Abstract
Engeström’s (1987, 1999) innovations in cultural-historical activity theory emphasise the role of contradictions in analysing and transforming learning in practice. This paper considers some of the problems and possibilities contained in his analytical understanding of contradictions, in relation to activity and to what he terms ‘expansive learning’ (Engeström, 2001, 2004, 2007). In doing so, it builds upon Engeström’s stated concern with theorising activities ‘in capitalism’. Its goal is to problematise the underlying practical definition of contradictions and the claims made for his ‘contradiction-driven’ analysis of work practices as a platform for transformation. This paper suggests that the definition of contradictions that underpins Engeström’s notions of ‘expansive’ learning and his ‘developmental work research’ methodology is restrictive because it underplays the wider social contradictions and antagonisms inherent in the commodification of labour-power . As such, while Engeström’s take on activity theory offers a valuable approach to reforming configurations of labour within the bounds of capitalist efficiency, its engagement with capitalism’s internal contradictions is uneven and, therefore, its claims to produce transformative, expansive learning are heavily qualified. The framework of this argument is provided by Postone’s (1996) reading of Marx’s Capital and Grundrisse as social theories of labour within capitalism and the extensive analyses of the social reproduction of labourpower developed by Rikowski (1999, 2000a, 2000b, 2002a, 2002b), Allman et al. (2000) and Dinerstein and Neary (2002). The paper ends with a consideration of the practical research possibilities emanating from its call to ground activity theory and its concern with contradictions in a sophisticated understanding of labourpower theory. It draws upon the UK-based Learning in and for Interagency Working Project’s (2004 ‑ 2008) intervention research in multiprofessional children’s service settings. It discusses the project’s rethinking of the notion of contradictions, the need to understand the division of labour as a tool in the social production of labour-power and the sense in which historical shifts in the ways that institutions organise   collective labourpower make visible the social production of labourpower as an object of activity
Keywords expansive learning  activity theory  labor  commodification  contradiction  labour
Categories (categorize this paper)
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 71,231
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Thought and Language.Lev Vygotsky - 1964 - Philosophy of Science 31 (2):190-191.

View all 10 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Breaking Away From Capital? Theorising Activity in the Shadow of Marx.Peter Jones - 2009 - Outlines. Critical Practice Studies 11 (1):45-58.
Where is the Primary Contradiction?Paulo Rocha - 2020 - Outlines. Critical Practice Studies 21 (2):06-28.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Breaking Away From Capital? Theorising Activity in the Shadow of Marx.Peter Jones - 2009 - Outlines. Critical Practice Studies 11 (1):45-58.
Who is Acting in an Activity System?Ritva Engeström - 2009 - In Annalisa Sannino, Harry Daniels & Kris D. Gutierrez (eds.), Learning and Expanding with Activity Theory. Cambridge University Press. pp. 257.
Value of the Commodity and Intellectual Labour: Rethinking Philosophy of Economics of K. Marx.Tuytsyn Yury - 2008 - Proceedings of the Xxii World Congress of Philosophy 22:117-123.
The Future of Activity Theory : A Rough Draft.Yrjö Engeström - 2009 - In Annalisa Sannino, Harry Daniels & Kris D. Gutierrez (eds.), Learning and Expanding with Activity Theory. Cambridge University Press. pp. 303--328.
Activity Theory and Transformation In Engeström, Y, Meiettinen, R. & Punamäki RL.Y. Engeström - 1999 - In Yrjö Engeström, Reijo Miettinen & Raija-Leena Punamäki-Gitai (eds.), Perspectives on Activity Theory. Cambridge University Press.
Activity Theory and Individual and Social Transformation.Yrjö Engeström - 1999 - In Yrjö Engeström, Reijo Miettinen & Raija-Leena Punamäki-Gitai (eds.), Perspectives on Activity Theory. Cambridge University Press. pp. 19--38.
Introduction. Y. Engeström, R. Miettinen,. & RL. Punamäki.Yrjö Engeström - 1999 - In Yrjö Engeström, Reijo Miettinen & Raija-Leena Punamäki-Gitai (eds.), Perspectives on Activity Theory. Cambridge University Press. pp. 1--16.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2013-12-01

Total views
19 ( #584,889 of 2,518,446 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #408,186 of 2,518,446 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes