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

[Xmca-l] Re: Fwd: Re: Отв: Re: Отв: Re: Отв: Re: Object oriented activity and communication



and for those curious about Volosinov, here is a great review of one of
Volosinov's works, Marxism and the Philosophy of Language (it happens to be
the one that I was referring to with the mention of hunger):
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1473-4192.2009.00210.x/full

-greg

On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 11:12 AM, Greg Thompson <greg.a.thompson@gmail.com>
wrote:

> David,
>
> I'd like to resist some of the individualism and internalism implied by
> your notion of "privileged access". (and I suspect that this capacity
> presupposes "guess what I'm thinking" kinds of games, and these are WEIRD
> phenomena in as much as they aren't culturally universal - in some cultural
> contexts they are seen to be rude!).
>
> To put my concern slightly differently and into questions:
> 1. What exactly is it that one has "privileged access" to?
> 2. Are there really no times in which we can have a feeling that is
> someone else's? Can a child's fear not be the mother's fear?
> 3. Are our feelings all ours? and not of others? (Here I'm thinking of the
> experience of watching my children be socialized into feelings by seeing
> what kinds of emotional expressions lead to what kinds of practical
> outcomes (and here refer back to #1). But I'm also thinking of Volosinov's
> notion of behavioral ideology - a feeling of hunger is something different
> when shared by thousands of others).
> 4. What is inside (and privileged) and what is outside (and not?)?
>
> Anyway, that's a bit of a mess, philosophically and otherwise, but seems
> like questions very relevant to thinking about Vygotsky in the vein of
> Hegel/Marx and attempts to transcend simple dualisms of subject/object,
> inside/outside, individual/society, etc.
>
> Hope you are well wherever you may be
> and may my well-being be your well-being...
>
> -greg
>
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 3:35 PM, David Kellogg <dkellogg60@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I think that when your grandson feels fear, what the child feels is his
>> own fear and not your fear. As you point out, what is communicated is a
>> vague uneasiness and not urgent and immediately actionable thought "I'm
>> afraid that my grandson is going to electrocute himself" or even "Grandpa
>> is afraid that I am going to electrocute myself".  I think that when Alan
>> Bennet's mother sees the cow, what she feels is the sensation of seeing
>> shapes and colors and remembering seeing such patterns in some concrete
>> context and not the precise location of a specifiable semantic address. So
>> it seems to me that Wittgenstein is confirmed and not confounded.
>>
>> Vygosky says that when a wild goose is startled and the whole flock takes
>> wing, we should call it "contamination' rather than "communication". What
>> is "communicable" here is symptom not cause. The first goose is afraid of
>> something and not because the other geese are afraid. The other geese are
>> not afraid of whatever it was that startled the first goose; they are
>> afraid because the first goose is afraid, and that is all.
>>
>> If you have a cold and sneeze, and I am sneezing because of the pepper on
>> my pickle sandwich, then I cannot say that I have caught your cold. There
>> is a well-known joke which makes the same point: if you scream in a
>> theatre, everybody tells you to shut up, but if you scream on an airplane
>> they all join in. In neither case, however, is there a feeling
>> communicated: in both cases, the only thing being communicated was the
>> fact
>> of screaming, not the emotion that gave rise to it.
>>
>> It makes a difference to an undamaged human brain. Here's Dr. Adolfo
>> Garcia
>> demonstrating that there are good neurological reasons why you can say "My
>> grandson ate breakfast" and even "My grandson felt/thought that it was
>> time
>> for breakfast'" but you cannot say "My grandson ate that it was time for
>> breakfast".  Mental processes are one thing, and material processes are
>> another: a human brain knows the difference, and our languages reflect
>> this
>> knowledge.
>>
>> https://vimeo.com/111374335
>>
>> Dr. Garcia has a good paper on this in Functions of Language:
>>
>> https://benjamins.com/#catalog/journals/fol.23.3.02gar/details
>>
>> If Alan Bennet's mum confirms Wittgenstein, but Alan Bennett thinks
>> Wittgenstein is confounded, can we really say that he has understood
>> Wittgenstein? if you prove my point, but you think you are actually
>> contradicting it, have we communicated or not?
>>
>> David Kellogg
>>
>> On Sat, Oct 28, 2017 at 10:36 PM, Julian Williams <
>> julian.williams@manchester.ac.uk> wrote:
>>
>> > David
>> >
>> > When I see my grandchild fall and bang their head I ‘feel their pain’
>> and
>> > wince even before I hear him cry… even more so, my grandson seems to
>> feel
>> > my fear before I actually say anything about it (when they poke their
>> > finger into the socket), and even though he is too young to have any
>> words
>> > for ‘fear’… when you see someone’s face twist in such and such a way,
>> you
>> > mirror it and feel the sensation associated with the expression straight
>> > away, don’t you?
>> >
>> > At some level of perception, we do communicate without words. As Alan
>> > Bennet said in his diaries (when his demented mother pointed to a cow in
>> > the field and said ‘I know what they are but not what they are called’)
>> > “Thus Wittgenstein was confounded by my mother”.
>> >
>> > Am I missing your point?
>> >
>> > Julian
>> >
>> > On 26/10/2017, 11:58, "xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of
>> David
>> > Kellogg" <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of
>> > dkellogg60@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >      All Vygotsky says is that thinking is represented in the brain
>> > differently
>> >     than immediate sensation. Vygotsky didn't have access to MRI scans
>> or
>> >     computerized tomography. In fact these can and do distinguish
>> between
>> > verbs
>> >     of sensation and verbs of verbal report. But what Vygotsky did have
>> > access
>> >     to is the grammar of reported speech.
>> >
>> >     In all languages that I know, it is possible to quote the words of
>> > another
>> >     person. I can say, for example:
>> >
>> >     Sasha says "Obviously, this has nothing to do with Marxism".
>> >
>> >     I can also quote the thoughts of another person.
>> >
>> >     Sasha thinks, "Obviously, this has nothing to with Marxism."
>> >
>> >     I can do this even when there are no actual words, just as I can
>> read
>> >     Sasha's thoughts without him speaking them.
>> >
>> >     However, in no languages that Iknow is it possible to quote the
>> > actions or
>> >     the immediate sensations of another person. I cannot say, for
>> example:
>> >
>> >     "Sasha stood "Up""
>> >
>> >     "Sasha felt 'Cold'".
>> >
>> >     When I try to say this, what I end up saying is that Sasha thought a
>> > word
>> >     meaning, not that he felt an immediate sensation.
>> >
>> >     In Chinese we say, "The speaker has gone, and the tea is cold."
>> This
>> > is
>> >     originally a line from the revolutionary opera "Shajiabang", about a
>> > woman
>> >     who runs a teahouse used by communists. In this scene, the children
>> are
>> >     acting out a visit by a Chinese quisling and a Japanese officer;
>> they
>> >     accuse the woman of communist sympathies, and she says that all
>> people
>> > who
>> >     come to her teahouse have sympathies, but as soon as they go, their
>> > tea is
>> >     cold, and she throws it out (6:13).
>> >
>> >     https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uUYvyRMvCNU
>> >
>> >     There is no way, as Wittgenstein says, to feel the toothache of
>> another
>> >     person; all you can do is to describe it in thoughts and words.
>> >     Paradoxically, when we want to share thoughts, we can do it
>> > "immediately",
>> >     because thoughts and words have already made the dialectical
>> leap--the
>> > leap
>> >     from idiolect into a sharable dialect.
>> >
>> >     David Kellogg
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >     other verbs). First of all, notice that he is saying that
>> >
>> >     On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 5:14 PM, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >     > That is a tendency within our heritage, David. Some people
>> >     > take the category of "labour" rather than "activity" to be
>> >     > the key category.
>> >     >
>> >     > As I understand it, "labour," or "production," is activity
>> >     > in the case where production and consumption and socially
>> >     > mediated, but I think that activity whose object is an
>> >     > object of consumption should be included within the basic
>> >     > category of Activity Theory, even if there are important
>> >     > psychological differences. Some are also concerned to
>> >     > separate symbolic activity, such as speech or supervision of
>> >     > labour, from the fundamental category, giving tool-use
>> >     > priority over sign use, and use of the term "labour"
>> >     > suggests that. Vygotsky expressed himself firmly against
>> >     > this move.
>> >     >
>> >     > So use of "activity" rather than "labour" or vice versa does
>> >     > reflect certain tensions within the tradition.
>> >     >
>> >     > Andy
>> >     >
>> >     > http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/pdfs/Tool%20and%
>> >     > 20Sign%20in%20Vygotskys%20Development.pdf
>> >     >
>> >     > ------------------------------------------------------------
>> >     > Andy Blunden
>> >     > http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm
>> >     > On 26/10/2017 6:14 PM, WEBSTER, DAVID S. wrote:
>> >     > > Xmca seems to have a workerist tendency operating - for myself I
>> > have
>> >     > always found that the work of generalising (in Vygotsky's sense)
>> is a
>> >     > labour of object-oriented activity. But that's just me
>> >     > >
>> >     > > -----Original Message-----
>> >     > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@
>> >     > mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Alexander Surmava
>> >     > > Sent: 26 October 2017 00:13
>> >     > > To: Alfredo Jornet Gil; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; Mike
>> > Cole;
>> >     > ivan-dgf; Martin John Packer; ‪Haydi ‪Zulfei‬‬
>> >     > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Отв: Re: Отв: Re: Отв: Re: Object oriented
>> > activity
>> >     > and communication
>> >     > >
>> >     > > Dear Alfredo,
>> >     > >
>> >     > > thank you for your very accurate reaction. You definitely
>> noticed
>> > the
>> >     > main thing. Today, in the era of globalization and developed
>> > technologies,
>> >     > the class antagonism between exploited people and their
>> exploiters,
>> > between
>> >     > capital and wage labor, assumes the appearance of the opposite
>> > between
>> >     > different ethnic groups and cultures. Capital itself has always
>> been
>> > a
>> >     > global phenomenon, and a class of capitalists - a cosmopolitan
>> class.
>> >     > Putting military overcoats on workers and sending them to fight
>> and
>> > to kill
>> >     > each other under nationalist slogans, they continued to cooperate
>> > with
>> >     > their exploitation colleagues, somehow continuing to receive
>> > dividends from
>> >     > their enterprises located on the territory of their "enemy." Today
>> > Putin's
>> >     > friends and henchmen who curse the "insidious West" take their
>> > capitals to
>> >     > this West, buy property there, send their children to study there
>> > and go
>> >     > there themselves to rest and be treated. And today Mr. Poroshenko
>> -
>> > the
>> >     > president of the country that was subje
>> >     > >  cted to the aggression of the neighboring state, owns chocolate
>> >     > factories located on the territory of this country.
>> >     > > In Russia, and in Western Europe, and in the United States, the
>> > policy
>> >     > of the ruling classes is based today on inciting against each
>> other
>> > the
>> >     > working people of different ethnic groups and confessions, on
>> their
>> >     > juxtaposition of each other as superior and second-class
>> creatures.
>> >     > > And as an ideological justification of the enmity incited by the
>> > ruling
>> >     > class towards working people of a different skin color, working
>> > people
>> >     > speaking a different language and praying to other gods, public
>> >     > consciousness is infected with totally false ideas constructed
>> > allegedly on
>> >     > a scientific basis. All this is not new. One hundred years ago,
>> the
>> >     > dominant ideology rested on undisguised racism. Today, the same
>> task
>> > is
>> >     > being solved by more sophisticated means, appealing to so-called
>> > "cultural"
>> >     > differences. Although the old ideology appealing to biological
>> > differences
>> >     > has not disappeared. Only today it is covered by a new,
>> > molecular-genetic
>> >     > argumentation, an appeal not only to livestock farming, but also
>> to
>> > the
>> >     > "psychology of culture".
>> >     > > It is possible to unmask this bourgeois lie, not only in words
>> but
>> > also
>> >     > in deeds, if we can understand that human development is not the
>> > ability of
>> >     > individuals to experience (perejivat’) the meaning of words, but
>> to
>> > be
>> >     > genuine subjects of object-oriented activity, the subjects of
>> labor.
>> >     > > If we stay on Vygotsky's theoretical positions, which believed
>> > that the
>> >     > human psyche begins with acts of sensation that thinking is just a
>> > verbal
>> >     > "generalization" of the material that our senses deliver to us,
>> then
>> > any
>> >     > wretched ideologist, with a well-suspended language, will seem to
>> us
>> > the
>> >     > owner of perfect wisdom, whereas a worker or a peasant doing his
>> own
>> > work,
>> >     > but not possessing the skill of ideological verbosity, will look
>> > something
>> >     > inferior.
>> >     > > If someone is shocked by such an evaluation of Vygotsky's
>> theory,
>> > open
>> >     > his "Thinking and speach" and reread this key paragraph.
>> >     > >
>> >     > >
>> >     > > "It has been said that the dialectical leap is not only a
>> > transition
>> >     > from matter that is incapable of sensation to matter that is
>> capable
>> > of
>> >     > sensation, but a transition from sensation to thought. This
>> implies
>> > that
>> >     > reality is reflected in consciousness in a qualitatively different
>> > way in
>> >     > thinking than it is in immediate sensation. This qualitative
>> > difference is
>> >     > primarily a function of a generalized reflection of reality.
>> > Therefore,
>> >     > generalization in word meaning is an act of thinking in the true
>> > sense of
>> >     > the word. At the same time, however, meaning is an inseparable
>> part
>> > of the
>> >     > word; it belongs not only to the domain of thought but to the
>> domain
>> > of
>> >     > speech. A word without meaning is not a word, but an empty sound.
>> A
>> > word
>> >     > without meaning no longer belongs to the domain of speech. One
>> > cannot say
>> >     > of word meaning what we said earlier of the elements of the word
>> > taken
>> >     > separately. Is word meaning speech or is it thought? It is both at
>> > one and
>> >     > the same time; it is a unit of verbal thi
>> >     > >  nking. It is obvious, then, that our method must be that of
>> > semantic
>> >     > analysis. Our method must rely on the analysts of the meaningful
>> > aspect of
>> >     > speech; it must be a method for studying verbal meaning.
>> >     > >
>> >     > > We can reasonably anticipate that this method will produce
>> answers
>> > to
>> >     > our questions concerning the relationship between thinking and
>> speech
>> >     > because this relationship is already contained in the unit of
>> > analysis. In
>> >     > studying the function, structure, and development of this unit, we
>> > will
>> >     > come to understand a great deal that is of direct relevance to the
>> > problem
>> >     > of the relationship of thinking to speech and to the nature of
>> verbal
>> >     > thinking."
>> >     > >
>> >     > >
>> >     > > Obviously, such an "understanding" of thinking has not the
>> > slightest
>> >     > relation to either Spinozism or Marxism. It is a naive attempt to
>> > combine
>> >     > eclectically the old ideas of empirical psychology with the school
>> > textbook
>> >     > of formal logic.
>> >     > > (Of course, I understand that this paragraph needs more detailed
>> >     > theoretical analysis. And I will not slow down this analysis in
>> the
>> > very
>> >     > near future. In the meantime, I only note that Vygotsky's
>> assertion
>> > that
>> >     > "generalization is a verbal act of thought" is a maximally
>> aphoristic
>> >     > expression of his idealistic position. For us, as for the
>> > materialists, the
>> >     > generalization is a practical act and its instrument is the
>> > instrument of
>> >     > labor. And the initial and universal instrument of generalization
>> is
>> > not a
>> >     > sign, but an instrument of labor. So the ax is a means of
>> > generalizing the
>> >     > properties of wood. The ax is, in the same time, a means of
>> > analyzing all
>> >     > the same wood. All this is obvious, looking through the optics of
>> >     > Spinoza-Ilyenkov, that is, simply a Marxist definition of
>> ideality.)
>> >     > Theoretical conclusions made by Vygotsky from the results of
>> Luria's
>> > trip
>> >     > to Uzbekistan logically follow from the above. The Uzbek
>> illiterate
>> >     > peasant, not from school textbooks, but from his own labo
>> >     > >  r experience knowing how the earth, aryk, water, hoe and melon
>> are
>> >     > connected, and therefore refusing to produce meaningless formal
>> > logical
>> >     > operations with words denoting these things, is declared a
>> primitive
>> >     > thinking by "complexes". Simultaneously, any school crap who knows
>> > how to
>> >     > pronounce definitions from his textbook and familiar with the
>> melon
>> > only
>> >     > when it is bought, washed and cut by his mommy, is declared the
>> > bearer of
>> >     > scientific consciousness.
>> >     > >
>> >     > > Only in this way can we, as psychologists and teachers, come to
>> the
>> >     > value of instruments of labor, not only for the distribution of
>> > material
>> >     > wealth, but also for the distribution of the spiritual wealth, for
>> > the
>> >     > distribution of the ability to think, for the distribution of
>> > culture. Only
>> >     > in this way can we approach the Marxist definition of culture as
>> the
>> >     > totality of the means of its object-oriented activity accumulated
>> by
>> >     > humankind the means of its labor. Only on the path of such based
>> on
>> > idea of
>> >     > object-oriented activity understanding of man we will be able to
>> get
>> > out of
>> >     > the deadlock of the semiotic, with its symbolic arbitrariness.
>> >     > > Vygotsky's merit is that he was the first who seriously set the
>> > task of
>> >     > creating a Marxist psychology and his merit can be considered that
>> > the
>> >     > first real step in this direction was made by his friend and
>> student
>> > AN
>> >     > Leontiev.Our task is to continue their mission.
>> >     > > Sasha
>> >     > >
>> >     > >
>> >     > >
>> >     > >       От: Alfredo Jornet Gil <a.j.gil@iped.uio.no>
>> >     > >  Кому: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <
>> xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu
>> > >;
>> >     > Mike Cole <lchcmike@gmail.com>; ivan-dgf <ivan-dgf@migmail.ru>;
>> > Martin
>> >     > John Packer <mpacker@uniandes.edu.co>; ‪Haydi ‪Zulfei‬‬ <
>> >     > haydizulfei@rocketmail.com>; Alexander Surmava <
>> >     > alexander.surmava@yahoo.com>
>> >     > >  Отправлено: среда, 25 октября 2017 15:03
>> >     > >  Тема: Re: [Xmca-l] Re: Отв: Re: Отв: Re: Object oriented
>> activity
>> > and
>> >     > communication
>> >     > >
>> >     > > #yiv0081188988 #yiv0081188988 -- P
>> {margin-top:0px;margin-bottom:
>> > 0px;}#yiv0081188988
>> >     > Dear Sasha, all,
>> >     > >
>> >     > > apologies for late response, as we've had some health issues at
>> > home
>> >     > that fortunately are now dissipating but which have limited
>> > participation
>> >     > anywhere else than home life.
>> >     > >
>> >     > > The real need of democratic pedagogy. That sounds like a
>> concrete
>> > aspect
>> >     > to begin moving on to what we had hoped at the beginning of this
>> >     > conversation: how is this all gonna be of practical (real)
>> relevance
>> > to us
>> >     > and not only armchair discussion. So, in what sense is this
>> 'real,'
>> > and is
>> >     > this a 'need'? (I am not addressing Sasha alone, I am addressing
>> any
>> > and
>> >     > everyone)
>> >     > >
>> >     > > Alfredo
>> >     > >
>> >     > > From: Alexander Surmava <alexander.surmava@yahoo.com>
>> >     > > Sent: 21 October 2017 13:36
>> >     > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; Mike Cole; Alfredo Jornet
>> > Gil;
>> >     > ivan-dgf; Martin John Packer; ‪Haydi ‪Zulfei‬‬
>> >     > > Subject: Отв: [Xmca-l] Re: Отв: Re: Отв: Re: Object oriented
>> > activity
>> >     > and communication Dear Martin,I think that if we're going to
>> discuss
>> > the
>> >     > method of Marx, then it is better to do it discussing his most
>> > mature work.
>> >     > That is evidently "Das Kapital" and Ilyenkov's monograph
>> "Dialectics
>> > of the
>> >     > abstract and concrete in theoretical thinking". I am aware that
>> > there is a
>> >     > point of view that the position of Marx as a humanist was
>> adequately
>> >     > presented in Gründrisse, whereas the humanistic core of Marx's
>> > theory was
>> >     > allegedly lost in “Das Kapital”. Accordingly, Marxism is better to
>> > study
>> >     > with the help of Gründrisse, and not with the help of “Das
>> Kapital”.
>> > Along
>> >     > with Ilyenkov I do not share this view.I'm afraid that the
>> > discussion of
>> >     > this topic would take us too far from our psychological themes. I
>> > think
>> >     > that we should not get stuck in discussing the order of "steps",
>> but
>> >     > immediately put our foot on the first "step" so that after that
>> try
>> > to rise
>> >     > from it to the seco
>> >     > >  nd, and so on ... Taking into account my not young age, it
>> seems
>> > to me
>> >     > that at least for me, it's time to move on from the discussion of
>> the
>> >     > method to the discussion of the subject, from the preparation to
>> > thinking,
>> >     > to the thinking as such. Especially because the Method can not be
>> > studied
>> >     > before and regardless of the study of the very subject. Perhaps
>> this
>> > seems
>> >     > paradoxical, but it is a paradox only for those who are not
>> familiar
>> > with
>> >     > the dialectic of Spinoza and Marx. Meanwhile, instead of
>> discussing
>> > the
>> >     > question - what is activity, or what is the psyche - we continue
>> to
>> > carry
>> >     > water in a sieve, discussing the singular or plural of the term
>> > activity.
>> >     > Without a doubt, this topic is very useful for translators from
>> > Russian (or
>> >     > German) language to English, but theoretically it is not very
>> > informative.
>> >     > And besides, we are convinced that Andy Blunden completely
>> exhausted
>> > this
>> >     > topic a few years ago. Much more interesting would be to discuss
>> the
>> >     > question: what is the justificati
>> >     > >  on to declare Vygotsky the founder of activity theory. Where,
>> in
>> > any
>> >     > > of his works, Vygotsky introduces the concept of activity, not
>> > just uses
>> >     > the term «activity» in the theoretical contexts in which it is
>> used
>> >     > habitually by idealistic psychology. “The activity (or
>> activities) of
>> >     > consciousness”, “the activity (or activities) of mental
>> functions”,
>> > “speech
>> >     > activity (or activities)”, the concrete activities of the
>> > personality”- all
>> >     > this has nothing to do with object-oriented activity, with Spinoza
>> > and
>> >     > Marx. It seems to me that our main mistake is that we are
>> discussing
>> > the
>> >     > subtleties of understanding the categories of activity by Vygotsky
>> > and
>> >     > Leontyev, whereas we need something different. It is necessary to
>> > try to
>> >     > formulate OUR OWN UNDERSTANDING of the activity, proceeding from
>> THE
>> > REAL
>> >     > NEED OF THE PRACTICE OF DEMOCRATIC PEDAGOGY.It is impossible to
>> > understand
>> >     > activity based on Vygotsky's ideas, because there was no such
>> > theoretical
>> >     > category in his theoretical system of views. AN Leontiev
>> introduces a
>> >     > category of object-oriented a
>> >     > >  ctivity into psychology, but his theory is of little use for
>> > solving
>> >     > practical problems too, for saying “A”, Leontyev never said “B”.
>> > Having
>> >     > proposed the principle of activity as the universal basis of the
>> >     > psychological theory, its germ cell AN Leontiev did not go further
>> > failing
>> >     > to concretize this correctly chosen abstract category.Once again,
>> > from
>> >     > thehobby group of lovers of Vygotsky, with his
>> "Сultural-Рistorical
>> >     > Psychology" and AN Leontyev with his "Psychological Theory of
>> > Activity" we
>> >     > all have to become community of researchers developing
>> fundamentally
>> > new
>> >     > approaches to education, based on dialectical, revolutionary
>> method
>> > of
>> >     > Marx.For the realization of this dream, it is necessary to begin
>> not
>> > so
>> >     > much - to learn to listen to each other... :-)Sincerely,Sasha
>> >     > >
>> >     > > От: Martin John Packer <mpacker@uniandes.edu.co>
>> >     > > Кому: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <
>> xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
>> >     > > Отправлено: пятница, 20 октября 2017 3:08
>> >     > > Тема: [Xmca-l] Re: Отв: Re: Отв: Re: Object oriented activity
>> and
>> >     > communication
>> >     > >
>> >     > > Right, Marx was himself well aware of this difference. My point
>> is
>> > that
>> >     > we have begin to talk about “the start” of Marx’s analysis, and
>> > about its
>> >     > “stages,” but these should not be equated with the order of the
>> > treatment
>> >     > in Capital.
>> >     > >
>> >     > > Martin
>> >     > >
>> >     > >
>> >     > >
>> >     > >
>> >     > > On Oct 19, 2017, at 5:40 PM, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net
>> > <mailto:ablu
>> >     > nden@mira.net>> wrote:
>> >     > >
>> >     > > https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/p3.htm
>> >     > >
>> >     > >   Of course the method of presentation must differ in form
>> >     > >   from that of inquiry. The latter has to appropriate the
>> >     > >   material in detail, to analyse its different forms of
>> >     > >   development, to trace out their inner connexion. Only
>> >     > >   after this work is done, can the actual movement be
>> >     > >   adequately described. If this is done successfully, if
>> >     > >   the life of the subject-matter is ideally reflected as
>> >     > >   in a mirror, then it may appear as if we had before us a
>> >     > >   mere a priori construction.
>> >     > >
>> >     > > Andy
>> >     > >
>> >     > > ------------------------------------------------------------
>> >     > > Andy Blunden
>> >     > > http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm
>> >     > > On 20/10/2017 3:23 AM, Martin John Packer wrote:
>> >     > > Seems to me that if we’re going to talk about the details of
>> Marx’s
>> >     > analysis we need to look not at Capital but at the Grundrisse. The
>> > two have
>> >     > virtually opposite organizations; it’s clear that the order of
>> > presentation
>> >     > in Capital was not the order of analysis.
>> >     > >
>> >     > > Martin
>> >     > >
>> >     > >
>> >     > >
>> >     > >
>> >     > >
>> >     > >
>> >     > >
>> >     > >
>> >     > >
>> >     > >
>> >     > >
>> >     > >
>> >     > >
>> >     >
>> >     >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D.
> Assistant Professor
> Department of Anthropology
> 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower
> Brigham Young University
> Provo, UT 84602
> WEBSITE: greg.a.thompson.byu.edu
> http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson
>



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