Developing a Dialectical Understanding of Generalization: An Unfinalized Dialogue Between Vygotsky and Davydov

  • Manolis DafermosEmail author
Part of the Theory and History in the Human and Social Sciences book series (THHSS)


Positivist-oriented psychology remains trapped in the formal account of generalization as a context (and content)-free procedure/process. Challenging the formal account of generalization, a dialectical perspective highlights the concrete, dynamic, historical connection between the general and the particular. It is proposed that a dialogue between Vygotsky and Davydov, who were both adherents of the dialectal tradition in psychology, can provide insights into conceptualizing generalization. A dialogue on dialectical understanding of generalization and its relation to changing societal practices is examined as a way to promote active, transformative subjectivity.


Generalization Dialectics L. Vygotsky V. Davydov Theoretical generalization 


  1. Baumann, C. (2011). Adorno, Hegel and the concrete universal. Philosophy and Social Criticism, 37(1), 73–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Blakeley, T. (1964). Soviet theory of knowledge. Dordrecht: Springer Science+Business Media.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Braun, C. M. J. (1991). The Marxist categories of the ‘abstract’ and ‘concrete’ and the cultural-historical school of psychology. Multidisciplinary Newsletter for Activity Theory, 4, 36–41.Google Scholar
  4. Bredo, E. (1997). The social construction of learning. In G. Phye (Ed.), Handbook of academic learning: The construction of knowledge (pp. 3–43). New York: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bühler, K. (1927). Die Krise der Psychologie. Jena: Gustav Fischer.Google Scholar
  6. Clancey, W. J. (1995). A tutorial on situated learning. In J. Self (Ed.), Proceedings of the international conference on computers and education (Taiwan) (pp. 49–70). Charlottesville, VA: AACE. Coughlin.Google Scholar
  7. Dafermos, M. (2003). Ob issledonanii logiki Kapitala K. Marxa v SSSR [about investigation of logic of K. Marx’s Kapital in USSR]. In D. Dzohatze (Ed.), Marxism: Proschoe, Nastajashee, Budushee [Marxism: Past, present, future] (pp. 271–276). Moscow: Russian Academy of Sciences/Institute of Philosophy.Google Scholar
  8. Dafermos, M. (2014). Vygotsky’s analysis of the crisis in psychology: Diagnosis, treatment, and relevance. Theory & Psychology, 24(2), 147–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dafermos, M. (2018). Rethinking cultural-historical theory: A dialectical perspective to Vygotsky. Singapore: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Danziger, K. (2009). The holy grail of universality. In T. Teo, P. Stenner, & A. Rutherford (Eds.), Varieties of theoretical psychology: International philosophical and practical concerns (pp. 2–11). Toronto: Captus.Google Scholar
  11. Davydov, V. V. (1988). The concept of theoretical generalization and problems of educational psychology. Studies in Soviet Thought, 36, 169–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Davydov, V. V. (1990). Types of generalization in instruction: Logical and psychological problems in the structuring of school curricula. In J. Kilpatrick (Ed.), Soviet studies in mathematics education (Vol. 2). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar
  13. Davydov, V. V. (1996). Teorija razvivajuscego obucenija [Theory of developmental education]. Moscow: Intor.Google Scholar
  14. Davydov, V. V. (1998). The concept of developmental teaching. Journal of Russian & East European Psychology, 36(4), 11–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Driesch, H. (1925). The crisis in psychology. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Engeström, Y. (2015). Learning by expanding. An activity-theoretical approach to developmental research. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Flick, U. (2007). Managing quality in qualitative research. London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hedegaard, M., & Chaiklin, S. (2005). Radical-local teaching and learning. A cultural-historical approach. Aarhus: Arhus University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Hegel, G. (1892). Lectures of the history of philosophy (Vol. 1). London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner.Google Scholar
  20. Hegel, G. W. F. (1991). Encyclopaedia of philosophical sciences (part 1) (Transl. by T. F. Geraets, W. A. Suchting, & H. S. Harris). Indianapolis, IN: Hackett.Google Scholar
  21. Henning, P. H. (2004). Everyday cognition and situated learning. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (pp. 143–168). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  22. Holzkamp, K. (2013). Practice: A functional analysis of the concept. In E. Schraube & U. Osterkamp (Eds.), Psychology from the standpoint of the subject: Selected writings of Klaus Holzkamp (pp. 87–111). London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  23. Ilyenkov, E. (1960). The dialectics of the abstract and the concrete in Marx’s ‘Capital’. Moscow: Academy of Sciences of USSR.Google Scholar
  24. Ilyenkov, E. (2009). The ideal in human activity. Pacifica, CA: Marxists Internet Archive.Google Scholar
  25. Koshmanova, T. S. (2007). Vygotskian scholars: Visions and implementation of cultural-historical theory. Journal of Russian & East European Psychology, 45(2), 61–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Levant, A., & Oittinen, V. (2014). Dialectics of the ideal: Evald Ilyenkov and creative soviet Marxism. Leiden: Haymarket Books.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lewin, K. (1931). The conflict between Aristotelian and Galieian modes of thought in contemporary psychology. Journal of General Psychology, 5, 141–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Marx, K. (1975). Contribution to the critique of Hegel’s philosophy of law. In K. Marx & F. Engels (Eds.), Collected works (Vol. 3, pp. 3–129). London: Lawrence & Wishart.Google Scholar
  29. Nemirovsky, R. (2002). On Guessing the essential thing. In K. P. Gravemeijer, R. Lehrer, H. J. van Oers, & L. Verschaffel (Eds.), Symbolizing, modeling and tool use in mathematics education (pp. 233–256). Dordrecht: Springer–Science +Business media.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Nissen, M. (2012). The subjectivity of participation. Articulating social work practice with youth in Copenhagen. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  31. Pavlidis, P. (2010). Critical thinking as dialectics: A Hegelian-Marxist approach. The Journal of Critical Education Policy Studies, 8(2), 74–102.Google Scholar
  32. Popper, K. (1940). What is dialectic? Mind, 49(196), 403–426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Rogoff, B., & Lave, J. (Eds.). (1984). Everyday cognition: Its development in social context (pp. 9–40). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Stetsenko, A. (2010). Standing on the shoulders of giants: A balancing act of dialectically theorizing conceptual understanding on the grounds of Vygotsky’s project. In W.-M. Roth (Ed.), Re/structuring science education: ReUniting psychological and sociological perspectives (pp. 53–72). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  35. Susen, S. (2015). The ‘postmodern turn’ in the social sciences. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Tateo, L. (2013). Generalization as creative and reflective act: Revisiting Lewin’s conflict between Aristotelian and Galilean modes of thought in psychology. Theory & Psychology, 23(4), 518–536.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Tateo, L. (2015). The nature of generalization in psychology. In S. Salvatore, G. Marsico, & R. A. Ruggeri (Eds.), Reflexivity and psychology (pp. 45–64). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.Google Scholar
  38. Tolman, C. (1989). The general psychological crisis and its comparative psychological resolution. International Journal of Comparative Psychology, 2(3), 197–207.Google Scholar
  39. Toulmin, S. (1982). The genealogy of ‘consciousness’. In P. F. Secord (Ed.), Explaining human behavior: Consciousness, human action, and social structure (pp. 53–70). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  40. Toulmin, S., & Leary, D. E. (1985). The cult of empiricism in psychology, and beyond. In S. Koch & D. E. Leary (Eds.), A century of psychology as science (pp. 594–617). New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  41. Valsiner, J. (2015). The place for synthesis: Vygotsky’s analysis of affective generalization. History of the Human Sciences, 28(2), 93–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Vaziulin, V. A. (1985). Rassudocnoe i razumnoe myslenije v razvitii poznanija [Understanding and reason in the development of cognition]. In M. N. Alekseev, & A. M. Korshunov (Eds.), Dialektika protsessa poznanija [Dialectics of the cognitive process]. Moscow: MGU.Google Scholar
  43. Vaziulin, V. A. (2002). Logika ‘Kapitala’ Karla Marksa [The logic of K. Marx’s “capital”]. Moscow: Sovremennij Gumanitarnij Universitet.Google Scholar
  44. Veresov, N. (1999). Undiscovered Vygotsky. Frankfurt/M.: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  45. Vygotsky, L. S. (1987). Thinking and speech. In R. W. Rieber & A. S. Carton (Eds.), The collected works of L. S. Vygotsky: Problems of general psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 39–285). New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
  46. Vygotsky, L. S. (1994). The problem of the environment. In R. Van der Veer & J. Valsiner (Eds.), The Vygotsky reader (pp. 338–354). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  47. Vygotsky, L. S. (1997a). The historical meaning of the crisis of psychology. In R. Rieber & J. Wolloc (Eds.), The collected works of L.S. Vygotsky (Vol. 3, pp. 233–344). New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
  48. Vygotsky, L. (1997b). The instrumental method in psychology. In R. Rieber & J. Wolloc (Eds.), The collected works of L.S. Vygotsky (Vol. 3, pp. 85–89). New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
  49. Vygotsky, L. (1998). The problem of age. In R. Rieber (Ed.), The collected works of L. S. Vygotsky (Vol. 5, pp. 187–205). New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
  50. Willy, R. (1897). Die Krisis in der Psychologie (first and second article). Vierteljahrsschrift für wissenschaftliche Philosophie, 21(79–96), 227–353.Google Scholar
  51. Willy, R. (1899). Die Krisis in der Psychologie. Leipzig: Reisland.Google Scholar
  52. Zavershneva, E., & Van der Veer, R. (2018). Vygotsky’s notebooks: A selection. Singapore: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity of CreteRethymnonGreece

Personalised recommendations