[Xmca-l] Re: Laws of evolution and laws of history
Andy Blunden
ablunden@mira.net
Wed Jan 14 04:06:15 PST 2015
Sure Juan. Of course Engels sees the historical process as a series of
revolutions. By "continuous" I meant that having begun from the descent
from the trees he doesn't draw line between biological evolution and
historical development. When he says: "the more that human beings become
removed from animals in the narrower sense of the word, the more they
make their own history consciously," that seems to be just a gradual
distancing from the animal.
I don't blame him for this! He was writing in 1883! To be more specific
could only have been guesswork.
Andy
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Andy Blunden*
http://home.pacific.net.au/~andy/
Juan Duarte wrote:
> Hello,
> Andy, i disagree with your statement that Engels "narrates a story which
> continues from this point up to socialist revolution as if it were one
> continuous story". Engels is just trying, in a little bit speculative -but
> fruitful- way, to find the evolutionary background for historical
> materialism. I think he gives a key to understand the relation between
> humanization/homininzation process, and historical one, trying to find the
> biological origins of human work (which presents en an alienated form in
> capitalism, and which is criticized by Marx in Das Kapital, etc.). Stephen
> Jay Gould has said that he was right in his bipedestation hipótesis, which
> was to be later confirmed by the discovering of Lucy and Ardi´s skeletons.
> And it doesn´t mean, in Engels to accept "a story which continues from this
> point up to socialist revolution as if it were one continuous story". Where
> does he say so? He is just saying that new ways of organizing society
> (socialist, which implies revolution, not "continuous" process), will give
> man new ways to understand and control biological process.
>
> Greets,
> Juan Duarte
> Universidad de Buenos Aires
>
> 2015-01-14 4:36 GMT-03:00 David Kellogg <dkellogg60@gmail.com>:
>
>
>> Mike--
>>
>> See Vol. Four of the Collected Works in English: the quote you refer to is
>> the epigraph to HDHMF. It's from Dialectics of Nature, and Vygotsky keeps
>> coming back to it again and again, throughout the whole text of HDHMF,
>> which is one reason why I am assuming (against what Anton Yasnitsky has
>> written) that HDHMF is a whole book, one of the very few that Vygotsky
>> completedly completed (and also his longest work).
>>
>> We had to gloss this epigraph as part of our translation. I assumed that
>> what Engels is saying is that man's knowledge of nature, viewed from the
>> point of view of nature, is nature's knowledge of itself. But of course
>> man's knowledge of nature is historical; we know nature through human
>> experience and human experience is historical. So, for example, the idea
>> that water boils at exactly 100 degrees centrigrade is entirely dependent
>> on the human ideas like "degree", "centigrade", the decimal number system,
>> and the tendency of human beings to settle near sea level.
>>
>> David Kellogg
>> Hankuk University of Foreign Studies
>>
>> On 14 January 2015 at 13:38, mike cole <mcole@ucsd.edu> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> yes, highly coordinated join activity that satisfies the participants
>>>
>> does
>>
>>> tend to do that. An academic flow creating device. But you should be
>>> careful of the not transcending biology part. :-)
>>> mike
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 8:04 PM, Kindred, Jessica Dr. <jkindred@cnr.edu>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> The dopamine rush of solving a problem together is not so much
>>>> transcending biology as just kind of living up to it. That was fun.
>>>> ________________________________________
>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
>>>>
>> ]
>>
>>>> on behalf of mike cole [mcole@ucsd.edu]
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2015 10:53 PM
>>>> To: Andy Blunden; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Laws of evolution and laws of history
>>>>
>>>> Bingo! I was not hallucinating!
>>>> Thanks a lot Jesica and Andy- I was just thumbing through my hardcopy
>>>>
>> and
>>
>>>> stopped to send an email.
>>>>
>>>> Do we interpret this as a belief that humans have transcended
>>>>
>> biological
>>
>>>> evolution? Its in our capable hands now that we are no longer just
>>>>
>> apes.
>>
>>>> Brrrrrr.
>>>>
>>>> mike
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 7:41 PM, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net>
>>>>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>>> Jessica refers to:
>>>>>
>>>>> "Indeed, the struggle for existence and natural selection, the two
>>>>> driving forces of biological evolution within the animal world,
>>>>>
>> lose
>>
>>>>> their decisive importance as soon as we pass on to the historical
>>>>> development of man. New laws, which regulate the course of human
>>>>> history and which cover the entire process of the material and
>>>>> mental development of human society, now take their place."
>>>>>
>>>>> Andy
>>>>> PS, I am not the translator, Jessica, just the transcriber. René van
>>>>>
>>> der
>>>
>>>>> Veer and Jaan Valsiner did all the work, and I just scanned it to
>>>>>
>> HTML.
>>
>>>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>>>> *Andy Blunden*
>>>>> http://home.pacific.net.au/~andy/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Kindred, Jessica Dr. wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Mike, your paraphrased is very clearly ststed in Vygotsky's essay,
>>>>>>
>> The
>>
>>>>>> Socialist Alteration of Man, especially in the second through fifth
>>>>>> paragraphs. I think this may be the source of the phrase you are
>>>>>>
>>> looking
>>>
>>>>>> for, though clearly Vygotsky is riffing on Engels.
>>>>>> ________________________________________
>>>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces+jkindred=cnr.edu@mailman.ucsd.edu
>>>>>> [xmca-l-bounces+jkindred=cnr.edu@mailman.ucsd.edu] on behalf of
>>>>>>
>> Andy
>>
>>>>>> Blunden [ablunden@mira.net]
>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2015 9:23 PM
>>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
>>>>>> Cc: Mikhail Munipov
>>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Laws of evolution and laws of history
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Actually, I think that "the more that human beings become removed
>>>>>>
>> from
>>
>>>>>> animals in the narrower sense of the word, the more they make their
>>>>>>
>>> own
>>>
>>>>>> history consciously" is near as dammit what you are looking for.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Engels of course lacked good information. Even in his day Vygotsky
>>>>>>
>> had
>>
>>>>>> poor information. In "Ape, Primitive Man and Child", "primitive" is
>>>>>> taken to mean "non-literate", as it was for Luria in his Central
>>>>>>
>> Asian
>>
>>>>>> expedition, and a great deal of emphasis is put on the origins and
>>>>>> development of *writing*. But writing only appears in Egypt c. 2,000
>>>>>>
>>> BCE
>>>
>>>>>> I think, in any case, in evolutionary time scales 5 minutes ago. The
>>>>>> development of writing is nothing to do with evolution of the
>>>>>>
>> species.
>>
>>>>>> Vygotsky defines primitive man as follows:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> “This term is commonly used, admittedly as a conventional label,
>>>>>>
>>> to
>>>
>>>>>> designate certain peoples of the uncivilized world, situated at
>>>>>>
>>> the
>>>
>>>>>> lower levels of cultural development. It is not entirely right
>>>>>>
>> to
>>
>>>>>> call these peoples primitive, as a greater or lesser degree of
>>>>>> civilization can unquestionably be observed in all of them. All
>>>>>>
>> of
>>
>>>>>> them have already emerged from the prehistoric phase of human
>>>>>> existence. Some of them have very ancient traditions. Some of
>>>>>>
>> them
>>
>>>>>> have been influenced by remote and powerful cultures, while the
>>>>>> cultural development of others has become degraded.
>>>>>> “/Primitive man, in the true sense of the term, does not exist
>>>>>> anywhere at the present time, /and the human type, as
>>>>>>
>> represented
>>
>>>>>> among these primeval peoples, can only be called “relatively
>>>>>> primitive.” Primitiveness in this sense is a lower level, and
>>>>>>
>> the
>>
>>>>>> starting point for the historical development of human
>>>>>>
>> behaviour.
>>
>>>>>> Material for the psychology of primitive man is provided by data
>>>>>> concerning prehistoric man, the peoples situated at the lower
>>>>>>
>>> levels
>>>
>>>>>> of cultural development and the comparative psychology of
>>>>>>
>> peoples
>>
>>> of
>>>
>>>>>> different cultures.”(Preface, 1930, Italics in the original)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And from the start, this chapter is framed as "cultural development"
>>>>>>
>>> as
>>>
>>>>>> distinct from "evolutionary development." Chapter 1 on primates
>>>>>>
>>> focuses
>>>
>>>>>> on the limited use of tools possible for apes, with the implication
>>>>>>
>>> that
>>>
>>>>>> the cultural development around the emergence of labour, i.e., the
>>>>>> production of tools, was part of evolutionary development, prior and
>>>>>> leading up to the formation of homo sapiens sapiens. There is no
>>>>>>
>>> chapter
>>>
>>>>>> covering the period between 2 million years ago and say `00,000
>>>>>>
>> years
>>
>>>>>> ago, where cultural and biological formation are interacting.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> According to Engels and others including Dewey, speech emerges
>>>>>> simultaneously with tools. Dewey makes the point that a tool is not
>>>>>>
>> a
>>
>>>>>> tool until its use is institutionalised, linking social, symbolic
>>>>>>
>> and
>>
>>>>>> tool-using activity together.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Andy
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>>>>> *Andy Blunden*
>>>>>> http://home.pacific.net.au/~andy/
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> mike cole wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So perhaps its just my bad memory, Andy. the issues remain central.
>>>>>>> THANKS for the appropriate links!
>>>>>>> mike
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 4:51 PM, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net
>>>>>>> <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There can only be two sources of this idea: Engels' "Part
>>>>>>>
>> Played
>>
>>>>>>> by Labour in the Transition from Ape to Man" (1876)
>>>>>>> http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1876/part-
>>>>>>> played-labour/index.htm
>>>>>>> and the Introduction to "Dialectics of Nature" (1883)
>>>>>>> http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1883/don/ch01.htm
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In the latter work, after explaining how freeing the hands by
>>>>>>> adopting an erect gait, led to the use of tools, meaning
>>>>>>>
>> labour,
>>
>>>>>>> and this led to the expansion of the brain, language and sundry
>>>>>>> other changes, and thus eventualy the emergence of human beings
>>>>>>>
>>> as
>>>
>>>>>>> a species. Then he says:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "With men we enter /history/."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In the earlier document, he says: "Labour begins with the
>>>>>>>
>> making
>>
>>>>>>> of tools" which Engels claims happened before the formation of
>>>>>>> modern homo sapiens, contributing to that formation rather than
>>>>>>> being a product of the formation of modern humans, and he
>>>>>>>
>>> narrates
>>>
>>>>>>> a story which continues from this point up to socialist
>>>>>>>
>>> revolution
>>>
>>>>>>> as if it were one continuous story, blurring over the
>>>>>>>
>> distinction
>>
>>>>>>> between evolution of the species and historical development of
>>>>>>> culture.
>>>>>>> The nerest we come to your quote is: "the more that human
>>>>>>>
>> beings
>>
>>>>>>> become removed from animals in the narrower sense of the word,
>>>>>>>
>>> the
>>>
>>>>>>> more they make their own history consciously." The "narrower
>>>>>>> sense" I presume means biological differentiation. So this
>>>>>>>
>> could
>>
>>>>>>> count for what you are looking for, Mike.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Andy
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>> ------------
>>>>>>> *Andy Blunden*
>>>>>>> http://home.pacific.net.au/~andy/
>>>>>>> <http://home.pacific.net.au/%7Eandy/>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> mike cole wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Dear Colleagues--
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I seem to recall reading an idea, that I recall being
>>>>>>> attributed to Engels,
>>>>>>> that (rooughly) "more and more the laws of evolution are
>>>>>>>
>>> being
>>>
>>>>>>> replaced by
>>>>>>> the laws of history."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Can anyone enlighten me either as to the source of this
>>>>>>> "quotation" or as
>>>>>>> to the source of my own confusion in this regard?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> mike
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> It is the dilemma of psychology to deal with a natural science as
>>>>>>>
>> an
>>
>>>>>>> object that creates history. Ernst Boesch.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> It is the dilemma of psychology to deal with a natural science as an
>>>>
>>> object
>>>
>>>> that creates history. Ernst Boesch.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> --
>>> It is the dilemma of psychology to deal with a natural science as an
>>>
>> object
>>
>>> that creates history. Ernst Boesch.
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
>
More information about the xmca-l
mailing list