[Xmca-l] Re: Hegel on Action
Andy Blunden
ablunden@mira.net
Sun Jul 16 03:11:11 PDT 2017
Haydi, I really don't see how "the interests of the
exploited and the oppressed" comes into this. I say nothing
of "corrections made by Marx on Hegel" though I make several
points of criticism of Hegel and my reading of Marx on Hegel
has certainly contributed to my views here. I just don't see
any value in quoting Marx in an article on Hegel. I have
found that the maxim about "turning Hegel on his head, or
rather back on his feet" unhelpful. I'm not saying it is
wrong, but it never helped me understand Hegel and has led
to a lot of misunderstanding of Hegel and Marx as well.
No-one can ever explain what it means without talking
nonsense. You say "you are quite right with your
understanding of concept not being activity itself" - you
misunderstand me. I am saying that a concept is a form of
activity.
One of the participants in my weekly Hegel Reading Group
told me that the main thing he has learnt from the group is
to simply read what Hegel wrote. He said that all his life
as an Italian Marxist he just repeated what fellow Marxists
had told him about Hegel. Now that he has read Hegel he sees
how small the differences are. He now understands Marx a lot
better for having closely read Hegel.
Hope that clarifies a little.
Andy
------------------------------------------------------------
On 16/07/2017 7:55 PM, Haydi Zulfei wrote:
> ....
>
> If I'm not mistaken in understanding Andy , he , on
> Hegel's lenses , equals 'goal-oriented material activity'
> with sharing in 'intention' or at times , fusion of
> intention and activity which is not so productive as to
> the interests of the exploited and the oppressed . He does
> say nothing of the corrections made by Marx on Hegel ,
> that is , that Hegel's theory is headlong or upside down ;
> that it should be switched in a way that it should look
> upright erected quite firm on its feet. I think you are
> quite right with your understanding of concept not being
> activity itself .
>
> Regards
>
> Haydi
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* Lplarry <lpscholar2@gmail.com>
> *To:* "ablunden@mira.net" <ablunden@mira.net>; "eXtended
> Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
> *Sent:* Saturday, 15 July 2017, 18:22:24
> *Subject:* [Xmca-l] Re: Hegel on Action
>
> Andy,
> Thanks for this article ‘Hegel on Action’
> The paragraph on (logical concepts) was clarifying in the
> mutual way we are inclined to take the word itself AS IF
> the word were the material concept and not take the
> concept AS activity (itself).
> I hope I am representing this (reading this) in the way
> you intended.
>
> Sent from my Windows 10 phone
>
> From: Andy Blunden
> Sent: July 15, 2017 5:30 AM
> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Hegel on Action
>
> James, I think you're using "material" in some specific
> sense which is unknown to me. It seems to me to be something
> to do with body language as opposed to speech, maybe
> practical consciousness rather than discursive
> consciousness. "Material" understood as meaning "made of
> matter" would simply be the opposite of "in my imagination".
> I find it difficult to get my head around the idea of a
> "sign in the mind" and if "mind" was some place other than
> the material world where a sign could be located. I'm sure
> what you are talking about is perfectly good, but I can't
> relate it to the absolutely basic ontological issue which
> you raised out of my paper about action.
>
> Andy
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> Andy Blunden
> http://home.mira.net/~andy <http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy>
> http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making
>
>
> On 15/07/2017 8:15 PM, James Ma wrote:
> > Thanks for such helpful explanation, Andy.
> > Regarding my last question, I mean one's feeling or sense
> > perception involved in social practice in a social context
> > possesses the material quality of a psychic image (a sign
> > in the mind). This material quality can be one's facial
> > expression or bodily movement connected with a particular
> > feeling.
> >
> > James
> >
> > /_____________________________________/
> >
> > */James Ma/*///https://oxford.academia.edu/JamesMa/
> >
> >
> >
> > On 15 July 2017 at 09:42, Andy Blunden
> <ablunden@mira.net <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>
> > <mailto:ablunden@mira.net <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>>>
> wrote:
> >
> > James, the meaning for words such as "material" and to
> > a lesser extent the other words in your message have
> > meanings which are extremely context (or discourse)
> > dependent. The Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy
> > doesn't have a definition of Matter, considering it
> > only in relation to Form, but their definition of
> > Substance will do the trick. I follow Lenin and
> > Vygotsky in my understanding of matter. (Hegel didn't
> > like to use the word, because he took it as too linked
> > to Atomism. Marx used "material" in a very specific
> > way to do with reproduction of the means of life.)
> >
> > As to the philosophical meaning of "matter" I think I
> > said it in the paper as succinctly as possible. If
> > it's in the mind then it is not material. I can't make
> > sense of your last question.
> >
> > 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>
> >
> > On 15/07/2017 6:28 PM, James Ma wrote:
> >
> > This is interesting to me, Andy. Do you rule out
> > anything that has material quality but is actually
> > associated with a mental sign (a sign in the mind,
> > as Peirce would say)? Do you consider social
> > practice (you mentioned earlier) to be tinted with
> > the intrapsychological within oneself?
> >
> > James
> >
> > /_____________________________________/
> >
> > */James
> > Ma/*///https://oxford.academia.edu/JamesMa/
> > <https://oxford.academia.edu/JamesMa/>
> >
> >
> >
> > On 15 July 2017 at 07:11, Andy Blunden
> > <ablunden@mira.net <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>
> <mailto:ablunden@mira.net <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>>
> > <mailto:ablunden@mira.net <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>
> > <mailto: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://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>>
> >
> > 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>>
> > <mailto:ablunden@mira.net
> <mailto:ablunden@mira.net> <mailto:ablunden@mira.net
> <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>>>
> > <mailto:ablunden@mira.net
> <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>
> > <mailto:ablunden@mira.net <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>>
> > <mailto: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>>
> >
> > <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://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>>
> >
> >
> <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>
> > <http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson
> > <http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson>>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
More information about the xmca-l
mailing list