Contrasting Vygotsky’s and Bakhtin’s approaches to consciousness

Abstract

Matusov (2011) sustains that Vygotsky and Bakhtin represent irreconcilable theoretical approaches. In his view, Vygotsky’s model is monologic and universalist, while Bakhtin’s is dialogic and pluralist. Although the two authors differ importantly, one cannot speak of irreconcilability for two main reasons. First, Vygotsky’s approach is much more multifaceted and even contradictory than usually thought. In fact, his concept of sense echoes the Romanticist claim that experience exceeds the limits of language. Second, a dialogical conception of mind is not outside the reach of Hegelian tradition, which, in Matusov interpretation, is where Vygotsky’s approach comes from. I emphasize that Bakhtin’s unit of analysis is the voice—a concept more sociologic than psychological. “Voice” is insensitive to selfhood and should not be taken as synonymous of “person.” Notwithstanding, Vygotsky and Bakhtin share beliefs with respect to the social constitution of the mind that allow including them in the same research program.

Keywords

Bakhtin Romanticism sense sociogenesis voice Vygotsky

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Bakhtin

M. M.

(1981). Dialogic imagination: Four essays by M. M. Bakhtin ( Emerson

Holquist

, Trans.). Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.

Bakhtin

M. M.

(1984). Problems of Dostoevsky’s poetics ( Emerson

, Ed. & Trans.). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.

Brinkmann

(2010). Towards an expansive hybrid psychology: Integrating theories of the mediated mind. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 45(1), 1–20.

Berlin

(1976). Vico and Herder: Two studies in the history of ideas. London: Hogarth Press.

Cornejo

(2004). Who says what the words say? The problem of linguistic meaning in psychology. Theory & Psychology, 14(1), 5–28.

Cornejo

(2010). Using “use”: Pragmatic consequences of the metaphor of culture as resource. Culture & Psychology, 16(1), 63–72.

De Leo

(2009). The phenomenological dimension of meaning: Words, vowels, phonemes as ways to sing the world, to celebrate the world, and to live it. Integrative Psychological & Behavioral Science, 43(1), 78–83.

Diriwächter

Valsiner

(Eds.) (2008). Striving for the Whole: Creating Theoretical Synthesis. Sommerset, NJ: Transaction Publishers.

Durkheim

(1915/1976). The Elementary Forms of the Religious Life, 2nd edn. London: Allen and Unwin.

10.

Eco

(1976). A Theory of Semiotics. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.

11.

Gaete

Cornejo

(2011). Psychology is about persons: On Brinkmann’s expansion of Harré’s hybrid psychology. Integrative Psychological & Behavioral Science. doi: 10.1007/s12124-011-9158-7.

12.

Groeben

(1986). Handeln, Tun, Verhalten als Einheiten einer verstehenderklärenden Psychologie: wissenschaftstheoretischer Überblick und Programmentwurf zur Integration von Hermeneutik und Empirismus [Action, doing, behavior as units of an understanding-explaining psychology: epistemological overview and outline of a program for the integration of hermeneutics and empirism]. Tuübingen: Francke.

13.

Harré

(2002). Cognitive Science: A Philosophical Introduction. London: Sage.

14.

Humboldt

W. V.

(1836/1999). On language: On the diversity of human language construction and its influence on the mental development of the human species. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

15.

Lotman

Y. M.

(2005). On the semiosphere. Sign Systems Studies, 33(1), 205–226.

16.

Matusov

(2011). Irreconcilable differences in Vygotsky’s and Bakhtin’s approaches to the social and the individual: An educational perspective. Culture & Psychology, 17(1), 99–119.

17.

Valsiner

Van der Veer

(2000). The social mind: Constructing the idea. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

18.

Vygotsky

(1934/1986). Thought and Language. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.