Re: History

From: Paul H.Dillon (illonph@pacbell.net)
Date: Wed Feb 13 2002 - 07:17:54 PST


Bruce,

Vygotsky was pretty clear about what he thought about "history". What does
"strict sense" mean to you? It seems to me that Vygosky takes the position
that "natural history" is subordinate, not "history" proper, but a
derivation, probably only possible because humans had extended the
fundamental structures of self-experience.

: "The word history for me means two things: (1) a general
dialectical approach to things - in this sense, everything has its history;
this is what Marx meant: the only science is history, natural science = the
history of nature, natural history; (2) history in the strict sense, i.e.,
human history. The first history is dialectic; the second is historical
materialism". C.H.P. 54-55.

Paul H. Dillon

----- Original Message -----
From: Bruce Robinson <bruce.rob@btinternet.com>
To: <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2002 2:45 AM
Subject: Re: History

> At 20:46 12/02/02 -0800, you wrote:
>
> >Of course I would make the same statment Eric. A gun in a pile of salt
> >undergoes changes but these changes do not constitute history in any
> >sense of the word.
> >
> >Oxidation is not history.
> >
>
> Of course, it's true that humans are the only species 'for whom history
> exists', as Paul puts it. But that does not mean that other things do not
> have a history. I do not accept that it is only meaningful to use the
term
> 'history' in relation to human activity undertaken 'for itself' (by which
I
> assume you mean with some degree of consciousness). A mountain has a
> geological history just as a kidney has a history of evolution as a
> physical organ. Their existence is just as much 'prima facie historical
> existence.' I'm reminded of Marx's remark that the great advance Darwin
> made was to introduce history into nature.
>
> I have always one of the aspects of the H in CHAT to be that mediating
> artefacts themselves have a history that plays an important role in the
> range of possibilities open to humans at any point in time.This notion is
I
> think fundamental to historical materialism with its concept that the
> development of the productive forces provides the bedrock for the
> development of human society.
>
> Bruce Robinson
>
> >
> >>----- Original Message -----
> >>From: <mailto:MnFamilyMan@aol.com>MnFamilyMan@aol.com
> >>To: <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> >>Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2002 6:30 PM
> >>Subject: Re: History
> >>
> >>In a message dated 2/12/2002 3:57:30 PM Central Standard Time,
> >><mailto:illonph@pacbell.net>illonph@pacbell.net writes:
> >>
> >>
> >>>A gun, a mountain, a kidney, as far as I know, do not have a
> >>>history for themself.
> >>
> >>
> >>Leave agun ina pile of salt as it rains and make the same statement.
>

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

----

> > --- > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.319 / Virus Database: 178 - Release Date: 28/01/02 >



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Mar 01 2002 - 01:00:20 PST