Re: [xmca] Monism Is Not Reductionist

From: Mike Cole (lchcmike@gmail.com)
Date: Sun Mar 11 2007 - 19:19:39 PST


Gotta be brief, Martin. Check the text. Also, Sakharov has a long article in
the van der veer and valsiner book of readings on vygotsky which goes deep
into the rationale. I only had time to skim.
I think the interactivity is crucial to the method, but that may well be a
superficial reading.
mike

On 3/11/07, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net> wrote:
>
> Yes, sorry, I meant "Martin". :-)
> I am not claiming that there is a "correlation" between a concept and a
> thing. e.g. as you say, being a commodity does not depend on a participant
> in exchange knowing the concept "commodity". Such a judgment is possible
> from an observer perspective without reference to the participant's theory
> of what they are doing.
> But I am saying that the basis for a concept is the ideality involved in
> the activity. You can't recognise a commodity by its physical properties.
> Some reference to mind is necessary."Commodity" does not arise as a
> concept
> until the practice of exchanging products reaches a certain level of
> development, which includes products being produced for exchanged, i.e.,
> as
> ideals. It is impossible to identify a thing as a commodity outside of
> consideration of the consciousness of the participants.
> For example, a thing produced *for the purpose of meeting the producer's
> needs by exchanging it for another person's product* is a commodity only
> because of the separation of the producer's needs from the producer's
> labour, and the existence of a relation with other producers such that
> someone else satisfies the person's needs, and each sees the other as a
> means to their own ends. This situation is sustainable only through forms
> of consciousness. It can't happen without appropriate orientation of
> people's psyches.
> And in fact if this situation were contrived independently of the
> consciousness of the participants (e.g., organisation of prison labour),
> then I would say that the products are not commodities, even though the
> movement of matter is the same.
> So "a commodity is a commodity, whether or not I recognize this in my
> thinking" but not for example if you intended to consume it yourself, but
> someone exchanged it for something else when you were out of the room, or
> you intended to exchange it, but no-one else wanted it.
> Andy
> At 07:42 PM 11/03/2007 -0600, you wrote:
> >And Andy, when you say 'David,' I presume you mean Martin? :)
> >
> >But you're not saying, are you, that our thinking necessarily
> 'correlates'
> >with the concepts formed in our activity? I mean, a commodity is a
> >commodity, whether or not I recognize this in my thinking.
> >
> >Martin
> >
> >On 3/11/07 6:24 PM, "Andy Blunden" <ablunden@mira.net> wrote:
> >
> > > And David, when you say 'practice', I presume you mean purposive
> activity,
> > > as opposed to simply material action, such as digestion. Material
> actions
> > > which are not 'practical' in this sense are not a relevantly necessary
> > > substrate of concepts. It is only practice which is part of 'mind'
> which is
> > > the relevant necessary substrate of concepts.Things that we do that
> have no
> > > correlate in our thinking, such as the use of meaningful artefacts,
> are not
> > > the basis for concepts.
> > > Andy
> > > At 06:03 PM 11/03/2007 -0600, you wrote:
> > >> David,
> > >> So when Andy writes 'If you mean that concepts do not exist other
> than in
> > >> connection with human minds, then I agree,' I think what he *ought*
> to
> > >> have said, perhaps what he meant to say, was that concepts do not
> exist
> > >> other than in connection with human *practices*. I think wed agree
> that a
> > >> 'commodity' exists in the social world, not merely in a person's
> head. The
> > >> 'commodity form' is defined, created, by social practices, not in and
> by
> > >> individual minds.
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > xmca mailing list
> > > xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > > http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >xmca mailing list
> >xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> >http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>
> Andy Blunden. The Subject -
> http://home.mira.net/~andy/works/the-subject.htm
>
> _______________________________________________
> xmca mailing list
> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>
_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Apr 01 2007 - 01:00:10 PST