mead--dewey--xmca

Mike Cole (mcole who-is-at weber.ucsd.edu)
Sun, 2 Nov 1997 09:25:14 -0800 (PST)

To: JDEWEY-L who-is-at VM.SC.EDU

The following was posted to g-h-mead who-is-at vm.sc.edu, but Dewey folk might be
interested. --TB

-------------------------
In a message dated 97-11-01 14:47:20 EST, burke who-is-at SC.EDU writes:

<< When they turn
further to explain *intelligence* in human nature -- i.e., to the
possibility of free, honest, objective, self-critical, hands-on
experimental thought, not just thought in and of itself -- this places
certain conditions on the nature of the sociality out of which minds may be
assumed to have naturally emerged. I.e., intelligence in human thought is
just the reflexivization in individual thought of *democracy* in human
social affairs. That is not the only possible explanation of human
intelligence, but it is an explanation that works admirably on purely
naturalistic grounds. If, moreover, it could be shown that this is the
best if not only viable explanation (and maybe that's a big `if'), then it
would follow that democracy in social affairs is not just an essential
feature of sufficient conditions for human intelligence, but also of
necessary conditions. Isn't that a rather amazing idea? Dewey should be
famous forever for conceiving of and pushing such a line of thought, even
if it's wrong. >>
You should check out C. Wright Mills description of the average person in
our american society. The political context of so-called democracy is not
the main factor in determining everyday consciousness. Political
consciousness is censored and repressed in most cases. Maintaining a focus
on our democracy is a daily struggle, as is reminding everybody that many
people have died so that some notion of individual freedom should be
protected. That this MUST be enforced does not auger well for an evaluation
of human social inteligence.
In one of Marxist classes, democracy was often referred to by the odd
pronunciation, democra-see-shit. Wonder why??? Money and power are still
dominating the system imperatives of justice and equality. This is a
class-caste society. If you have to argue this point, I will have to ignore
the posts. If you can acknowledge this aspect of the situation, I will be
glad to continue the discussion.