[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [xmca] Interpreting Leontiev: functionalism and Anglo Finnish Insufficiences

Yes , Christine ! You are right . In the realm of ideal activity because Leontiev believes the structure of the material activity and that of the ideal activity is the same . But this could not be a plea to deny or ignore the priority of the external material world . A scientist working with his ideas in his privacy and restarting each time a new round of ideal activity is not destined to INTROSPECTIONISM for ever if he wants to live a human life , a collective one not a solitary one .  

 From: Christine Schweighart <schweighartc@gmail.com>
To: Haydi Zulfei <haydizulfei@rocketmail.com> 
Sent: Saturday, 31 December 2011, 3:03:26
Subject: Re: [xmca] Interpreting Leontiev: functionalism and Anglo Finnish Insufficiences

Dear Haydi,
 I have a notion that Viriol was writing in an attitude evoking empathy - 'bemoaning' and provoking to 'imagination and dreams. Can I read this still in the 'reaching to far places yet undiscovered.? And then do these 'flights of fancy ' come back to 'the same' points of departure - or can they come back to another moment in another activity -i.e'. a cross-fertilization of ideas ' as we say in everyday concepts?

On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 10:05 PM, Haydi Zulfei <haydizulfei@rocketmail.com> wrote:

Dear Christine 
>Thank you for the 'very felt' reply !
>Dialogue as a theme in CHAT and transformative in 'awareness' as you say , which is quite true , is then , in fact , dealing with and manipulating objects , relations , processes proper embodied in signs . Man recoursed  to gesture and language because of and out of a MUST . He could not deal with all around him through manipulation , replacements and fetching . Leontiev depicts the process of the leaving of the signs of their site/s of action , as if pushing to their wings and flying too far places yet undiscovered but always returning to their point/s of departure concrete , material , objective as they are ; Other than this will take us to the realm of subjectivism (#agency) and metaphysics . A transformed awareness , too , needs to leave potentiality , go externalizing , realizing and actualizing all too far yet of sedimenting (reification is in vogue) rather than sedimentation .
>p.s. The internet down , I could not 'send' this piece in time . Now I see I
 have dear Larry to respond to and it's too late here to be awake ! 
> From: christine schweighart <schweighartgate@hotmail.com>
>To: haydizulfei@rocketmail.com 
>Cc: xmca@weber.ucsd.edu 
>Sent: Friday, 30 December 2011, 8:39:55
>Subject: Re: [xmca] Interpreting Leontiev: functionalism and Anglo Finnish Insufficiences
>Dear Haydi,
>Although your message was to Arturo - I enjoyed reading it very much. I  have only minutes to say  that reification is always still open. So 'sedimentation' is also 'still there' as possibility to reinterpret.
> you say 
>"He also needs 'consciousness' to take from . But what is consciousness ? It's there fixed for ever like a storage-house  on the alert for you to give it the honour of your presence and seek some needy things out of it and then leave without a good-bye ? "
> This is very felt: and
>You have to act even today and in the future , too , taking from the consciousness  
> [which was emerging in social relations]
>but with each taking you encounter it anew because you should act in the direction of 
>[an on-going situation of relations in actuality - there is actuality]
>{Maybe there will be something 'like' 
>a particular goal... maybe not
>But after achievement of understanding in dialogue - maybe some conceptual relations then  begins forming and tranforming in awareness??}
> Also very quickly I heard and conversed very briefly with a person called Vyacheslav Maracha, and we recognised together a very 'convoluted loop' that the Moscow Methodology Circle took - beginning in the 1950's of 'thinking as activity' , all sorts of levels and inventions were made  ( very funny to reflect upon )to 'compensate' - but now there is recognition  ( as does Davydov) that 'thinking ' is not activity...
> Christine.
> Also I was reading Virilio this morning ' The Art of the Motor' - a little quote
>" We now know that we can exhaust the world's being, so why not anticipate that we can also rapidly exhaust the fragile sphere of our dreams, our fantasies, our amazements - which no one is now presenting as the ultimate goal of a civilization that would actually end up experimenting with them.
>But the works of the Surrealists, particularly their famous 'Dream Bank," showed the poverty of the trivial dream, which is so curiously lacking in variety and imagination that the representation of our desires becomes a load of drivel, with endless repetition of a few limited themes. .......
>We have clearly reached the point of no return here, with a major question about what now appears to be an abuse of language. Although determined to prove the opposite, creative man [!sic!] is not for all that creator; creation is not his realm, and though so often used, the word creator is inappropriate. In a sense man is more definitely an engineer."
> p71 (A Terminal Artpp61-75 'The Art of the Motor' 1995 
xmca mailing list