[Xmca-l] Re: Hegel's notion of The Notion

[Wolff-Michael Roth]

Vygotsky was heading, but never made progress because of his
intellectualism (see Zavershneva). Max Weber (sinnorientierte Handlung),
then A. Schütz (taking up Weber), later Ricœur (action sensée) all focus on
that dimension.

Ricœur also works out the relation between our practical comprehension
(compréhension) and explication.

All of this will lead to the insight that concepts are not things (e.g. see
Merleau-Ponty on how we know and understand a CUBE dynamically, which is
acknowledged and reified by the research on mirror neurons---see Rizzolatti
et al, 1997, in SCIENCE).

Michael

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor
Applied Cognitive Science
MacLaurin Building A567
University of Victoria
Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2
http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth <http://education2.uvic.ca/faculty/mroth/>

New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics
<https://www.sensepublishers.com/catalogs/bookseries/new-directions-in-mathematics-and-science-education/the-mathematics-of-mathematics/>*

On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 9:17 AM, Wolff-Michael Roth <
wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com> wrote:

> To me the question is not that they exist---we use concepts, like *Expressionism
> *(in painting, in music, in poetry...), but HOW do they exist. This is
> where the major theoretical divides will show itself. And concerning the
> mind, I would search in a direction that Anglo-Saxons really have a hard
> time with, it is SENSE (Sinn, smysl), a direction Vygotsky w  Michael
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> --------------------
> Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor
> Applied Cognitive Science
> MacLaurin Building A567
> University of Victoria
> Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2
> http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth <http://education2.uvic.ca/faculty/mroth/>
>
> New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics
> <https://www.sensepublishers.com/catalogs/bookseries/new-directions-in-mathematics-and-science-education/the-mathematics-of-mathematics/>*
>
> On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 8:48 AM, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net> wrote:
>
>> Concepts are first of all things which exist; because they exist, the
>> mind is capable of grasping them, in fact, they are exactly the way the
>> mind grasps the world (etymologically concept = to grasp). The way they
>> exist is in human activity and the artifacts we use in that activity. Since
>> you have made a start on this Greg, I have to say that I think you need
>> this and also the section to follow called "The Subjective Notion" to get a
>> decent picture.
>>
>> Andy
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------
>> Andy Blunden
>> http://home.mira.net/~andy
>> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making
>> On 12/05/2017 1:40 AM, Greg Thompson wrote:
>>
>>> ​Okay Andy, I've started into the Hegel text that you suggested (I don't
>>> think you truly appreciate how slow of a reader I am! BTW, the text Andy
>>> shared can be found here: https://www.marxists.org/refer
>>> ence/archive/hegel/works/hl/hlnotion.htm), and I came across this
>>> notion of The Notion by Hegel in Section 1279:
>>>
>>> "Now although it is true that the Notion is to be regarded, not merely
>>> as a subjective presupposition but as the /absolute foundation/, yet it can
>>> be so only in so far as it has /made/ itself the foundation. Abstract
>>> immediacy is no doubt a /first/; yet in so far as it is abstract it is, on
>>> the contrary mediated, and therefore if it is to be grasped in its truth
>>> its foundation must first be sought. Hence this foundation, though indeed
>>> an immediate, must have made itself immediate through the sublation of
>>> mediation."​
>>>
>>> This seems core to the kind of realism that Hegel is building up (a
>>> realism of concepts) and, I think, remains a revolutionary conception
>>> today. The idea here seems to be that the Notion is not a "subjective
>>> presupposition" but is rather much more real than that. But, I guess I'm
>>> wondering HOW can this be?
>>>
>>> There are multiple objections, but perhaps the biggest objection comes
>>> from 20th century social science's preoccupation with social construction.
>>> In this tradition, concepts are things held in the head, subjective and
>>> maybe also intersubjective, but always mediated (and some might say
>>> "derivative"). Hegel seems to be offering a much different take - one in
>>> which concepts are much more primary. Am I right here?
>>>
>>> And, what is this business about the "sublation of mediation"? (and
>>> where does this last bit jibe with CHAT? Many people in CHAT speak of
>>> mediation but I don't recall anyone speaking of the "sublation of
>>> mediation").
>>>
>>> Any help with this text would be appreciated.
>>>
>>> (and this is closely related to "the stuff of words" but I still felt
>>> that this needed a new thread.).
>>>
>>> -greg
>>>
>>> --
>>> Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D.
>>> Assistant Professor
>>> Department of Anthropology
>>> 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower
>>> Brigham Young University
>>> Provo, UT 84602
>>> http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson
>>>
>>
>>
>