ADVANCING FURTHER the HISTORY of SOVIET PSYCHOLOGY: Moving Forward from Dominant Representations in Western and Soviet Psychology
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
History of Psychology © 2014 American Psychological Association 2014, Vol. 17, No. 1, 60–78 1093-4510/14/$12.00 DOI: 10.1037/a0035565 ADVANCING FURTHER THE HISTORY OF SOVIET PSYCHOLOGY: Moving Forward From Dominant Representations in Western and Soviet Psychology Fernando L. González Rey University Center of Brasília This article discusses the works of some Soviet scholars of psychology, their theoretical positions, and the times within which their works were developed. Dominant repre- sentations of Soviet psychology and some of the main Soviet authors are revisited in the light of a blending of facts actively associated with their emergence in both Soviet and Western psychology. From the beginning, Soviet psychology was founded upon Marxism. However, the ways by which that psychology pretended to become Marxist in its philosophical basis were diverse and often contradictory. Other philosophical and theoretical positions also influenced Soviet psychologists. Different moments of that contradictory process are discussed in this article, and through this, I bring to light their interrelations and the consequences for the development of Soviet psychology. This article reinterprets several myths found within Soviet psychology, in which different theoretical representations have become institutionalized for long periods in both Soviet and Western psychology. Particular attention is given to identifying the condi- tions that presented Vygotsky, Luria, and Leontiev as part of the same paradigm, and which paved the way for a perception of Leontiev and his group as paralleling Vygotsky’s importance among American psychologists. Many of the sources that are used in this article were published in Soviet psychology only after the 1970s. Unlike the different and interesting works that began to appear on diverse trends in Soviet psychology, this article details in depth the articulation of topics and questions that still now are presented as different chapters in the analysis of Soviet psychology. Keywords: Soviet psychology, cultural-historical approach, activity theory, consciousness, ide- alistic Russian psychology This article aims to advance the representa- To achieve this purpose, we begin with the tion of Soviet psychology as has prevailed in the manner by which Soviet psychology began to West. This representation also corresponds with be known in the United States, due to the rele- what has dominated Soviet psychology. Some vance of American interpretations and publica- theoretical positions and authors have monopo- tion of the reception of Vygotsky and Soviet lized the political situation, gaining unjustified psychology all over the world. We deal further recognition during different historical periods in with the moments, facts, and authors of that psychology. The growing number of publica- psychology, and their interrelations, which per- This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. tions, both in Russia and in the West, has suf- mit new interpretations of Soviet psychology. This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individualfered user and is not to be disseminated broadly. distortion, resulting from censorship, and We also discuss theoretical and methodological this situation allows us, at this moment, to raise facts and authors, which have remained in new interpretations of Soviet psychology as shadow or have been little discussed for decades well as its main protagonists. in both Soviet and Western psychology. We draw attention to those chronological moments that we consider relevant, where we consider the facts for each historical moment, Correspondence concerning this article should be ad- dressed to Fernando L. González Rey, SQS 407, Bloco R, without any pretension, in order to turn them Apto 206, CEP - 70256-180; Brasília D.F. Brazil. E-mail: into the best periodization for psychology. In [email protected] our divisions, we focus on discussions, events, 60 ADVANCING FURTHER THE HISTORY OF SOVIET PSYCHOLOGY 61 and figures, which are closely related to some explanation of human behavior. The mistaken qualitative moments and ruptures within Soviet identification of Pavlov with reflexology ex- psychology. Due to the difficult historical and tended until relative recently. Bruner (1995), institutional contexts within which that psychol- one of the pioneers in the American-Soviet re- ogy developed, the changes, contradictions, and lationships in the 1960s, stated, “When Stalin heterogeneity deserve careful attention. took power in 1925, Congresses were called to Putting aside the political pressures that im- bring things into line with Marxist doctrine, pacted on Soviet psychology, this article will including one to bring psychology and the brain discuss in depth two moments that particularly sciences into line with Marxism generally and impacted on the path taken by Soviet psychol- “Pavlov” particularly” (p. 76). ogy. The first is related to the elimination of If a well-informed psychologist like Bruner idealistic philosophers and psychologists who expressed such an idea, it meant that it was not played an important role in the advent of that an isolated position, but a shared social repre- psychology, a fact that has been completely sentation on Soviet psychology that remained omitted from that history and from its interpre- alive in the West until the 1990s. Until the tations. The second concerns the peak of the 1970s, publications of Soviet psychologists political pressures on psychology that took were scarce in English, and they appeared with- place at the end of the 1940s as result of the out historical contextualization. According to purges within Soviet science, propelled by the Luria, the strongest line in Russian psychology accusations raised by Lysenko against bour- in the 1920s was Kornilov’s reactology and not geois deviation in Soviet genetics. As a result of Pavlov’s theoretical position (Luria, 1928). that period, for the first time in its history, an Luria was a member of the editorial board of the official Marxist psychology was imposed based Journal of Genetic Psychology at that time, and on Pavlov’s doctrine. he opened the path through which two of his After a discussion of those historical mo- colleagues, Vygotsky and Leontiev, also pub- ments, this article discusses in depth the post- lished articles in that journal in 1929 and 1932, Stalinist moment in Soviet psychology, which respectively (A. N. Leontiev, 1932; Vygotsky, preserves the idea of identifying Marxist psy- 1929). Despite these early publications in Eng- chology by its objectivity. After Stalin’s death, lish, the authors did not greatly impact Ameri- as the Pavlovian physiological reductionism can psychologists because of the absence of that was officially imposed for a short period references for following these positions. during the 1950s was overcome, a turning point Between 1930 and 1960, apart from the pre- took place. Here the focus was on object-based viously referred to articles, Soviet psychologists activity, in which concrete objects became the remained relatively unknown in their original essence of the definition for a Marxist Soviet works, and to get information, Americans de- psychology. The rise and fall of activity theory pended on authors who understood Russian is discussed within this complex network of (Cole, 1963). This situation explains the small psychological theory in both moments. interest in Soviet psychology in the United States at that time. At the beginning of the Representation of Soviet Psychology and 1960s, Bruner, already a well-known psycholo- Vygotsky in the West gist, began an increasing stream of correspon- This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. dence with Luria, as a result of which Bruner The first works devoted to Russian psychol- This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly. made his first visit to Moscow. Through Luria, ogy in English were published at the beginning he mainly was in contact with the Department of the 20th century. The best-known figure then of Psychology of the Moscow State University, was Pavlov, who was the first Russian author to headed by Leontiev.1 These exchanges between be published in English in the first half of the Bruner and Luria and Leontiev opened the way 20th century. As Pavlov’s studies centered on conditioned reflexes, little confusion exists in its identification as reflexology. “Reflexology” was 1 The information about the first visit of Bruner to Mos- cow was taken from the interview of Audrey Amrein- a term developed by Bekhterev, another great Beardsley with Bruner, accessed by the author through the figure of Russian neurophysiology, with the ex- site http://www.insidetheacademy.asu.edu/wp-content/ plicit proposal of replacing psychology in the uploads/2012/08/transcriptBruner.pdf 62 GONZÁLEZ REY for an increasing curiosity about Soviet psy- tinued to monopolize the references of Ameri- chology among psychologists who were close can psychology in education and child develop- to Bruner. As a result of that first visit to Mos- ment. cow, Bruner stated, “I found these young Rus- Vygotsky’s popularity in the West owed sian scholars in cognitive science, who were more to Mind in Society than to the English battling against Pavlov in much the same way I edition of Thinking and Speech. Mind in Society had been battling against the Skinnerian ap- was edited by a group of authors (Cole, Steiner, proach” (Amrein-Beardsley, 2012,p.5). Scribner, & Souberman, 1978). This book was Bruner’s first impressions represented the ad- the more relevant reference to Vygotsky in the vent of a new representation of Soviet psychol- West for decades since that moment. ogy in the United States. As evident from the Before the publication of Mind in Society, the previously quoted statement by Bruner, this book A Handbook of Contemporary Soviet Psy- new representation was primarily modeled chology, edited by Cole and Maltzan, was pub- through Leontiev and his close circle of follow- lished in 1969 after Cole’s return from Moscow.