings are of immediate relevance for understanding other fields of expert practice.
This paper is discusses some central points in a dissertation for the degree of dr. phil., "Regulation as Productive Tool Use - a Participatory Observation in the Control Room of a District Heating System." An earlier version of the paper was presented by the author as part of the defense of the dissertation at Roskilde University Center June 14 2002. As suggested by the title, the dissertation was an empirical study of regulation in a control room. The object of the authors participatory observation was how the operators in the control room followed rules when they regulated a highly automated plant. When I was shown the plant I was told that the technology ran smoothly and without error. Its control structures are based on formal logic and mechanical principles, all the same human beings are required in the control room to take care of anomalies. Among other things, the observations provide an opportunity to discuss the limitations of psychologies that study human beings on the basis of formal principles. The present paper focuses on two characteristic aspects of this discussion in the dissertation. First, it takes its point of departure in some practical problems of the control structures of the control room. It will demonstrate that the practical problems are problems of principle, and that formal principles are not adequate to study the object of human sciences, namely, human beings. Second, it sketches out what is required of a conception of human beings. As human beings are trusted to handle anomalies, we must explain how they are able to act on an incomplete understanding of the situation. And since they are able to identify what is wrong, we must explain how they develop new knowledge. The paper presented at the defense summarized the main arguments of the dissertation and alluded to an expansion of the main point using a particular instance. Here the weight is shifted to the latter expansion.
The problems most people have in understanding Marx come not only from the complexity of his theories, but also from the frequent changes in the meanings of his concepts. The present article attributes this unusual practice to Marx’s ‘philosophy of internal relations’, which serves as the foundation for his dialectical method, and his use of the process of abstraction (breaking up our internally related world into the ‘parts’ best suited to study it). The ‘flexibility’ found in Marx’s use of language is the linguistic counterpart of the different abstractions he believes necessary in order to capture the complex workings of capitalism. Marx’s dialectical categories, especially ‘contradiction’, are good examples of this process at work.
Critical Psychology is discussed as an historical science of the subject. The confrontation of human and machine is used to differentiate subjects in action from notions of isolated, formal mental mechanisms. An investigation of operators' regulation in a control room reveals issues of how subjects must re-arrange conditions to act more appropriately. The operators do not know everything necessary to act. This means that they must act on the basis of a concrete, varied, and situated understanding of their work. Since the dilemmas of work have no correct solutions, the operators must break rules to follow them and thereby re-arrange conditions. Each worker has his perspective on the problems. The differences are sorted out in conflictual cooperation. This challenges the more mediated aspects of work conditions.
• The title of this volume, Experience and nature, is intended to signify that the philosophy here presented may be termed either empirical naturalism or naturalistic empiricism, or, taking "experience" in its usual signification, naturalistic humanism. I believe that the method of empirical naturalism presented in this volume provides the way, and the only way by which one can freely accept the standpoint and conclusions of modern science: the way by which we can be genuinely naturalistic and yet maintain cherished values, provided they are critically clarified and reinforced. The naturalistic method, when it is consistently followed, destroys many things once cherished; but it destroys them by revealing their inconsistency with the nature of things—a flaw that always attended them and deprived them of efficacy for aught save emotional consolation. But its main purport is not destructive; empirical naturalism is rather a winnowing fan. Only chaff goes, though perhaps the chaff had once been treasured. An empirical method which remains true to nature does not "save"; it is not an insurance device nor a mechanical antiseptic. But it inspires the mind with courage and vitality to create new ideals and values in the face of the perplexities of a new world. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
• The title of this volume, Experience and nature, is intended to signify that the philosophy here presented may be termed either empirical naturalism or naturalistic empiricism, or, taking "experience" in its usual signification, naturalistic humanism. I believe that the method of empirical naturalism presented in this volume provides the way, and the only way by which one can freely accept the standpoint and conclusions of modern science: the way by which we can be genuinely naturalistic and yet maintain cherished values, provided they are critically clarified and reinforced. The naturalistic method, when it is consistently followed, destroys many things once cherished; but it destroys them by revealing their inconsistency with the nature of things—a flaw that always attended them and deprived them of efficacy for aught save emotional consolation. But its main purport is not destructive; empirical naturalism is rather a winnowing fan. Only chaff goes, though perhaps the chaff had once been treasured. An empirical method which remains true to nature does not "save"; it is not an insurance device nor a mechanical antiseptic. But it inspires the mind with courage and vitality to create new ideals and values in the face of the perplexities of a new world. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
Interdisciplinary collaboration and conflict concerning children in difficulties-Conditions, procedures and politics of everyday life in school
- M Røn Larsen
Subjectivity and knowledge: Generalization in the psychological study of everyday life
- O Dreier
Psychology: Social self-understanding on the reasons for action in the conduct of everyday life
- K Holzkamp
Categories in activity theory: Marx’s philosophy just-in-time
- Juul Jensen
Skoleledelse: mellem konflikter og samarbejde
- P Busch-Jensen
Pedagogical dictionary /1985
- J Dewey
Elevsamspil, konflikter og udsathed i skolens fællesskaber
- C Højholt
- I Schwartz
John Hattie som uddannelsesteoretiker—en kritik af teorien om synlig læring
- J Klitmøller
- K Nielsen
The dialectical biologist
- R Levins
- R Lewontin
Dialektik ohne Dogma (dialectics without dogmatism: Natural sciences against communistic ideology)
- R Havemann
Skoleledelse: mellem konflikter og samarbejde
- P Busch-Jensen
- C Højholt
- D Kousholt