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

[Xmca-l] Re: Thought and language as oscillating and pulsing [or not]



Yes, I had the same response, Greg. A 'gap' is essential for freedom, Sartre suggests: the gap between who we are and who we could be. That gap is what gives us freedom to act. And I think that imagination would be central to filling it (historical and cultural variations notwithstanding).

And yes, ontology is central, in various ways. One is the view that appearances lead us to how things are, to what exists: there is not, for phenomenology, a complete rupture between things-in-themselves and things-for-us. This connects with the view that humans play a role in the 'constitution' of reality. For Husserl this was a matter of the activity of subjectivity; while for Heidegger it was a matter of participation in public practices. But both saw a link between human activity and the world we live in. To me there are clear connections to Marx, on the one hand, and to Vygotsky, on the other.

Martin

On Jan 26, 2015, at 10:33 AM, greg.a.thompson@gmail.com wrote:

> Thanks for this Martin. A lovely explanation that helps me to see how questions of ontology naturally flow out of phenomenology (something that many anthropologists doing ontology and/or phenomenology have missed!).
> 
> I also noticed remarkable resonances between etienne and mikes mind the gap paper and Sartre's argument locating freedom in the gap between the perception of the thing and our awareness of our perception of the thing. It makes sense but I hadn't thought of mike and etienne's paper in this relation before.
> Cheers,
> Greg
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
>> On Jan 25, 2015, at 7:15 PM, Martin John Packer <mpacker@uniandes.edu.co> wrote:
>> 
>> This time, the BBC has come up with quite a good discussion of phenomenology, from Husserl to Heidegger and onwards (though not to Spet, unfortunately)!
>> 
>> <http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b04ykk4m>
>> 
>> Martin
>> 
>>> On Jan 24, 2015, at 10:19 PM, Annalisa Aguilar <annalisa@unm.edu> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi Martin,
>>> 
>>> I would be interested in the "intro to Husserl" by Shpet, as I have long been curious how the Husserl got to LSV.
>>> 
>>> Is it possible/doable to get some scans of chapter(s) from Appearance & Sense? you know, the ones you believe to be most juicy?
>>> 
>>> You may at any time hermeneutically determine what is "most juicy."
>>> 
>>> Kind regards,
>>> 
>>> Annalisa
>> 
>> 
>