Andy, you must have seen this in Thinking & Speaking:
"The unit contains, in a simple, primitive form, the characteristics of the
whole that is the object of analysis" (p 244, chapter 7)
This seems to say that, yes, unit of analysis and microscosm have different
meanings, but also that a correctly-selected unit of analysis will be a
microcosm.
And then the next sentence:
"We found the unit that reflects the unity of thinking and speech in the
meaning of the word."
You will agree, no, that this is saying that word meaning is the unit of
analysis of the relationship of thinking and speaking? Why not, then, the
unit of analysis of consciousness?
puzzled,
Martin
On 2/22/09 9:48 AM, "Andy Blunden" <ablunden@mira.net> wrote:
"We showed that a generalised reflection of reality is the
basic characteristic of words. This aspect of the word
brings us to the threshold of a wider and deeper subject
the general problem of consciousness. Thought and language,
which reflect reality in a way different from that of
perception, are the key to the nature of human
consciousness. Words play a central part not only in the
development of thought but in the historical growth of
consciousness as a whole. A word is a microcosm of human
consciousness." (end ch 7 Thinking and Speaking)
I take this in the same way: if you can thoroughly
understand how words operate in human life then you will
have solved all the essential problems.
On this basis, I agree with Nikolai, that "microcosm" and
"unit of analysis" have quite different meanings. I would be
inclined to anyway, as I do not believe that "word meaning"
can be a unit of analysis for consciousness.
_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca