[Xmca-l] Re: Shpet & principium cognescenti

[Andy Blunden]

Apparently these principium triad comes from the Theologian Hermann 
Bavinck: all knowledge begins with God, and via the Scriptures, man can 
make it his own knowledge.
But in line with Mike's observation, I well remember the perezhivanie I 
had when a friend pointed out the parallels between the Marxist 
conception of primitive communism - civilization - socialist society, 
and not just the Fall of Man in the Garden of Eden, but a half a dozen 
narratives or our own time. Paralleled by the perezhivanie I had when I 
read that for Spinoza, "God" meant Nature (including humanity).
Nonetheless, despite the humbling symmetry between the great world 
theories, we all signal our allegiance to this one or that one by the 
names we give to the One (God, Nature, matter, Allah, Spirit, ...) and 
the Triad and in the case cited, Vygotsky is using a famous Hegelian 
version of the triad, "in itself, for others, for itself":

    "The education and instruction of a child aim at making him actually
    and for himself what he is at first only potentially and therefore
    for others, viz., for his grown up friends. The Reason, which at
    first exists in the child only as an inner possibility, is
    actualised through education: and conversely, the child by these
    means becomes conscious that the goodness, religion, and science
    which he had at first looked upon as an outward authority, are his
    own nature."

Although the symmetry between the systems of thought we unkowingly 
affiliate to is surprising, we all declare our affiliation by the name 
we give to the One or the Triad, as the case may be. In the article 
Larry cites, however, Zinchenko just seems to be chiding Vygotsky 
repeatedly for failing to adhere to analytical Dualism.

Andy
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Andy Blunden*
http://home.pacific.net.au/~andy/


mike cole wrote:
> I can try an answer, Huw. These idea of a triadic system, spirals of
> development, etc
> are core metaphors for expressing some sort of thirdness about human life.
> Father/son and holy ghost, id/ego/superego, subject/object/medium etc. It
> is a part of the Judeo-Christian system and aligns with non-religiously
> affiliated intuitions that dualism does not cut it as a mode of thought.
> The trouble is, there are only two kinds of people in the world....
> !
> mike
>
> On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 2:14 PM, Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>   
>> There seems to be a clear parallel between Vygotsky's use of the
>> formulation "in itself, for others, for itself" and Shpet's referencing
>> theological principium cognescenti which according to my brief browsing are
>> three principles:
>> principium essendi, principium cognoscendi externum, principium cognoscendi
>> internum.
>>
>> Is anyone here familiar with the etymology of these principles and their
>> bearing on Vygotsky's work?  Is there more than a superficial resemblance?
>>
>> Huw
>>
>>     
>
>
>
>