[Xmca-l] Re: Hegel on Action

Greg Thompson greg.a.thompson@gmail.com
Sat Jul 15 22:52:47 PDT 2017 

Yes, thanks Larry for pointing to the resonances with where I was trying to
go and Andy's paper, and for catching that my query about gravity was in
the interests of considering gravity as a parallel to activity.
Seemed a useful metaphor (along with the idea of matter at the subatomic
level). But, of course, I recognize that metaphors are of limited use
(helpful for initial grasping but always lacking in that they fail to fully
and precisely represent what they are metaphorizing). It is much more
precise to simply describe these things in words.
-greg


On Sat, Jul 15, 2017 at 11:19 PM, Lplarry <lpscholar2@gmail.com> wrote:

> Greg, Andy,
> As I  am listening to your discourse from the margins I  hear Andy saying
> (take activity) as the mono basic fundamental  approach.
> I will respond to how I understand this discourse:
>
> Consciousness, matter, gravity, are concepts and as concepts are
> derivative from more basic activity which is primary.
> Activity as the basic (substance) , concepts as derivative.
>
> As substance, activity is NOT COMPOSED of other things.
> Andy gives the example of the concept  (chair) that is not a material
> object but is an activity. The (entire activity) is REPRESENTED in the
> concept of the chair.
> Whatever artifact is considered, it is not the material object that is
> represented by the conceptual artifact, but the (entire activity) is
> represented in the conceptual artifact.
> Mediating artifacts used by philosophers in their social practice are
> words.
> Just as we are inclined to IDENTIFY the concepts of ordinary artifacts
> with the material object ITSELF (rather than the entire activity mediated
> by the artifact) we likewise are inclined to talk about the concept
> mediated by the word (such as the word ‘being’) AS IF the word were ITSELF
> the concept (therefore loosing awareness of the entire activity IDENTIFIED
> in the concept (being) as used by philosophers.
>
> So, in Hegel’s time the concept (Spirit) expressed this entire activity,
> but today the entire activity is better understood as (activity). Both the
> concept  Spirit in Hegel’s time and the concept Activity today, indicate
> the same phenomena (the entirety of activity).
> Activity (the entirety of activity)  is the one SUBSTANCE that cannot be
> decomposed into other things.
>
> Matter, consciousness, gravity, can be understood as activity (the one
> substance) so these words represent concepts and concepts are NOT the
> words, concepts are the activity (the entirety of activity) and activity is
> more basic than consciousness or material.
>
> Andy, not sure if I am taking (activity) as you intended, but is my
> response to listening to the discourse between you and Greg as I listen
> from the margins.
>  A tentative probe
>
> Sent from my Windows 10 phone
>
> From: Andy Blunden
> Sent: July 15, 2017 6:03 PM
> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Hegel on Action
>
> Communication is hard, isn't it? You have interpreted what I
> have said in the exact 100%  opposite of my meaning, Greg.
>
> The European Rationalists and Empiricists of the
> Enlightenment broke with the monism of the Catholic Church
> and proposed that matter existed outside of and
> independently of human consciousness but the nature of
> matter could be known by the respective programs of
> rationalism and empiricism. This is the view which guided
> the development of philosophy and science in the West and
> remains common sense to this day.
>
> *Hegel proposed a viable alternative to this ontology*
>
> But he did not do that by providing "new" definitions of
> matter and consciousness. He proposed a new monist starting
> point and reconstructed an entire world view beginning from
> that single concept which, in the spirit of his own times,
> he called "Spirit". I call it "Activity" and the article
> shows that this interpretation is true to Hegel's intention.
>
> So please, rather than imagining how matter and
> consciousness could somehow get mixed up with one another
> and we can discover psychokinesis and tell the future with
> dreams, be open to taking Activity as the substance of a
> world view.
>
> Andy
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> Andy Blunden
> http://home.mira.net/~andy
> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making
>
> On 16/07/2017 4:45 AM, Greg Thompson wrote:
> > Andy,
> >
> > I must confess to being entirely confused by your
> > suggestion that "matter is everything outside of
> > consciousness". It sounds like you are starting the
> > conversation by saying "there is matter on the one hand
> > and there is consciousness on the other hand and never the
> > twain shall meet." Perhaps that is an essential starting
> > point for understanding activity, but I would at least
> > like to imagine it could be otherwise.
> >
> > In my work I am trying to
> > ​do this work of imagining
> >  how it could be otherwise. I'm trying to think of this
> > another way
> > ​, t​
> > o get a grip on things in some way that does not split the
> > world in two
> > ​ right at the get-go​
> > .
> > ​
> > ​I assume that for you this is an ontological commitment.
> > You start by assuming (asserting? realizing?) that there
> > are two types of things in the world - matter and
> > consciousness. I'd rather not start there.​ Because this
> > involves a disagreement in our starting assumptions, I
> > don't suspect we'll get very far with that conversation
> > (and we've dabbled in that conversation before and indeed
> > we haven't gotten anywhere).
> >
> > So I thought I would ask a slightly different question:
> > what is the nature of gravity? Is it more like matter or
> > more like consciousness (in that one could imagine gravity
> > being something "outside" of matter in the sense that you
> > are saying "consciousness" is outside of matter)? I know
> > you are committed to non-dualism in some sense and I'm
> > just trying to figure out how you reconcile all of this.
> >
> > ​In solidarity,​
> > -greg​
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Jul 15, 2017 at 12:11 AM, Andy Blunden
> > <ablunden@mira.net <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>> wrote:
> >
> >     No, it would be spreading confusion, Greg.
> >
> >     "Matter" in this context is everything outside of my
> >     consciousness. "Activity" in this context is human,
> >     social practice. Moving attention to the sub-atomic
> >     level, a field where we have no common sense, sensuous
> >     knowledge, does not help.
> >
> >     Andy
> >
> >     ------------------------------------------------------------
> >     Andy Blunden
> >     http://home.mira.net/~andy <http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy>
> >     http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-
> decision-making
> >     <http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-
> collective-decision-making>
> >
> >     On 15/07/2017 2:31 PM, Greg Thompson wrote:
> >
> >         Andy,
> >         Just musing here but I'm wondering if "matter" is
> >         anything more than activity, particularly when
> >         considered at the sub-atomic level.
> >         At that level, matter seems a lot more like the
> >         holding of relations in some activity (not so
> >         different from the Notion?).
> >         Or would that be taking things too far?
> >         -greg
> >
> >         On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 10:12 PM, Andy Blunden
> >         <ablunden@mira.net <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>
> >         <mailto:ablunden@mira.net
> >         <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>>> wrote:
> >
> >             Anyone who got interested in that material about
> >             "Hegel on Action", here is my contribution.
> >
> >         https://www.academia.edu/33887830/Hegel_on_Action
> >         <https://www.academia.edu/33887830/Hegel_on_Action>
> >
> >         <https://www.academia.edu/33887830/Hegel_on_Action
> >         <https://www.academia.edu/33887830/Hegel_on_Action>>
> >
> >             Andy
> >
> >
> >             --
> >          ------------------------------------------------------------
> >             Andy Blunden
> >         http://home.mira.net/~andy
> >         <http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy>
> >         <http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy>
> >         http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-
> decision-making
> >         <http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-
> collective-decision-making>
> >
> >         <http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-
> collective-decision-making
> >         <http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-
> collective-decision-making>>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >         --
> >         Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D.
> >         Assistant Professor
> >         Department of Anthropology
> >         880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower
> >         Brigham Young University
> >         Provo, UT 84602
> >         http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson
> >         <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
> > http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson
> > <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
http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson

More information about the xmca-l mailing list