[Xmca-l] Re: Ilyenkov, Marx, & Spinoza
Andy Blunden
ablunden@mira.net
Mon Jul 24 18:26:15 PDT 2017
I see.
This is a slightly different context. The original meaning
of "paradigm," before the popularisation of Thomas Kuhn's
work, was a "founding exemplar."
"Exemplar" presumably has the same etymology as "example."
The idea of "an example" as being one of numerous instances
of a process is a different concept, the opposite really.
Andy
------------------------------------------------------------
Andy Blunden
http://home.mira.net/~andy
http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making
On 25/07/2017 2:01 AM, Larry Purss wrote:
> Andy,
> I will reference where I got the notion of linking
> [example] and [framework]. If this becomes interesting
> will open another thread.
> From David L. Marshall titled : "Historical and
> Philosophical Stances: Max Harold Fisch, a Paradigm for
> Intellectual Historians" -2009-
>
> PAGE 270:
>
> "Max Fisch constitutes an alternative to any intellectual
> historical method insisting that practiontioners remain
> agnostics about the value of the ideas they study. It is
> the chief contention of this essay that he is a 'paradigm'
> for intellectual historians, a paradigm in the original
> Greek sense of an *example* and in the DERIVED
> contemporary sense of a *framework* within which the
> community of research can proceed. Indeed it is just such
> *doubling* of the philological object qua example into a
> carapace for ongoing action and thought that Fisch
> explored in a variety of ways during his half century of
> creative intellectual work. "
>
>
> Andy, not sure if this is adequate context, but the
> relationality of [example : framework] through the concept
> *paradigm* seemed generative??
>
> On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 7:21 AM, Andy Blunden
> <ablunden@mira.net <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>> wrote:
>
> "actions" or "an action" ... no extra word is needed.
> Extra words like "singular," "individual" or "single"
> only confuse the matter. "Examples" is too vague.
>
> Cannot make sense of the rest of your message at all,
> Larry.
>
> 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 25/07/2017 12:17 AM, Lplarry wrote:
>>
>> Andy,
>>
>> Following your lead it may be preferable to say
>> single (individual) to indicate the uniqueness of
>> variable social actions. This doubling (by
>> including both terms) may crystallize the intended
>> meaning as you mention.
>>
>> Andy is this vein can we also include the term
>> (examples)?
>>
>> Then the moving TRANS forming from single
>> (individual) social acts towards (practices) would
>> indicate the movement from examples to exemplary
>> actions and further movement (historicity) toward
>> (framework) practices.
>>
>> (framework) practices being another doubling.
>>
>> So moving (transforming) from single social examples
>> through exemplary social examples crystallizing in
>> social framework practices.
>>
>> Is this reasonable?
>>
>> Or not
>>
>> Sent from my Windows 10 phone
>>
>> *From: *Andy Blunden <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>
>> *Sent: *July 24, 2017 6:57 AM
>> *To: *eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
>> <mailto:xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
>> *Cc: *Alexander Surmava <mailto:monada@netvox.ru>
>> *Subject: *[Xmca-l] Re: Ilyenkov, Marx, & Spinoza
>>
>> Larry, when you say "Action IS individual," did you
>> mention
>>
>> to say that *actions* - the individual units of
>> *action* are
>>
>> individual? In which can it is of course a tautology.
>>
>> But *action* is irreducibly *social*, and so is every
>>
>> "individual" action. Or better, so is every
>> "singular" action.
>>
>> A lot of relevant differences are coded in the English
>>
>> language by the use of the count-noun or mass noun
>> form, but
>>
>> on the whole the set of words (action, actions,
>> activity,
>>
>> activities) and the set of words (practice,
>> practices) have
>>
>> no systematic difference running across all
>> disciplines and
>>
>> schools of thought. For us CHATters, "activities" are
>> practices.
>>
>> If you read Hegel and Marx, there is an added issue: the
>>
>> German words for action (Handlung) and activity
>> (Tatigkeit)
>>
>> are more or less inverted for Hegel, and he doesn't use
>>
>> Aktivitat at all.
>>
>> 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 24/07/2017 11:42 PM, Larry Purss wrote:
>>
>> > Alexander, Mike,
>>
>> > Thanks for the article.
>>
>> > Moving to page 51 I noticed that when referencing
>> Bernstein he contrasted (action) with (practice) and
>> did not REPEAT (identity) the thesis about the role
>> of practice in knowing).
>>
>> > Two formulas:
>>
>> > • Knowing THROUGH ‘action’
>>
>> > • Verification of knowing THROUGH ‘practice’
>>
>> >
>>
>> > These two formulas closely RESEMBLE each other but
>> do not co-incide
>>
>> >
>>
>> > Action IS individual
>>
>> > Practice IS a social category.
>>
>> >
>>
>> > Sociohistorical (practice) in the final analysis is
>> nothing other than the SUM total of the actions of
>> individual who are separate.
>>
>> >
>>
>> > Individual action is LIKE a single experiment.
>> They are alike in that both individual action & a
>> single experiment are poorly suited to the role of :
>>
>> >
>>
>> > A philosophical criterion of (truth).
>>
>> >
>>
>> > I do not have the background to intelligently
>> comment, but did register this theme as provocative
>> FOR further thought and wording.
>>
>> > And for generating intelligent commentary
>>
>> >
>>
>> >
>>
>> >
>>
>> >
>>
>> > Sent from Mail for Windows 10
>>
>> >
>>
>> > From: Ivan Uemlianin
>>
>> > Sent: July 20, 2017 11:17 AM
>>
>> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
>>
>> > Cc: Alexander Surmava
>>
>> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Ilyenkov, Marx, & Spinoza
>>
>> >
>>
>> > Yes very interesting thank you! (Ilyenkov fan)
>>
>> >
>>
>> > Ivan
>>
>> >
>>
>> > --
>>
>> > festina lente
>>
>> >
>>
>> >
>>
>> >> On 20 Jul 2017, at 18:00, mike cole
>> <mcole@ucsd.edu> <mailto:mcole@ucsd.edu> wrote:
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >> This article might prove of interest to those who
>> have been discussing
>>
>> >> LSV's sources in
>>
>> >> marx and spinoza.
>>
>> >> mike
>>
>> >> <Ilyenkov_and_the_Revolution_in_Psycholog.pdf>
>>
>> >
>>
>> >
>>
>
>
More information about the xmca-l
mailing list