Re: Response to Michael Glassman's questions on ideality

From: Steve Gabosch (
Date: Wed Jun 02 2004 - 04:35:05 PDT

Thanks for your response. You offer much to think about! (As always!)

You ask a series of direct questions about my response to question 3. I
have both a succinct general answer and a succinct specific answer to your
questions. First, your comments and questions, and second, my rather
succinct answers.

The ideality question: You explicitly identify ideality with meaning.
>Though you don't really define meaning, I've gathered from your descriptions
>of its significance etc. that meaning is understood to be knowledge, i.e.
>the knowledge embodied in the cultural artefact. This knowledge or ideality
>(including recognition of ideality in material objects) you describe as
> 1. The product of collective human consciousness;
> 2. As a creation of human social relations; and
> 3. As a part of the collective consciousness.
>You then go on to state "Ideality is imposed on artifacts and nature by
>human social activity and relations."
>Several questions come to mind:
>1. How does collective human consciousness produce ideality?
>2. How do human social relations create ideality?
>3. In what way is consciousness made collective?
>And, finally, if knowledge is imposed on artifacts and nature by human
>social activity and relations, then where does it come from, or better yet
>how is it made?

To all the above, my general answer is: human social activity.
And to all the above, my specific answer is: human social labor.

Highest regards,
- Steve

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Nov 09 2004 - 11:42:57 PST