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

[Xmca-l] Re: Leontyev's activities

But a new born has none of the capacities, etc., which make us human other than DNA. It is interaction with carers in a social situation which makes them human and a particular kind of human. And that surely, is where the interest lies for us (despite the contemporary fashion to ascribe everything to DNA).

... and yes of course, the subject-object relation is a complex one, as Lubomir indicates, for example. It is equally unsatisfactory to say simply that the object is a construction of the subject (meaning an individual person). Hegel's solution was to begin from a concept such as "formation of consciousness" a.k.a. "social formation" or Vygotsky's "social situation" or "perezhivanie" which is undifferentiated subject-and-object, and trace the differentiating-out of subject and object from there.


Huw Lloyd wrote:
From: Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net>
... which comes first? or do we need a new concept which avoids
this duplication of the world.

I would say it quite obvious which comes first for the new-born.

... The object is the subject's construction, and from my incomplete reading
could be distributed across various things.  The object is only objective
in that is has objective qualities to it.  The distinctness of things to us
is their social object quality.