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

[Xmca-l] Re: The Social and the Semiotic



It's an excellent essay, worth a read for anyone interested in CHAT. Taylor puts the thesis which I agree with, that the substance of Hegel's philosophy and the subject matter of his logic is human activity. This has always been the basis for my linking of Hegel, Marx and Vygotsky and Activity Theory. Robert Pippin's chapter in the same book is even better actually.

And yes, Greg, Hegel would say "The Divine". That is not Taylor's own idea, it is Hegel's. The point that we 21st century readers have to keep in mind is that it is not a question of whether God exists but what is the nature of God. For example, as is well known, I think, Spinoza believed that God was Nature and all its attributes and substances including human life. Later readers interpreted Spinoza's conception of God as monistic materialism. And it is the same with Hegel.

Andy

------------------------------------------------------------
Andy Blunden
http://home.mira.net/~andy
http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making
On 29/06/2017 4:06 AM, Greg Thompson wrote:
Andy et al,
Found this description of the key point of Taylor's essay. Seems very relevant. Here is a snippet of that summary:

"Taylor maintains that the causal theory of action is inherently atomist, while the qualitative theory comprehends and includes actions that are irreducibly collective, in short/ours/, that cannot be reduced to or analyzed as a collection of actions that are/mine/. Finally, Taylor observes that for Hegel there is a crucial level of activity which is not only more than individual, but more than merely human. Some of what we do we can understand more deeply as the action of spirit through us. Thus we have to transcend our ordinary self-understanding. To the extent that our common-sense view of ourselves is atomist, we have to make two transpositions or decenterings: in the first we come to understand that some of our actions are those of communities; in the second we see that some are the work of spirit. The latter includes the individual, his community, and their relation to the divine."

Andy, would Hegel use the term "the divine" or is this Taylor's (or this author's) term for something like Hegel's "Universal"?

Full summary is here: http://ndpr.nd.edu/news/hegel-on-action/

-greg

On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 10:00 AM, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>> wrote:

    I'm actually reading it in hard copy, James!

    It is a reprint of an article written in 1983 called
    "Hegel and the Philosophy of Action," and it is
    included in the volume "Hegel on Action" ed. Arto
    Laitinen and C. Sandis published by Palgrave Macmillan
    in 2010.

    Andy

    ------------------------------------------------------------
    Andy Blunden
    http://home.mira.net/~andy <http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy>
    http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making
    <http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making>

    On 29/06/2017 1:47 AM, James Ma wrote:

        Could you forward the article to me, Andy?
        Thanks, James

        2017年6月28日 下午4:37,"Andy Blunden"
        <ablunden@mira.net <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>
        <mailto:ablunden@mira.net
        <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>>>写道:

            I have just been reading an article by Charles
        Taylor
            in which he refers to theories (plural) of signs
            formulated by Enlightenment philosophers,
        mentioning
            Condillac in particular. It never occurred to
        me that
            semiotics stretched back to the 18th century. I
            thought that Peirce invented it! Something new
        every day.

            andy

------------------------------------------------------------
            Andy Blunden
        http://home.mira.net/~andy
        <http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy>
        <http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy>
        http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making
        <http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making>
<http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making
        <http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making>>

            On 29/06/2017 1:19 AM, HENRY SHONERD wrote:

                Here is a link to a text for which I find no
                author, but I found it enlightening in the
        context
                of the chat with constant collaborative
        efforts to
                determine what we mean when we communicate and
                how, despite the dialog’s endlessness, gets us
                somewhere because we collaborate and how we
                collaborate. If this short text is of any
        use to
                the subject line, please let me know.

        http://courses.logos.it/EN/2_20.html
        <http://courses.logos.it/EN/2_20.html>
                <http://courses.logos.it/EN/2_20.html
        <http://courses.logos.it/EN/2_20.html>>
                <http://courses.logos.it/EN/2_20.html
        <http://courses.logos.it/EN/2_20.html>
                <http://courses.logos.it/EN/2_20.html
        <http://courses.logos.it/EN/2_20.html>>>

                Henry



                    On Jun 27, 2017, at 8:24 PM, Andy Blunden
                    <ablunden@mira.net
        <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>
        <mailto:ablunden@mira.net <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>>>
                    wrote:

                        Eco's "unlimited semiosis"








--
Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor
Department of Anthropology
880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower
Brigham Young University
Provo, UT 84602
http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson