The Role of Mental Schemata in Production of Space (Criticism of Lefebvre's Spatial Triad from the Perspective of Vygotskian School of Cognitive Psychology)

Farmahini Farahani, Behrad; Sarrafi, Mozaffar

doi:10.30475/isau.2020.223709.1376

The Role of Mental Schemata in Production of Space (Criticism of Lefebvre's Spatial Triad from the Perspective of Vygotskian School of Cognitive Psychology)

Document Type : Original Research Paper

Authors

Behrad Farmahini Farahani ¹

Mozaffar Sarrafi ²

¹ PhD Candidate in Urban Planning, Campus 2, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran.

² Professor, Faculty of Architecture and Urban Planning, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran.

https://doi.org/10.30475/isau.2020.223709.1376

Abstract

Extended Abstract
Objective and Background: Henri Lefebvre’s theory of production of space has been one of the most influential theories in spatial studies that deals with the relationship between the mentality of urban residents and urban space. The triad of spatial practice, representations of space and representational spaces, which have been discussed in that theory, have proven to be problematic due to its failure of explanation of the way that semeiotical significations in a representational space lead to the creation of meanings in the mind. In addition, it is not precise from the perspective of the cognitive psychology. The objective of present essay is the criticism of Lefebvre’s triad and explanation of the process of thought and representation in mind by means of Vygotskian School in cognitive psychology and application of the mental schema model. By criticism of Lefebvre’s theory and revelation of its deficiencies and finally, by the use of model of mental schema, the following question is answered: How is urban space created in relation to consciousness and mentality of its residents?
Methodos: The methodology of current essay is based on two general methodological approach: system approach in epistemology and structurationist ontology; with emphasize on becoming, which is dialectic. Thus, it is emphasized that there is something beyond the mere expression of the mutual relationship between structure and culture, environment and psyche of man and it is that social and spatial phenomena should be studied in the course of their evolution, maturation and fall in history; this is indeed the method of dialectic.
Although Lefebvre’s method from the perspective of its three moments helps us to avoid the absolute and one-sided encounter with spatial issues, it is still problematic and subject to criticism that how representational spaces influence human psyche and mind through the process of semiotical significations as well as the adi of physical objects that contain meanings (whether in line with political and social resistance or in line with the regeneration of the dominant way of production through systematization of space and exertion of hegemony over the space).
Findings: This criticism took place through the encounter of the ideas of Lefebvre with the ideas of Vygotsky and Bakhtin and expression of the role of mental schema in understanding of meanings and interpretation of the inputs and their externalization. Firstly, Vygotsky in his discussion as regards inner speech showed that on the one hand, there is a distance between the meaning of a word and its sense. On the other hand, he proved that there is a difference between the scientific concepts and everyday concepts, which in turn reminds us the Hegelian difference of “In-itself” and “For-Itself. In addition, scientific concepts, which are the result of education, surpass the everyday concepts in mental analyses. Secondly, according to Bakhtin’s theory, process of thought has a dialogic nature, and in the word of every individual, there is always a trace of “otherness”. This issue leads us towards understanding the role of social groups in individual consciousness. Thirdly, mental schema, which are the dynamic element of individual consciousness and have a propositional nature change following the creation of question and search for answer. Following the change of the mental schema, if the individual finds the opportunity for institutionalization and popularization of his own idea, the culture would change too. Then, culture can be defined through the change in mental schema. On the other hand, problem of cognitive distortion is also related with the concept of exertion of hegemony and false consciousness, which can be discussed in the form of the intentional manipulation of the mental schema. Through these three theoretical foundations, one can conclude: 1)consciousness acts by means of the concepts that build mental schema; 2)since reality is changing, concepts also change in the course of time, and change in concepts and their relations through raising a question, findings answer, training and institutionalization leads to the change of mental schema; 3)individual consciousness has a collective structure, i.e. it is influenced by social groups which host the individual as their member; 4) factors of hegemony succeed to control cultural space and lived space thanks to cognitive distortion. Definition of culture through model of mental schema causes the mode of production and change of space to be clarified without being entangled with the cognitive deficiencies of Lefebvre’s cognitive theory. In an analysis that was proposed of the everyday concepts and scientific notions, it became clear that perceptions and ideas that take place due to the semiotical metaphors and significations within lived space and through spatial representations of Lefebvre are mere everyday concepts. Therefore, they do not have the logical structure of scientific concepts and even if the end of the concatenation of associations leads to similar action, since they have led to that action with an inferential method and by means of different notions and interrelations between them in the form of mental schema, soon or later, the difference and contradiction of them will be revealed. Therefore, Lefebvre’s political project, i.e. the ideal society that will be realized through resistance of different groups like oppressed, underclasses, ethnic groups, gender groups and other before the capitalist system, is more a poetic notion than a scientific analysis of the mental conditions of those groups.
Conclusion: The results acquired through findings and discussions show that semiotical significations in lived space not in a poetic form that is hidden in Lefebvre’s expression rather through the role that concepts and the relations between them are established between them in the form of schemata in mind. Moreover, study of formation and change of space requires the study of the evolutionary schemata of intentional and active man whose consciousness has taken form by mediation of the semiotical systems and tools and of course, changes in the course of time. Since the consciousness of every individual is influenced by the social group to which the individual belongs, the mental schemata of social groups regarding a determinate space should be studied.

Graphical Abstract

The Role of Mental Schemata in Production of Space (Criticism of Lefebvres Spatial Triad from the Perspective of Vygotskian School of Cognitive Psychology)

Highlights

- Semiotical significations in lived space not in a poetic form that is hidden in Lefebvre’s expression rather through the role that concepts and the relations between them are established between them in the form of schemata in mind.
- Study of formation and change of space requires the study of the evolutionary schemata of intentional and active man whose consciousness has taken form by mediation of the semiotical systems and tools and of course, changes in the course of time.
- The mental schemata of social groups regarding a determinate space should be studied.

Keywords

Mental Schema

Production of Urban Space

Lev S. Vygotsky

Henry Lefebvre

Culture

Mikhail Bakhtin

Ahmadi, G.A., Abdolmaleki, Sh. (2014). Investigating the Effect of Education Based on Socio-Cultural Approach of Vygotsky on Cognitive-Social Development of Preschool Students of Sanandaj. New Thoughts on Education, 10(2), 33-58.
Arizi Samani, H. R. (2002). Baz-shenasi Vygotsky [Recognition of Vygotsky], Ketab-e Mah-e Adabiat. Vol.62, 3(3), 108-111.
Azabdaftari, B. (1996). Vygotsky va Moammaye Terajedi Hamlet [Vygotsky and The Tragedy of Hamlet Mystery]. Chista. Vol.128, 115-138.
Azabdaftari, B. (2003). Roykard-e Vygotsky be adabiat va honar [Vygotsky's Approach to literature and art]. Ketab-e Mah-e Adabiat. Vol.76, 72-79.
Azabdaftari, B. (2011). Hekayat-e Tamsili Fabel: mashghale nazar-e Vygotsky [Fable's allegorical anecdote: Vygotsky's Concern]. Ketab-e Mah-e Adabiat. Vol.163, 4-13.
Bachelard, G (2013). La Poétique de l'Espace. (Translated from English (J. R. Stilgoe, 1994) to Persian by M. Kamali & M. Shirbache). Tehan: Roshangaran va Motaleat-e Zanan Press. (Original work published 1957).
Bakhtin, M. M. (2018). Problems of Dostoevsky's Poetics. (Translated from English (ed. and trans. C. Emerson, 1984) to Persian by S. Solhjou). Tehan: Niloofar Press. (Original work published 1963).
Barohny, E. (2016). Bringing Vygotsky and Bakhtin into the second Language classroom: A focus on the unfinalized nature of communication. Language Teaching and Learning, 6(1), 114-125.
Bartlett, F. (1932). Remembering: A Study in Experimental and Social Psychology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Basin, Y. I. (2005). Semantic Philosophy of Art. (Translated from English to Persian by B. Eslahpazir). Tehran: Niloofar Press. (Original work published 1979).
Bateni, M. (2013). Naghsh-e Avatef dar Tasmimgiri-ye Kheradmandane [The Role of Affetcs in Reasonable Deciding]. In Cognition & Affect, Clinical and Social Aspects, (Edited by H. Ghasemzadeh). Tehran: Arjmand Press.
Benjamin, W (1985). One-way street. In One-way Street and other writings. London: Verso, pp: 45-104. (Original work Published 1928).
Brenner, N. (1997). Global, fragmented, hierarchical: Henri Lefebvre's geographies of globalization. Public Culture, 10(1):137–169
Brenner, N. (2000). The urban question as a scale question: Reflections on Henri Lefebvre, urban theory and the politics of scale. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 24(2), 361–378.
Brenner, N., & Elden, S. (2009). Introduction: State, space, world. In H. Lefebvre (Eds.), State, space, world: Selected essays, pp.1–48. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
Brewer, W. F., and Nakamura, G. V. (1984). The nature and functions of schemas. In R. S. Wyer, Jr. & T. K. Srull (Eds.), Handbook of social cognition, Vol. 1, pp. 118-160). Mahwah, NJ, US: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
Buser, M. (2012). The production of space in metropolitan regions: A lefebvrian analysis of governance and spatial change. Planning Theory, 11(3), 279-298.
Butler, C. (2012). Henri Lefebvre: Spatial Politics, Everyday Life and the Right to the City. London: Routledge.
Cazden, C.B. and Cordeiro, P. (1992). Whole Language Plus: Essays on Literacy in the United States and New Zealand. Teachers College Press, New York
Cole, M. (1996). Cultural Psychology: A Once and Future Discipline. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
Craib, I. (2018). Modern Social Theory: From Parsons to Habermas. (Translated from English to Persian by A. Mokhber). Tehran: Agah Press. (Original work published 1984).
Daniels, Harry, Michael Cole & James V. Wertsch. (2007). the Cambridge Companion to Vygotsky. New York: Cambridge University Press.
De Certeau, M. (1984). The practice of everyday life. Berkeley, Ca: University of California Press.
Elden, S. (2004). Understanding Henri Lefebvre. London, England: Continuum.
Elden, S. (2007). There Is a Politics of Space Because Space is Political. Radical Philosophy Review. 10(2), 101-116.
Elhammoumi, M. (2010). Is 'back to Vygotsky' enough? The legacy of socio-historicocultural psychology. Psicologia em Estudo, Maringá, 15(4), 661-673.
Elias, N. (2014). Über den Prozeß der Zivilisation. Soziogenetische und psychogenetische Untersuchungen. (Translated from German to Persian by Gh. Khadivi). Tehran: Jame-Shenasan Press. (Original work published 1939).
Fanni, Z., Mahmoodi, L. (2018). Tolid-e faza shahri: dar goftman-e seganeh Lefebvre va Paradaim-e shahri-e Mumford [Production of Urban space; In Lefebvre's Triad discourse and Mumford's paradigm]. Roshd-e Amoozesh-e Joghrafia, No.120, 36-42.
Fillmore, C. J. (1975). An alternative to checklist of meaning. In Proceeding of the first annual meeting of the Berkeley Linguistic Society, University of California, Berkeley.
Fyfe. N.R. (1996). Contested visions of a modern city: planning and poetry in postwar Glasgow. Environment and Planning A, 28(3), 387–403.
Gee, J.P. (1996). Social Linguistics and Literacies: Ideology in Discourses, (2nd ed.) Taylor & Francis, London.
Ghasemzadeh, H. (2006). Tarhvare-ye Zehni, Farhang va Taghir [Mental Schema, Culture and becoming]. Baztab-e-Danesh: A journal on Cognition, Brain & Behavior, Vol.1, 57-68.
Ghasemzadeh, H. (2013a). Shenakht va afsordegi [Cognition and Depression]. In Cognition & Affect, Clinical and Social Aspects, (Edited by H. Ghasemzadeh). Tehran: Arjmand Publication.
Ghasemzadeh, H. (2013b). Pardazeshe tarhvare-ei va farayand-e taghir (dar afsordegi) [Schematic processing and change process (in depression)]. In Cognition & Affect, Clinical and Social Aspects, (Edited by H. Ghasemzadeh). Tehran: Arjmand Publication.
Gholami Haredashti, S., Rashidpoor, R. (2015). Nazarie zaban Vygotsky va ertebat-e an ba mabani nazari amoozesh falsafeh be koodakan [Vygotsky's theory of language and its relation to the theoretical foundations of teaching philosophy to children]. Falsafe va Koodak. Vol.9, 91-102.
Habibi, M., Amiri, M. (2016). Right to the City from Current to Ideal City. Iranian Journal of Anthropological Research (IJAR), 5(2), 9-30.
Hajhosseiny, M., Mehran, G. (2012). Vygotsky and Frieri in dialogue-based education. Foundations of Education, 1(2), 21-38.
Harvey, D. (2016). Social Justice and the City. (Translated from English to Persian by M. R. Haeri) Tehan: Sazman Fanavari Etelaat va Ertebatat Shahrdari Tehran. (Original work published 1973).
Heath, S.B., (1983). Ways with Words: Language, Life, and Work in Communities and Classrooms. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
Hedges, H. (2012). Vygotsky's phases of everyday concept development and the notion of children's “working theories”. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction. 1, 143–152.
Hegel, G. W. F. (2014). The Phenomenology of Spirit. (Translated from English to Persian by B. Parham). Tehran: Kandokav Publication. (Original work published 1807).
Hegel, G. W. F. (2018). Science of Logic. (Translated from English to Persian by B. Eslahpazir). Tehran: Roozamad Publication. (Original work published 1812).
Heinich, N. (2015). La sociologie de Norbert Elias. (Translated from French to Persian by A. Nikgohar). Tehran: Ney Publication. (Original work published 1997).
Hyman, R. (2017). The Nature of Psychological Inquiry. (Translated from English to Persian by H. Ghasemzadeh). Tehran: Arjmand Publication. (Original work published 1964).
Ilyenkov, E. V. (2014). Dialectical Logic; Essays on its History and Theory. (Translated from English to Persian by B. Eslahpazir). Tehran: Roozamad Publication. (Original work published 2008).
Jahanbegloo, R. (2003). Ta'ammolat-e Hegeli [Hegelian Thoughts]. Tehran: Ney Publication.
Javan, J., Dalil, S., Salmai Moghaddam, M. (2013). Lefebvre's Dialectic of space. Arid Regions Geographic Studies. 3(4), 1-17. http://journals.hsu.ac.ir/jarhs/article-1-368-fa.html
Kozulin, A. (2013). Vygotsky’s Psychology: A Biography of Ideas. (Translated from English to Persian by H. Ghasemzadeh). Tehran: Arjmand. (Original work published 1999).
Lave, J., and Wenger, E., (1991). Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
Lefebvre, H. (2009). Social Product and Use Value. In State, Space, World, Selected Essays (edited by N. Brenner and S. Elden, Translated by G. Moor, by N. Brenner and S. Elden). University of Minnesota Press. (Original work published 1979).
Lefebvre, H. (2016). The Production of Space. (Translated From English to Persian by M. Abdollahzadeh). Tehran: Markaz-e Motale'at va Barnamerizi-e Shahr-e Tehran. (Original work published 1974).
Lloyd, c. (1997). Explaining the history of economic and social structure. (Translated from English to Persian by H. Nozari). Tarikh-e Moaser-e Iran. 1(3), 93-134. (Original work published 1993).
Luria, A. R. (2004). The Mind of a Mnemonist: A Little Book about a Vast Memory. (Translated from English (by L. Solotaroff) to Persian by H. Ghasemzadeh). Tehran: Arjmand Publication. (Original work published 1968).
Luria, A. R. (2010). Cognitive Development, Its Cultural and Social Foundations. (Translated from English to Persian by H. Ghasemzadeh). Tehran: Arjmand Publication. (Original work published 1976).
Luria, A. R. (2011). Language and Cognition. (Translated from English to Persian by H. Ghasemzadeh). Tehran: Arjmand Publication. (Original work published 1981).
Luria, A. R. (2013). The Man with a Shattered World: The History of a Brain Wound. (Translated from English to Persian by H. Ghasemzadeh). Tehran: Arjmand Publication. (Original work published 1972).
Maarefvand, M. (2010). Learner-base Apprenticeship. Social Science. 17(3), 172-207.
Marx, k. (2015). Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844. (Translated from English to Persian by H. Mortazavi). Tehran: Ashian. (Original work published 1932).
Matusov, E. (2015). Vygotsky’s Theory of Human Development and New Approaches to Education. International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, 2nd edition, Volume 25, pp: 316-321.
McCann, E. (1999). Race, protest, and public space: contextualizing Lefebvre in the US city. Antipode, 31(2), 163–184.
Merleau-Ponty, M. (1962). Phenomenology of perception, Translated by C. Smith. New York: Humanities Press.
Merrifield, A. (1995). Lefebvre, Anti-logos and Nietzsche: an alternative reading of the production of space. Antipode, 27(3), 294-303.
Merrifield, A. (2006). Henri Lefebvre: A Critical Introduction. London: Routledge.
Merrifield, A. (2016). Place and Space: A Lefebvrian Reconciliation. (Translated from English to Persian by A. Torkameh). (Original work published 1993). In Daramadi bar tolid-e faza-ye Henry Lefebvre, (2nd ed). Tehran: Tisa. (Original work published 1993).
Minsky, M. (1975). A framework for representing knowledge. In P. H. Winston (Ed.), "the Psychology of Computer Vision". New York: McGraw-hill.
Mokri, A. (2013). Tasire Atefe va Hayajan dar ekhtelal-haye shenakht-e chehre va shenasaee ashkhas [The effect of emotions and excitement on facial recognition disorders and finding individuals]. In Cognition & Affect, Clinical and Social Aspects (Edited by H. Ghasemzadeh). Tehran: Arjmand Publication.
Navabakhsh, M., Ahmadi, G. (2012). Analysis of City-Dwelling the Growth Process of New Middle Class in Iran. Hoviat Shahr, 6(3), 27-38.
Nietzsche, F. (1994). Über Wahrheit und Lüge im aussermoralischen Sinne. (Translated to Persian by M. Farhadpour). Arghanoon, 1(3), 121-136. (Original work published 1896).
Parsi, H. R., Farmahini Farahani, B. (2017). Mental Schema, Urban Space, Creativity. ARMANSHAHR Architecture and Urban Development. 9(2), 305-315. http://www.armanshahrjournal.com/article_44634_en.html.
Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: integrating theory and practice (Fourth Edition). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Pirouz, Gh., Ghafoori, E. (2017). Analysis of Attar Nishapuri’s Mantiq-ut-Tayr and Mosibat-Nama based on constructivism theory Vygotsky and Bruner. JBA (Boostan Adab). 9(3), 19-44.
Popov, M. B. (2016). ЛЕКЦИИ ПО ФИЛОСОФИИ ИСТОРИИ (Lectures on the Philosophy of Hitory). (Translated from Russian to Persian by S. Farahani). Tehran: Sales Publication. (Original work published 2010).
Rafieian, M., Alvandipour, N.(2015). Mafhoom-pardazi andishe hagh be shahr: dar jostojuye modele mafhoumi [Conceptualizing Right to the City Thought: Searching Conceptual Model]. Iranian Sociological Association. 16(2), 25-47. http://www.jsi-isa.ir/article_21110.html
Rashtchi, M. (2010). A psychological survey of Vigotsky's theory and its relationship with the theoretical foundations of teaching philosophy to children. Tafakkor va Koodak [Thought and kid]. 1(1), 3-20. http://fabak.ihcs.ac.ir/article_263.html
Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeships in thinking. New York: Oxford University Press.
Ronneberger, K. (2008). Henri Lefebvre and Urban everyday life: In research of possible. In Space, Difference, Everyday Life: reading Henri Lefebvre. (Goonewardena K, Kipfer S, Milgrom R and Schmid C (eds)). pp.134-146. New York: Routledge.
Rumelhart, D. E. (1975). In "Notes on a schema for stories". D. G. Bobrow & A. Collins (Eds.), Representation and Understanding. New York: Academic Press.
Saunders, P. (2013). Social Theory and the Urban Question (2nd ed). (Translated from English to Persian by M. Sharepoor). Tehran: Tisa. (Original work published 1986).
Schmid C. (2008). Henri Lefebvre’s theory of the production of urban space: towards a three-dimensional dialectic. In Space, Difference, Everyday Life: reading Henri Lefebvre. pp.27-45 (Goonewardena K, Kipfer S, Milgrom R and Schmid C (eds)). pp.134-146. New York: Routledge.
Shields, R. (1989). Social Spatialisation and the Built Environment: The Case of the West Edmonton Mall. Environment and planning D: Society and Space, 7(2), 147-164.
Shields, R. (1999). Lefebvre, Love and Struggle: Spatial Dialectics. London: Routledge.
Shojaeivand B, Rostaei S, Asgari Zamani A. (2018). Spatial Representation and Production and Reproduction of the Mental Image: Lefebvre’s Trialectic Approach. Arid Regions Geographic Studies. 2018; 9(3),1-19. http://journals.hsu.ac.ir/jarhs/article-1-1443-fa.html
Simmel, G, (1997). The metropolis and mental life. (D. Frisby and M. Featherstone (eds)) In Simmel on culture. London and Newbury Park, Ca: Sage, pp: 174-185. (Original work published 1903).
Simonsen, K. (2005). Bodies, Sensations, Space and Time: The contribution from Henri Lefebvre. Georgr. Ann. 87B (1): 1-14.
Smith, N. (1984). Uneven Development: Nature, Capital and the Production of Space. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Soja, E. W. (1989). Postmodern Geographies: The Reassertion of Space in Critical Social Theory. London: Verso.
Soja, E. W. (1996). Third space: expanding the Geographical Imagination. London: Blackwell.
Stanek, L. (2011). Henri Lefebvre on Space: Architecture, Urban Research and the Production of Theory. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Stein D.J. (1992) Schemas in the cognitive and clinical sciences: An integrative construct. Psychother Integrat, 2, 45–63.
Stewart, L. (1995). Bodies, visions, and spatial politics: a review essay on Henri Lefebvre's The Production of Space. Environment and Planning D; Society and Space, 13, 609-618.
Tikhomirov, Oleg K. (1999). The theory of activity changed by information technology. In Perspectives on Activity Theory (Yrjö Engeström, Reijo Miettinen, Raija-Leena Punamäki, (Eds.)). Cambridge University Press, 347-360.
Todorov T. (2017). Mikhail Bakhtin: The Dialogical Principle (Translated from to Persian by D. Karimi). Tehran: Markaz Press. (Original work published 1984).
Tomasello, M. (2018). The Cultural Origins of Human Cognition (Translated from English to Persian by M. Nasiri). Tehran: Naghd-e Farhang Press. (Original work published 1999).
Vygotsky, L. S. (1998). The psychology of art. (Translated from English to Persian by B. Azabdaftari). Tabriz: Tabriz University Press. (Orginal work published 1971).
Vygotsky, L. S. (2008). Thought and language. (Translated from English to Persian by H. Ghasemzadeh). Tehran: Arjmand Press. (Original work published 1934).
Wright, J. H., Thase, M. E., Basco, M. R. (2017). Learning Cognitive-behavior Therapy: An Illustrated Guide. (Translated from English to Persian by H. Ghasemzadeh & H. Hamidoor). Tehran: Arjmand Press. (Original work published 2006).
Young, J. E., Klosko, J. S., Weishaar, M. E. (2015). Schema Therapy: A Practitioner's Guide. (Translated from English to Persian by H. Hamidpour & Z. Andouz). Tehran: Arjmand Press. (Original work published 2003).