Re: Nature, sociocentrism and socio-individual
Francoise Herrmann (fherrmann who-is-at igc.apc.org)
Thu, 26 Oct 1995 18:14:16 -0700
Hi everyone, I'd like to pick up on some on Eugene's and Stanton's
messages (which I am really confortable with) with these thoughts.
I think that perhaps the sociocentric view is much in line with a
feminist position in that feminists such as Mary Daly (and perhaps
Helen Cixous) have made a sociocentric case when looking at the
pathological tradition in psycho-analysis, especially when
defending "Dora". In light of such a sociocentric view, the "Dora"
case does not really hold and this extends to much of the
culpabilization that is poured onto women. Modern feminists (the
Susan Faludi, Naomi Wolfe generation and younger) drive the idea
of uniqueness however, (thinking one's own thoughts, having one's
own mind and desire). So to me there is something here of a
contradiction. Perhaps that the way that it is being resolved is
to say a postiori (retrospectively) that the individual the sum
total of the lived social interactions, but, then a priori (in the
process of these social interactions) where is the individual that
can choose to resist, whose spirit can be broken etc... When I
read Rolfe Winward's early message I thought that perhaps there
was an issue a little like the chicken or the egg problem (i.e.;
which came first -the individual or the social?) THat's why
perhaps, that I am so confortable with a dialectical approach
where the answer would be both and neither although I haven't
really thought through what the new synthesis (beyond 1 and 2)
might be other than a working, loving, caring human being (unique,
but very much dependant and interdependant with the social and
material environment.
I think that I can only be "right" for me, but this is what has
been humming in my mind.
Francoise Francoise Herrmann fherrmann who-is-at igc.org