[Xmca-l] Re: Imagination

Andy Blunden ablunden@mira.net
Sun Dec 14 16:57:24 PST 2014


"Recollection" is a translation of Erinnerung, and "Memory" is Gedaechtnis.
The whole piece on Representation (Vorstellung) and Imagination 
(Einbildungskraft) is at 
http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/hegel/works/sp/suspirit.htm#SU451
Attached is a couple of pages from Michael Inwood's excellent Hegel 
Dictionary explaining the differences between what these terms mean.
I take it that Erinnerung is to be reminded of something, whereas 
Gedaechtnis is "thinking about something" and as you can read, is 
closely connected to the word.
Andy
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Andy Blunden*
http://home.pacific.net.au/~andy/


mike cole wrote:
> Andy- It was the Russians who pointed me toward Kant and they are 
> doing contemporary work in which they claim Vygotsky and his followers 
> as an inspiration. Some think that LSV was influenced by Hegel, so its 
> of course interesting to see those additional categories emerge. 
>
> 19th Century psychological vocabulary, especially in translation, 
> seems awfully slippery territory to me. The word, "recollection" in 
> this passage, for example, is not a currently used term in counter 
> distinction to "memory."
> Normal problems. There are serious problems in contemporary discourse 
> across languages as our explorations with out Russian colleagues have 
> illustrated.
>
> That said, I feel as if I am learning something from theorists who 
> clearly influenced Vygotsky and early psychology -- when it was still 
> possible to include culture in it. 
>
> Ribot has a book called "Creative Imagination" which, interestingly 
> links imagination to both movement and the meaning of a "voluntary" 
> act. Parts of it are offputting, primitives thinking like children 
> stuff that was also "in the air" for example. But at present the 
> concepts of creativity and imagination are thoroughly entangled, so 
> its curious to see that the two concepts are linked.
>
> Just cause its old doesn't mean its useless, he found himself writing.
> mike
>
>
> Its difficult, of course, to know the extent to which pretty old 
> approaches to a pesum
>
> On Sat, Dec 13, 2014 at 4:39 PM, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net 
> <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>> wrote:
>
>     I know we want to keep this relatively contemporary, but it may be
>     worth noting that Hegel's Psychology also gave a prominent place
>     to Imagination in the section on Representation, mediating between
>     Recollection and Memory. He structured Imagination as (1)
>     Reproductive Imagination, (2) Associative Imagination (3)
>     Productive Imagination, which he says leads to the Sign, which he
>     describes as Productive Memory. In other words, the transition
>     from immediate sensation to Intellect is accomplished through
>     these three grades of Imagination.
>
>     Andy
>     ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>     *Andy Blunden*
>     http://home.pacific.net.au/~andy/
>     <http://home.pacific.net.au/%7Eandy/>
>
>
>     mike cole wrote:
>
>         Here are some questions I have after reading Strawson and
>         Williams.
>
>         Kant et al (including Russian developmentalists whose work i
>         am trying to
>         mine for empirical
>         strategies and already-accumulated results) speak of productive
>         imagination. The Russians write that productive imagination
>         develops.
>
>         At first I thought that the use of productive implies that
>         there must be a
>         kind of ​imagination called UNproductive imagination. But I
>         learned that
>         instead the idea of RE-productive imagination appears and is
>         linked to
>         memory.
>
>         So, it seems that imagination is an ineluctable part of
>         anticipation and
>         memory.
>         Imagine that!
>         mike
>
>         On Sat, Dec 13, 2014 at 12:16 PM, HENRY SHONERD
>         <hshonerd@gmail.com <mailto:hshonerd@gmail.com>> wrote:
>          
>
>             Strawson provides a long view historically on imagination
>             (starting with
>             Hume and Kant), Williams a more contemporaneous look, and
>             provides a space
>             for imagination not afforded by the socio-cultural as
>             fixed. This, coupled
>             with Pelaprat and Cole on Gap/Imagination, gives me a
>             ground to take part
>             in the thread on imagination. Of course, I start with
>             preconceptions: Vera
>             on creative collaboration and the cognitive grammarian
>             Langacker on
>             symbolic assemblies in discourse and cognitive domains,
>             particularly the
>             temporal. Everyday discourse, it seems to me, is full of
>             imagination and
>             creativity. I am terribly interested in two aspects of
>             temporality:
>             sequence and rhythm (including tempo and rhythmic
>             structure), which I think
>             must both figure in imagination and creativity, for both
>             individual and
>             distributed construals of cognition and feeling.
>             Henry
>
>                
>
>                 On Dec 13, 2014, at 12:01 PM, Larry Purss
>                 <lpscholar2@gmail.com <mailto:lpscholar2@gmail.com>>
>                 wrote:
>
>                 Henry, Mike, and others interested in this topic.
>
>                 I too see the affinities with notions of the third
>                 *space* and the
>                      
>
>             analogy
>                
>
>                 to *gap-filling*
>                 I am on holiday so limited access to internet.
>                 However, I wanted to mention Raymond Williams and his
>                 notion of
>                      
>
>             "structures
>                
>
>                 of feeling" that David K references. This notion is
>                 explored under the
>                 notion of historical *styles* that exist as a *set* of
>                 modalities that
>                      
>
>             hang
>                
>
>                 together.  This notion suggests there is a form of
>                 knowing that is
>                      
>
>             forming
>                
>
>                 but has not yet formed [but can be "felt"
>                 [perceived??] if we think
>                 imaginatively.  Raymond explores the imaginal as *style*
>                 Larry
>                 On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 4:38 PM, HENRY SHONERD
>                 <hshonerd@gmail.com <mailto:hshonerd@gmail.com>>
>                      
>
>             wrote:
>                
>
>                     Mike and Larry,
>                     I promise to read your profer, but just want to
>                     say how jazzed up I am
>                            
>
>             now
>                
>
>                     about this thread. My mind has been going wild,
>                     the mind as Larry
>                            
>
>             construes
>                
>
>                     it. I ended up just now with a triad, actually
>                     various triads, finally
>                     found my old friend Serpinski. Part now of my
>                     notebooks of the mind, as
>                     Vera would construe it. I’ll be back! Gap adentro,
>                     luega pa’ fuera.
>                     Fractally yours,
>                     Henry
>
>                            
>
>                         On Dec 12, 2014, at 5:09 PM, mike cole
>                         <mcole@ucsd.edu <mailto:mcole@ucsd.edu>> wrote:
>
>                         For those interested in the imagination
>                         thread, attached are two
>                                  
>
>             articles
>                
>
>                         by philosophers who have worried about the issue.
>
>                         My current interest stems from the work of
>                         CHAT theorists like
>                                  
>
>                     Zaporozhets
>                            
>
>                         and his students who studied the development
>                         of imagination in a manner
>                         that, it turns out, goes back to Kant's notion
>                         of productive
>                                  
>
>                     imagination. I
>                            
>
>                         am not advocating going back to Kant, and have
>                         no intention of doing
>                                  
>
>             so.
>                
>
>                         But these ideas seem worth pursuing as
>                         explicated in the attached
>                                  
>
>             texts.
>                
>
>                         Through reading the Russians and then these
>                         philosophers, I came upon
>                                  
>
>             the
>                
>
>                         idea that perception and imagination are very
>                         closely linked at several
>                         levels of analysis. This is what, in our
>                         naivete, Ettienne and I argued
>                                  
>
>                     in
>                            
>
>                         our paper on imagination sent around earlier
>                         as a means of access to
>                                  
>
>             the
>                
>
>                         work of the blind-deaf psychologist, Alexander
>                         Suvorov. Moreover, such
>                         views emphasize the future orientation of the
>                         perception/imagination
>                         process. I believe that these views have
>                         direct relevance to Kris's
>                                  
>
>             paper
>                
>
>                         to be found on the KrisRRQ thread, and also
>                         speak to concerns about the
>                         role of different forms of symbolic play in
>                         development.
>
>                         So here are the papers on the imagination
>                         thread. Perhaps they will
>                                  
>
>             prove
>                
>
>                         useful for those interested.
>                         mike
>
>                         --
>                         It is the dilemma of psychology to deal with a
>                         natural science with an
>                         object that creates history. Ernst Boesch.
>                         <Imagination and Perception by P.F. Strawson.pdf>
>                                  
>
>
>                            
>
>
>                
>
>
>          
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> It is the dilemma of psychology to deal with a natural science with an 
> object that creates history. Ernst Boesch.
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Erinnerung.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 1935789 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20141215/08b68868/attachment-0001.pdf 


More information about the xmca-l mailing list