Thanks Peter
In general with "social" I was trying to move from the assumed "neutral, objective knowledge"
of the world to concepts that have a more ideological twist. Now, I very much see both as
social, but probally differently than you.
I guess my reading, maybe incorrect, of your paper was practice was reduced to the world
outside of practice. It seems to me one of the assumptions of modernism as in science is
various instances of the object can be added up in which the subjective is ignored somewhat.
I quess I question this to a large extent.
I guess I would agree with Mike when he said awhile back that activity (practice) is where
the objective and subjective meet. That is how I understand Marx's reference to senseous
activity. I guess in general I question the division in the first place.
The chimp I thought it was you who posted it. Funny thing was when I read it, it seemed as
objective proof for some kind of collective economic system.
Nate
________________________________________________________
1stUp.com - Free the Web
Get your free Internet access at http://www.1stUp.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Jul 01 2000 - 01:00:28 PDT