Michael,
I can't quite parse your response. How does this work for Luria's studies of peasants in Uzbekistan?
bb
-------------- Original message ----------------------
From: Wolff-Michael Roth <mroth@uvic.ca>
> Hi bb,
>
> the question about primitive and inferior arises whenever reasoning
> presupposes self-identity---a position French philosophers have to
> denote as the ontology of the same; it defines difference in terms of
> deviation from the same. Difference then does not exist in and for
> itself. If you begin with difference---e.g., Deleuze in "Difference &
> Repetition", Nancy in "Being Singular Plural"---then, to express it a
> bit simplistically, everything is different. Sameness (even that
> expressed in "A = A") is the result of a construction, as is
> primitiveness and inferiority. The ontology that begins with
> difference leads us to a very different way of thinking, to a very
> different ethics (see Levinas), to a very different politics (see
> Derrida).
>
> have a nice weekend
>
> Michael
>
>
> On 21-Oct-06, at 6:35 AM, bb wrote:
>
> Agradezca le, Nacho, por el texto excelente en espa�ol e ingl�s que
> ayude a un principiante como entiende espa�ol en contexto. En el
> momento que puedo contribuir solamente con el uso de las traducciones
> en l�nea, que entiendo para ser particularmente malo.
>
> Thank you, Nacho, for the excellent text in both spanish and english
> that helps a novice like me understand Spanish in context. At the
> moment I can only contribute through the use of online translations,
> which I understand to be particularly bad.
>
>
> Picking up on the dialectical thread at Anna's comment, "Instead,
> dialectical thinking presupposes that there is always a next step,
> and a new height, however 'full' one's thinking is", I wonder if this
> train of thought leads to some kinds of thinking as more advanced
> than others, and (lessons from Luria) if some cultures (or
> individuals) never reach these more advanced forms of thinking, they
> will be considered to be primitive or inferior?
>
> �Escogiendo para arriba en el hilo de rosca dial�ctico en el
> comentario de Ana, "en lugar de otro, el pensamiento dial�ctico
> presupone que hay siempre un paso siguiente, y una nueva altura, no
> obstante ' lleno ' es su pensamiento", me pregunto si este tren del
> pensamiento conduce a algunas clases de pensamiento como m�s avanzado
> que otros, y (las lecciones de Luria) si algunas culturas (o los
> individuos) nunca alcanzan estas formas m�s avanzadas de pensamiento,
> los considerar�n ser primitivos o inferiores?
> _______________________________________________
> xmca mailing list
> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>
> _______________________________________________
> xmca mailing list
> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Nov 01 2006 - 01:00:15 PST